Re: Feeling Good, Louis

1

I don't hate Hitchens, I merely despise him.


Posted by: Invisible Adjunct | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 7:38 PM
horizontal rule
2

If there's one thing I did not need to see, it's Christopher Hitchens taking a shower.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 7:39 PM
horizontal rule
3

On the wax: "like a sandpaper handjob".

Fantastic.


Posted by: Becks | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 7:40 PM
horizontal rule
4

I'm claiming Sandpaper Handjob as my future band name, BTW.


Posted by: Becks | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 7:42 PM
horizontal rule
5

Even prior to 9/11, I never got the point of Hitchens, or why people seemed to admire him. But the slide show's pretty good. "Sack, back, and crack" is just perfect (it isn't his). And maybe it's a sign: prepare for Band Girl, ogged.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 7:46 PM
horizontal rule
6

Yoo is evil, Hitchens merely crazy and drunk. You should read his sober but still crazy brother Peter sometime.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 7:47 PM
horizontal rule
7

6: Is brother Peter some kind of reactionary Tory or something?


Posted by: Invisible Adjunct | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 7:49 PM
horizontal rule
8

6: I thought Peter's Iran piece was good, but it's like reading something good from Derb: there is some odious position in the back there that I can't quite see but know is an important motivator.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 7:49 PM
horizontal rule
9

I'm claiming Sandpaper Handjob as my future band name, BTW.

It would also be a good pseudonym if you ever feel the need to further anonymize.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 7:51 PM
horizontal rule
10

I hate him well in excess of that much.


Posted by: Flippanter | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 7:52 PM
horizontal rule
11

Even prior to 9/11, I never got the point of Hitchens, or why people seemed to admire him.

Because he's a good writer and writes about interesting things, and tries to defend positions that others are too lazy to actually try to defend.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 7:53 PM
horizontal rule
12

I never actually read his stuff, but someone who smeared M. Theresa, Lady Di, and Kissinger can't be all bad.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 7:55 PM
horizontal rule
13

He's basically a super-troll.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 7:57 PM
horizontal rule
14

Looking good, Louis.


Posted by: TJ | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 8:00 PM
horizontal rule
15

The Kissinger book was good, maybe the best thing he's done, and I agreed in general with his arguments in the Clinton and Mother Teresa books. His post-9/11 descent into Slate-level contrarianism (which naturally led in short order to his regular Slate column) is indefensible, but I have to say that, based on one experience, he's a lot of fun to go drinking with.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 8:03 PM
horizontal rule
16

12:John beat me to it.

Back when I was watching a lot of TV, I saw the brothers Hitchens go at each other on CSpan for about three hours, including autobiography. Before 9/11, I think it was. They were funny.

Look Amis has apparently gone crazy over Muslims. 9/11 changed everything.

PS:While researching High Wind in Jamaica I noticed that Martin Amis had a pretty large part as his one & only acting part. At 16 or so, not so far from the period of the The Rachel Papers. I am sure everyone already knew that, MA has probably written about it, and it isn't that interesting anyway.


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 8:04 PM
horizontal rule
17

Can I play bass in your band, Becks?


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 8:27 PM
horizontal rule
18

Hitchens can really turn a phrase. Sober (rarely), drunk (often), and even hung-over, he can flat-out write. He's like a truly gifted athlete: playing another game than most of the rest of us (maybe not AWB, who's got the prose gene).

That said, when it comes to ideas, he's little more than a latter-day Podhoretz (Sr.) or Kristol (also Sr.): a true believer, from far left to extreme right. He lacks doubts, which makes him a bit dull, even when he wows me with a lovely construction. So I read him for the words and try to ignore the creepy ideology lurking beneath them.


Posted by: anmik | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 8:31 PM
horizontal rule
19

I got tricked, HWiJ came out in 65 and MA was born in 49 but filmed the movie in like 62-63. So a wee lad. He devotes 2 pages to it in Experience.


