I have mixed feelings about this book. On the positive side, it is much needed. Strayhorn has always been too much in Ellington’s shadow. It is not right that he be forever pigeon-holed as Ellington’s associate, and this book is a step toward correcting that.

Second, the book is informative. Hajdu discusses Strayhorn’s roots and pre-Ellington influences more thoroughly than any one to date. He also explores in greater detail the nuts and bolts of Ellington and Strayhorn’s partnership, an alliance that was not static through the years but evolved with changing circumstances. I have always wondered, for example, why "Take the ‘A’ Train" was attributed solely to Strayhorn when most of his other compositions also carried the Ellington name. Hadju’s discussion of the legal climate of the day, with the looming musician’s strike, clarifies the point nicely.

But I also have some reservations. The title, Lush Life, is appropriate. Hadju includes a lot of information about Strayhorn’s alternative life style--his homosexuality, alcoholism, drug use, etc. Such information is appropriate. Those elements were, after all, part of Strayhorn’s identity and experience. But in a musical biography, discussions of lifestyle should be connected to an artist’s music. How did these experiences affect Strayhorn’s compositions? Such connections are tenuous in this book. For example, Hadju spends several pages discussing Strayhorn’s involvement in a 1940’s Manhattan group called the Copasectics--an informal gathering of black, gay artists. Some details of that little known group are interesting, but it’s not clear from this book how (or whether) the organization affected Strayhorn’s musical perceptions.

Second, the documentation is fuzzy. Hajdu reportedly did five hundred interviews in preparing the book. I’m impressed. But we don’t know when and under what circumstances those interviews were done. Ordinarily, that wouldn’t raise my eyebrows, but there are a lot of startling quotes by a lot of people--mainly with reference to homosexuality--that make me wonder in what contexts the comments were made.

At the end of the preface, Hadju says, "This book is an effort to extricate Billy Strayhorn from the world of myth, to see who Billy Strayhorn was, how he came to create what he did the way he did it. . . ."

Hajdu accomplishes part of his goal. After reading the book, we do see more clearly who Billy Strayhorn was. However, we do not see so clearly "how he came to create what he did the way he did it." In short, this book is a first step toward "extricat[ing] Billy Strayhorn from the world of myth," but more needs to be done.