How to describe Solomon's very good book on Beethoven? It is part psychohistory, which is always a perilous operation for a writer. I am one of those people who actually like Freud, but sometimes Solomon's psychoanalysis irritated me, and I was always glad when he left the couch and went back to more or less solid facts. There is a huge chapter on the Immortal Beloved that bored me after a couple of dozen pages, but those particularly interested in this aspect of Beethoven's life are in for a real treat! I'd like to have seen more discussion of B's politics and social views; Solomon's discussion of these is, overall, pretty thin.
But Solomon's weaknesses (and that is my judgment) do not ouweigh his great strengths. He has certainly done his homework on B's life, and he is a skilled writer and a patient, tireless researcher. He knows his Thayer as well, and he isn't above questioning long-held assumptions about this flawed but very great man. Solomon's discussion of B's music is sufficient for a biography (those who want a lot of details on the music should go elsewhere), and he does a great job of showing how the composer followed the classical models and broke away toward romanticism. He does well in showing the man's great genuis without ever worshipping him (the way 19th century music lovers did). No doubt about it, Beethoven was a real crumb in a lot of ways, and Solomon makes this clear.
As good as this book is, I wouldn't call it definitive. I imagine some bright peson coming along some day who has a deep understanding of the Enlightenment, of early romanticism, of music, and of German and Viennese society who will give a truer picture of the man in his full context. It is very difficult to describe music in words, but my imaginary writer will be adept at this as well. Until this person comes along (and we're talking about a reincarnation of Samuel Johnson or Shakespeare), Solomon will do just fine.