Sharing the same bed implies that they are friends and there are no professional boundaries between them. The subject’s and biographer’s relationship is not one that can be affected by feelings or guilt because the biographer’s main job is to tell a truthful story. Guilt and feeling that the biographer owes something to their subject, if they were to become friends would only interfere with that objective.

Biographers and subjects cannot share the same bed because the bed is considered an intimate place where secrets and thoughts are shared, especially during the late night hours. If they were to share a bed, the biographer would be crossing a major professional boundary line and may even feel compelled to compose a biased or a more favorable opinion of his subject should his subject unintentionally reveal something too personal and as a follow-up asks to keep it a secret.

Sharing a bed has an implication of an very personal and intimate connection, one that crosses the boundaries that should be held between biographers and subjects. Although the biographer’s relationship to the subject comes into play when writing, there is a line to be upheld to keep professionalism. Sharing a bed could implicate a personal connection that might interfere with the honesty of the story.

keep away from the biographer is his sleeping quarters, probably his only private time. the biographer jokes saying that thats what happens when you have a biographer same bed, almost expressing the profoundness of a biographer, i feel that he almost scared Michael, slyly hinting that this biography will get deep.

Because of the different role of each character, biographer and subject cannot share the same bed no matter how close they are in the reality. As the role of a biographer, he should stay in the third person persecution to write the subject; just like the hunter and the deer. Sharing a bed creates a very personal and intimate connection between the two. They can share each’s opinion and might affect other’s thoughts. As a result, it might impact how the story would go or the truthfulness of the story.

Sharing a bed can symbolize a personal action, where two people are close to each other and possibly ruin candid information. They made the right decision to avoid making any potential mistake through an intimate setting, despite Michael joking about the situation.

Being in bed together is a reference to the idea of being to intimate. Who shares a bed? Lovers. A kinship to detached, and contradictory to the relationship between biographers and their subjects. They cannot share a bed because there are no boundaries, and would lead to a biography that is as bias as possible.

The biographer and subject cannot share the same bed because it interferes and hinders with a level of professionalism that has been established between the two. Despite their strong relationship, a shared bed is reserved for intimacy which goes beyond the boundary of a close friendship. After-hour conversations, where secrets and true feelings are exchanged in that setting between lovers could alter and jeopardize the accurate portrayal of the subject within the story.

There has to been some professionalism maintained between the biographer and the subject. Without boundaries, neither of them would know where companionship ends and business matters begin.

Someone is bound to take offense when the truth is involved; secrets might be revealed and a lot of names might get brought up. It’s difficult to please everyone when there are multiple participants in the biographer’s scope.

It is simply impossible to reveal truth without offending people. There are many perspectives to please and when one’s intent to be honest, there are sure to be people who might disagree or be unaware. A biographer’s job is to bring forward aspects of a subject’s life that may not be commonly seen and these details are often hidden for a reason.

As a biographer, one has taken the responsibility upon herself/himself to tell a truthful and honest story. As much as we’d all like to believe every person, specifically public figures, have good intentions, have never done wrong by anyone, have a heart of gold, etc. most of the time, there are deeper, darker feelings hidden within, exposing the sinner part of a person. People want to believe in good but are consistently met with bad therefore, when a biographer writes a story about the “other side”, people don’t want to believe it, therefore criticize it.

the biographer is simply trying to get the true story and it is not all about the glory moments

The truth can be a dirty discovery that will haunt someone forever. It also could change someone’s career from wanting to be allies with everyone to criticizing the wrong person and damaging your career. From reading the paragraph, the biographer is carefully making decisions on what to write.

It is so hard for the biographer to avoid offense, because no matter what there is someone who holds a stake in the subjects image. In this case, the son of a subject. When someone isn’t depicted holy as day, grander than grandiose, and better than the best then people with stakes have a problem.

It is difficult for Michael to avoid offense because of the conflicting viewpoints of the subject from all that are involved. Not everyone is going to like or approve of the truth being revealed — including negative aspects of the subjects life, but Michael wants to be as honest as possible so it presumed to come with potential backlash.

When there are two or more pieces of the story arguing over the facts of a matter, one side is bound to get burned by the truth. Biographers/Journalists must remain steadfast in the face of scrutiny so as to honor the truth

The details are what make every story more interesting and often they highlight and/or support the truth. People are more interested in what happens behind the scenes of a public figure’s life, rather than in the spotlight. Just how a secret romance is always juicer than a known one.

The cliche “the romance is in the details” serves to highlight how the details are potentially more important than the overarching story itself. The readers are more interested in the how and the why, rather than the what. It’s the little things, the details, that no one knows, that makes the story interesting and more intimate to the reader.

The cliche emphasizes Montaigne’s favor for details, expressing that it is these details that truly make a story interesting. Especially for well-known stories, the plot is already a given, but it is the details and intricacies of the individuals behind the story that provide character. For a biographer, his job is to focus on these details. The subjects themselves are already well-known, so readers are interested in the details behind the famous figures that make them more real.

In today’s world, it feels like everything needs to be summarized or needs to “get to the point”. The focus is to highlight the big things when in fact the big things would have never become big had there not been small details in between. These small details are crucial to understanding the reasoning behind consequential life-changing events. And it just tells a better story. Some of the greatest stories are the ones with the richest detail and take pride in that detail. At one time, it was respected. Now its considered a nuisance. Had it not been for those small details, we would always be left wondering why?

The cliche is based on discovery details that hold strong merit to a story. Readers obviously want to be interested or informed by any story. Realizing substantial information of why something occurred is most important from this cliche.

What we fall in love with as readers is not the gist of the story, or the big pictures. But the tiny details that make it complete, that make it real. In the example given about Brutus, its not about what he said to the public, its about how he arrived there the night before. Its about what emotions he went through, what things he thought and said before it was cleaned up for public consumption.

The cliche “the romance is in the details”, reveals the amount of curiosity that readers have in wanting to go in-depth and behind the scenes to find the true meaning behind a subject’s decision making process to reach their current state. Details in a story are what peak the interest of readers and provide them with information to unanswered questions about the subject.

Anyone can spit out/absorb a headline in order to get the gist of the story. The meaty core, the juicy narrative, the insightful commentary, those are what intoxicates the reader. What may seem like a page-filler is what fleshes out the story.