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 8:32 PM
horizontal rule
20

18:I honestly don't know what Htchen's ideology is. Did he support the Tax Cuts? Bush supporter for the way Katrina was handled?

I should have read the Amis interview. Maybe the British & Europeans have an abhorrence of fervent religiosity that we Americans don't quite get. We always have been surrounded by God-crazies whereas for them militant Islam is the only variant left alive.


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 8:40 PM
horizontal rule
21

ober (rarely), drunk (often), and even hung-over, he can flat-out write.

This is one of the points at which I get stuck. He writes well. So do many, many others. He's not notably better than half the people writing in NYRB. Perhaps he writes a bit more crisply. The admiration feels like Anglophilia gone awry.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 8:41 PM
horizontal rule
22

20: Fluid, to be sure, but always strident.

21: I think he's much better than almost anyone writing in the NYRB. Again, though, not on the ideas but the prose. Most of the contributors to the NYRB don't bother writing with image, wouldn't know meter if it crept up up and bopped them on the head, and ignore even journalistic conventions -- because they can't be bothered to try. When, for example, was the last time a NYRB writer had a real narrative arc in her review. I can't think of an example. But I skip quite a lot, to be honest.

As for Hitchens, he'll often write a sentence that makes me sit up and take notice. I admire him for that, even if I think he's a deplorable human being. Seriously, a repugnant and fetid bag of wind.


Posted by: anmik | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 9:24 PM
horizontal rule
23

So he decided to go plucked turkey instead of cold turkey? Interesting.


Posted by: Wrongshore | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 10:34 PM
horizontal rule
24

He's basically a super-troll.

Yup. I kind of like him, even though he's an ass.

I have to admit he looks better after the makeover. And I absolutely love that he had the cynicism and skirt to not only do it, but be photographed doing it. Gotta admire an out-of-shape middle-aged alcoholic who'll let Vanity Fair publish pictures of him getting his crotch waxed.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 10:41 PM
horizontal rule
25

Yes, Peter is a reactionary Tory.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 10:45 PM
horizontal rule
26

24: Apparently he's been offering it up for a feel in NYC. Where did I read this?


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 10:46 PM
horizontal rule
27

Maybe the British & Europeans have an abhorrence of fervent religiosity that we Americans don't quite get. We always have been surrounded by God-crazies whereas for them militant Islam is the only variant left alive.

I read something about Tony Blair's being seemingly about to convert to Catholicism, and how it made him a real weirdo among the political class to even think about religion, and how most of the best-loved British prime ministers of this century had no religion at all. It said that something like 7% of Engish people go to regular Church of England services. So if there are some public institutions that pay lip service to and subsidize religion in the absence of actual religious people, and the governments continue to hypocritically pretend that religion is important to people, they should be worried that "religion" will one day mean "Islam" for these purposes.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 10:48 PM
horizontal rule
28

12 nails it. I have to admit that I really like Hitchens, even given his sailor dive into clash of civilizations crazitude. He almost never fails to make me laugh. Also, this should be required reading every Christmas.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 10:58 PM
horizontal rule
29

Why is getting a Brazilian part of a makeover? That shit is not standard.


Posted by: Lambent Cactus | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 11:02 PM
horizontal rule
30

28: That is a very good piece.


Posted by: anmik | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 11:17 PM
horizontal rule
31

That shit is not standard.

get with the times, granpa


Posted by: soup biscuit | Link to this comment | 11-28-07 11:18 PM
horizontal rule
32

27: One of the Blair legacies is the renewed fervor of the god botherers, whether scary Opus Dei Catholics like, well, half Blair's cabinet it seemed like or crazy fundie loons imported from America whinging about Jerry Springer: the Opera.

I've read Hitchens' book on Kissinger back in 2001 or 2002 or so and while it's good, it's nothing that any other dedicated writer couldn't have written. If you'd paid attention when Kissinger was in office, you would've known everything Hitchens put in that book.


Posted by: Martin Wisse | Link to this comment | 11-29-07 1:16 AM
horizontal rule
33

"There's no joke Dick Cheney or John Yoo could make or participate in that would crack me up."

