Book Review Locke: A Biography by Roger Woolhouse The English philosopher John Locke (1632-1704) left behind not

only "An Essay Co ncerning Human Understanding" (1690) but also his laundry lists and many other r ecords, documents, and correspondence quite an abundant stock of material d enrich the work of his biographer. Roger Woolhouse draws deeply on this awesome archive, and yet to my biographer's mind, "Locke: A Biography" (Cambridge, 548 pages, $39.99) is a let-down. Follow ing the well-established procedures of academia, Mr. Woolhouse presents Locke's life in strict chronological order, paying heed to every treatise, even when the re is considerable overlap between these works resulting in tiresome repetitions . If this Locke scholar is obliged to be so rigidly faithful to the order of his s ubject's oeuvre, is there not a corresponding fealty to the demands of biography ? Certainly, Mr. Woolhouse lays bare a good deal about his subject, but he never lingers to take the measure of the man who argued that government is founded on the consent of the governed, and that the individual begins life as a piece of "white paper" on which experience writes his ideas and values. In his early writings, for example, Locke was doubtful that there could be comit y between different Christian denominations, let alone between different faiths. After traveling to Cleves in Germany and witnessing how a diverse community of Christians managed to live in harmony, he began to change his views, becoming, i n the end, an outspoken champion of toleration. Why not write, then, a Lockean biography? Instead of giving every piece of the p hilosopher's writing equal weight, focus precisely on those experiences that gav e rise to his treatises. And attach those experiences and works to the portrayal of a man with strikingly modern ideas about self-invention. When Locke rejected an opportunity to pursue a diplomatic post in Spain, he wrot e in a letter: "Whether I have let slip the minute that they say everyone has on ce in his life to make himself, I cannot tell." Step aside, Andy Warhol, for the original philosopher of self-creation. Locke observed himself learning from experience, and consequently he launched a series of arguments against the notion of innate ideas. The mind expanded throug h the senses. God gave humankind a sensory apparatus for a purpose, Locke conten ded, even if not everything in creation can be comprehended through empirical in vestigation. All this can be gleaned from Mr. Woolhouse's very learned book, but it becomes r ather a chore to assemble. And some aspects of Locke are never integrated into a whole view of the man. Why, for example, was Locke so interested in medicine an d chemistry? Surely his fascination with the functioning of the human body is co nnected to his fixation on a corporeal self, where ideas result from physical se nsations.

that shoul

Even more intriguing are Locke's chronic illnesses. He thought he had consumptio n (tuberculosis), although it now seems more probable that he suffered from asth ma, bronchitis, and eventually emphysema from inhaling all that horrid coal smok e in London. He almost never visited the city without returning home to Oxford w ith a racking cough. Did Locke see in his own ailments which interrupted but perha ps also stimulated his medical studies proof of the way ideas and sensations mesh? Mr. Woolhouse might object that evidence is lacking for the answers to my questi ons. But surely it is duty of any biographer to pose questions that arise out of

the patterns of a subject's life. Biography is not merely a matter of reporting what the biographer knows; it is a lso a work of interpretation seeking out the subject's motivations. For example, Mr. Woolhouse seems to think that Locke was rather cowardly when he disavowed t he politics of his employer, the Earl of Shaftsbury, who was suspected of plotti ng against Charles II. Locke had been Shaftsbury's secretary and was certainly p rivy to, if not a full participant in, Shaftsbury's intrigues. Mr. Woolhouse quo tes "someone who knew him [Locke] during his worrying years" as having a "peacea ble temper, and rather fearful than courageous." He might here have pointed out that Locke's aim was to preserve his life as a thinker, even if it meant to use Mr . Woolhouse's term resorting to "disingenuity." Experience taught Locke to bide his time. In 1699, he returned to England from a six-year exile in Holland, understanding that his new sovereign, William, would look favorably on his work. Thus began Locke's triumphant years of publication. So Locke did not miss his minute, and it is unfortunate that Mr. Woolhouse's bio graphy does not present his subject's grand return and triumph with the kind of fanfare it deserves.