John Healy is a fascinating character. A formidable intellect, articulate, a mind so hungry for information that he is well-informed/educated despite leaving school so early. Incredible lows and extraordinary highs in his life. It's amazing that his intensity is such that he could beat grandmasters at chess within a short time of turning his mind to the game having had no previous idea how to play.
But the documentary is spoiled by tired old stereotypes of Irish victimhood. Healy allegedly "hates" London but he doesn't leave it. His sanctuary is allegedly Ireland that he never moves to and is shown meeting relatives that he has chosen not to see for an incredible 45 years. His genius is magnified whilst the despair he has brought to other people's lives is brushed over. His cruel and brutal Irish father beating him at 6 is obviously the source of his demons that plagued his mental health for the rest of his life but the programme makers choose to focus on his oppression being sourced in the reaction to contemporary Irish terrorism. His dispute with Faber after having threatened them makes him out to be the victim yet the programme makers lack circumspection that literally no publisher in the world would touch him for years, not even Irish ones.
There're a lot of warts in his story, yet they are all portrayed to be elsewhere. A more objective account would provide better balance giving due acknowledgment that John was not a mere victim, his parenting was absolutely appalling and it was that that principally shaped him and ruined his life chances.
But the documentary is spoiled by tired old stereotypes of Irish victimhood. Healy allegedly "hates" London but he doesn't leave it. His sanctuary is allegedly Ireland that he never moves to and is shown meeting relatives that he has chosen not to see for an incredible 45 years. His genius is magnified whilst the despair he has brought to other people's lives is brushed over. His cruel and brutal Irish father beating him at 6 is obviously the source of his demons that plagued his mental health for the rest of his life but the programme makers choose to focus on his oppression being sourced in the reaction to contemporary Irish terrorism. His dispute with Faber after having threatened them makes him out to be the victim yet the programme makers lack circumspection that literally no publisher in the world would touch him for years, not even Irish ones.
There're a lot of warts in his story, yet they are all portrayed to be elsewhere. A more objective account would provide better balance giving due acknowledgment that John was not a mere victim, his parenting was absolutely appalling and it was that that principally shaped him and ruined his life chances.