This is an untenable position.

Dick Cheney would merely have to deadpan quack the There Once Was a Man from Nantucket limerick to bring down the house, you included.

-----

Hitchens is a rather lovable artist and persona with loathsome political views. Folks like that have always existed. Deal with it.


Posted by: Petey | Link to this comment | 11-29-07 4:46 AM
horizontal rule
34

It's an interesting question whether we can be (should be) amused by loathsome people.

As I recall, an apparent majority of you were amused by a loathesome person diving headfirst into the bottom of a swimming pool, so there is that.


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 11-29-07 5:24 AM
horizontal rule
35

34: Funny is as funny does.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 11-29-07 5:47 AM
horizontal rule
36

#34. Tragedy is when I cut myself; comedy is when Krauthammer dives into a shallow pool.

Hitchens is a rather lovable artist and persona

Whoa, horsey! Let's not follow Charles into the pool. I can't see anything particularly loveable about Hitchens, but he is witty, he can turn a phrase, etc. He's entertaining to read, usually, even when I think he's nuts. I imagine he'd be entertaining to drink with, too--for a while, at least. It's a shame he came all this way just to be Auberon Waugh, though.


Posted by: Populuxe | Link to this comment | 11-29-07 6:47 AM
horizontal rule
37

"he is witty, he can turn a phrase, etc. He's entertaining to read, usually, even when I think he's nuts. I imagine he'd be entertaining to drink with, too--for a while, at least."

That's lovable in my book.


Posted by: Petey | Link to this comment | 11-29-07 7:02 AM
horizontal rule
38

I imagine he'd be entertaining to drink with, too--for a while, at least.

For precisely as long as it took for him to start with his characteristic moral preening--which, I imagine, would happen three sips into the first beer if you were having any kind of serious conversation.

Really, folks, Hitch is personally unpleasant in exactly the same way Andrew Sullivan is: he has unshakeable confidence in the infallibility of his own moral judgement, and to disagree with said judgement is to mark yourself as a moral cripple. That these moral judgements are remarkably coincident with the author's own prejudices and self-interest (Hitchens: the execution of Ricky Ray Rector puts Bill Clinton beyond the pale for all decent people; Sullivan: revealing embarassing personal details about someone's sex life is the most morally despicable invasion of privacy imaginable) provokes exactly zero self-reflection on their part.

Boris Johnsons is loathesome but lovable; Hitchens is loathesome tout court.


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 11-29-07 7:23 AM
horizontal rule
39

Hitchens was invited to a recent atheists convention and made a point of spending all his time baiting them with pro-war bullshit. Troll is right.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 11-29-07 7:54 AM
horizontal rule
40

Hitch is personally unpleasant in exactly the same way Andrew Sullivan is: he has unshakeable confidence in the infallibility of his own moral judgement

And you know who else is like that? Jamie Fucking Kirchick. Except he has none of the redeeming talents of Sullivan and Hitchens.

But I guess I'm preaching to the choir here, so I'll stop.


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 11-29-07 8:16 AM
horizontal rule
41

Boris Johnson is loathesome but lovable

Via YouTube: Boris Johnson is reminded of his involvement in a bungled criminal conspiracy.


Posted by: Populuxe | Link to this comment | 11-29-07 8:31 AM
horizontal rule
42

Just watched Depp in The Libertine again this week. John Wilmot at 18 was the toast of the court but in ten years became universally loathed after he turned his rapier toward his friends.

There is a kind of vicious wit that can be fun to watch while it is directed at one's enemies but becomes intolerable when it is recognized as misanthropy. The misanthrope can arbitrarily limit his targets, but then becomes cynical and disgusted with himself. This can be expressed ironically with an obviously absurd self-righteousness.

Or fuck and drink himself to death while still young enough to make the effort.


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 11-29-07 11:16 AM
horizontal rule
43

Looking good, Billy Ray!


Posted by: Tassled Loafered Leech | Link to this comment | 11-29-07 5:17 PM
horizontal rule