What do you think of Christopher Hitchens ?

[SJS]

For those who dont know of him, here is a link to his latest article

WE CAN NOT SURRENDER

I am a great fan and have read all his books.

[benchmark00]

Yeah he's a good bloke...

[Chubb]

He's better than his brother, but as I regard his brother Peter as one of the most odious things currently inhabiting planet earth, that isn't saying much.

[Slow Love™]

IMO, Hitchens is a first class, self-important w@nker, who far too often derides his political opponents for arguments they didn't make, and dismisses those who oppose current US foreign policy as being aligned with the terrorists/Saddam, like the worst elements of the Right. Described himself as feeling "exhiliration" at the wonderful battle to come when the planes impacted with the WTC.

Another trotskyite that went neo-con, and a personal friend of Peter Wolfowitz. Can't stand him - I've only read articles of his though, and don't own his books, which must be an interesting passage in his voyage from the Left (although he was just as much of a w@nker then) to George Bush cheer-squad.

I'd love to be a fly on the wall at his family get-together's with his brother though.

chris hinton is also a big fan of Hitchens, as far as I remember.

[Adamc]

Originally Posted by Slow Love™

chris hinton is also a big fan of Hitchens, as far as I remember.

Ah, I knew I'd heard the name before. I immediately thought 'BAD!' as soon as I saw the name, so that must be where the association comes from. Don't really know much about Hitchens though, so I can't make an informed judgment.

[luckyeddie]

I much preferred the style and sentiments of Tony Parsons's article you posted in the other thread - 'nothing you do can hurt us because we've seen off bigger tossers than you lot in the past'.

This guy is all 'gung ho' - 'watch out, if you are not for us you are against us'.

[FaaipDeOiad]

Okay, Chris is a tough one for me.

On one hand, I am a big, big fan of his writing. Hitchens wrote what is probably the best ever book on George Orwell (Why Orwell Matters) and despite his new political leanings managed not to claim Orwell as his own but still salute his brilliance. The Trial Of Henry Kissinger is also a fabulous piece of work, worthwhile for anyone not familiar with Henry and his legacy.

Having said that, on the war on terror he's completely wrong, in my opinion. He makes more good points than most of his allies on the issue, mind you, and I don't disagree with much that he says about Saddam and company, but some of his crackpot theories about "the left" since the whole thing began have turned me against him.

Either way, he's an absolutely magnificent writer, whether or not I agree with him, and even in his latest incarnation as a Clinton-bashing, Bush-defending, War-mongering right-wing beast, he still comes out with some absolute gems. The linked article here, however, is not one of them.

[Jono]

By God I'm happy he is yet to mention Orwell in any significant manner, because I doubt very much that a great man like Orwell would appreciate being linked to his ridiculous attacks on the left.

Personally can't stand the bloke.

[FaaipDeOiad]

Originally Posted by Jono

By God I'm happy he is yet to mention Orwell in any significant manner, because I doubt very much that a great man like Orwell would appreciate being linked to his ridiculous attacks on the left.

Personally can't stand the bloke.

Seriously, his book on Orwell is brilliant. Has wonderful insights into his writing, and covers his significance to modern political discourse convincingly. Has a whole chapter utterly tearing a apart some of the right's claims to Orwell (that he would have supported the war in Vietnam, for one) as well. Great stuff.

[vic_orthdox]

It says at the bottom that he writes for "Vanity Fair". Is that as in Vanity Fair the fashion type magazine? I'm suprised that they have someon who seems to be so highly regarded/respected/read is from that sort of publication.

P.S. SJS, its just not the same without your dogs as your avatar.

[SJS]

I think he is a fantastic writer.

He has lots of faults (says who ? ..me who has none ??) no doubt. He is so strongly and aggressively passionate about his opinions that he comes out to those with even a slightly different view point as being too bloody head strong (for want of a better word). But as with all great political writers, one doesnt have to agree with all they say. He still makes many great points and thats enough reason for me to read most of what I can lay my hands on.

I too dont agree with some of his stuff. I also know that doesnt, necessarily, make me right

Originally Posted by vic_orthdox

P.S. SJS, its just not the same without your dogs as your avatar.

I know my dogs are better looking. I'll get one of them back sooner rather than later

[SJS]

Another Hitchens article on the London Bombings.


Yes, London Can Take It

[luckyeddie]

Originally Posted by SJS

Another Hitchens article on the London Bombings.


Yes, London Can Take It

That article is quite, quite dreadful. Basically, it seems to be accusing all and sundry of thinking that they know what's in the heads of so many others whereas of course they don't, and then the author compounds that by thinking that he has the insight to know what's really in the heads of those who think they know..... etc.

So much implication, so little substance.

[SJS]

Originally Posted by luckyeddie

That article is quite, quite dreadful. Basically, it seems to be accusing all and sundry of thinking that they know what's in the heads of so many others whereas of course they don't, and then the author compounds that by thinking that he has the insight to know what's really in the heads of those who think they know..... etc.

So much implication, so little substance.

Yes you are right.