Reads more like a collection of facts, anecdotes and analysis of his works, rather than a cohesive story of his lifetime. Great nonetheless.
“The Agony and the Ecstasy” by Irving Stone about Michelangelo was much better in terms of building a story and weaving everything else into it. It’s also interesting to compare how both of them viewed each other - their life and work overlapped a bit.
Irving Stone was also presenting Michelangelo’s art and let the reader decide what they think of it and if they like it. Isaacson, on the other hand, doesn’t let anyone not like what they see. Everything is genius and extraordinary and we just must be in awe of everything we see. Well, some things I liked, some not so much. I don’t need the author to do the thinking and liking for me.