Interesting comment from the author on the review process for "Life":
"Reviewers were only allowed to look at it for a maximum of six hours under close observation at his publishers to ensure that they didn't somehow copy the entire brick-like volume and sell bootleg editions in Camden Market. As a consequence, much of the panicked press tended to scan it for headline-grabbing attacks on Mick Jagger and very little else."
Do I also remember that they weren't allowed to take any written notes? If you were trying to guarantee a review full of tabloid-size snippets of sleaze and inaccurately-recalled soundbites, you couldn't have invented a better way of doing it. Not that some "headline-grabbing attacks" weren't there - but the process did guarantee that they got the lion's share of the early reviewers' attention.