I’m not sure what Lownie wanted to accomplish in Stalin’s Englishman. If he wanted to provide entertainment, he failed. The book is filled with entire chapters of what Burgess ate and drank, what he bought and wore, and who he fucked or tried to — all without any comment on why we should care. If he wanted to provide heretofore unknown facts, he failed. Throwing in this level of detail would be laudatory if this were a primary source, but it’s simply sorting through already plentiful sources and just rearranging them and pretending it’s something new. The book is extensively footnoted, but little new is provided. If he wanted to provide analysis, he failed. Mundane unimportant facts are simply spread onto the page without adequate comment or attempt to explain either why Burgess did what he did, how much damage it caused within and without England, or what it meant going forward.
At one point in the book, Lownie quotes someone saying, “This is a bad unpleasant book about a bad, unpleasant man.”
That line itself explains the entire book.