Scan barcode
neilrcoulter's review against another edition
3.0
Fans of Christopher Hitchens often say what an amazing writer he is, and so I’ve wanted to see if I agree. Suspecting that there’s little value to be gained from reading one of his books specifically about atheism, I picked up this collection of essays and reviews instead. And at 750 pages, “picked up this collection” is no small feat. Included are over a hundred essays from the early 2000s, originally published in places such as Slate, Vanity Fair, and The Atlantic. The man wrote. The selections include book reviews, journalism, and opinion essays. Of these, I most enjoyed the book reviews, even though they were all of books I haven’t read and usually on topics I know nothing about. But as a book reviewer myself, I learned a lot from observing how Hitchens puts a review together. His style is not a general template for every writer, because it’s dependent on his ability to bring together many facts from different places into one conversation (an ability I admire greatly); but it’s helpful in seeing how a book review doesn’t need to be “I read this book, by so-and-so, about such-and-such...Here are the three sections of the book...now I’ll explain what each chapter talks about...etc.” For my writing (I wrote a book review for publication while I was in the midst of reading this Hitchens collection), it’s helped me feel freer to bring my whole self and whatever I’m thinking about into a coherent, conversational book review. For my students (I’ve just shared one of Hitchens’s reviews with my writing class), I hope it will push them out of that generic template and into other modes of writing reviews.
The further Hitchens gets away from the grounding of talking about a specific book, the less I enjoy his writing. In his writing about everyday-life topics, he sometimes comes across as a whiny, privileged baby. When he writes of “the failure of the upper crust and the cream of society to have the remotest glimmer of an idea of what life is like for others” (699), I thought, “Do you not think that this group includes you?”
In addition, the nearer Hitchens gets to any topic related to religious faith, the shabbier his otherwise excellent thinking becomes. He demonstrates an incredible appetite for learning the minutest details about any topic in the world . . . except, oddly, religion. In those moments, he glides across the surface of tired old questions that have answers, if he wanted to look. I read something recently (by an atheist) suggesting that outspoken atheists tend to be much more fundamentalist than fundamentalist Christians, and I find that to be true in Hitchens’s writing. He comes to the Bible expecting it to be a certain specific thing, and then when he discovers something that contradicts that expectation, he triumphantly declares the whole thing to be worthless. In one essay, Hitchens derides the Ten Commandments for being “situationist ethics,” and then unironically proposes his own new set of commandments which includes “Turn off that fucking cell phone” (422). Facepalm.
Those criticisms aside, however, what impresses me about Hitchens is that he was deeply, holistically pro-life. Though he abhorred certain beliefs among certain people, in no way would he ever have abided by limitations on anyone’s freedom of speech. It’s an attitude that often seems absent in public discourse today: the ability to disagree with a person’s beliefs but not wish that person would fall off the face of the earth; and also, the patience to put together arguments and conversations that are really meant to educate, not to attack or “win points” against “opponents.”
Hitchens fans also frequently praise him for how funny he was. Though I didn’t find him extremely amusing in this collection (his wit often felt a little forced or obvious to me), he does express some things really well—for example, in an essay about political campaign jargon:
The essays in this volume aren’t grouped chronologically, but more into lightly connected themes—so you might read three essays in a row on the topic of the Holocaust, or current events in Iran. It was an interesting arrangement, and kudos to the editor for working through all that material and finding a structure to contain it all. Reading this book also showed me some of the dominant themes in Hitchens’s writing and thinking. George Orwell, for example, is never more than a couple of pages away, with references to P. G. Wodehouse lagging only slightly behind. I knew Hitchens’s reputation as an atheist, but I’m glad to know more of him now. It’s a shame that he is so well-known in that one area (where I think he wasn’t at his best), when his mind was constantly bringing together information from many, many areas of life, literature, and history. This didn’t translate into him becoming a “wise guide for life,” but it makes him an interesting author to try to keep up with.
Reading this collection is almost certainly more Hitchens than even the most devoted fan needs, but I’m glad to now have this overview of someone who was such an intellectual force during his lifetime. It’s enough Hitchens for me for a long, long time, but I have gleaned a number of lessons from his writing that will enhance mine.
The further Hitchens gets away from the grounding of talking about a specific book, the less I enjoy his writing. In his writing about everyday-life topics, he sometimes comes across as a whiny, privileged baby. When he writes of “the failure of the upper crust and the cream of society to have the remotest glimmer of an idea of what life is like for others” (699), I thought, “Do you not think that this group includes you?”
In addition, the nearer Hitchens gets to any topic related to religious faith, the shabbier his otherwise excellent thinking becomes. He demonstrates an incredible appetite for learning the minutest details about any topic in the world . . . except, oddly, religion. In those moments, he glides across the surface of tired old questions that have answers, if he wanted to look. I read something recently (by an atheist) suggesting that outspoken atheists tend to be much more fundamentalist than fundamentalist Christians, and I find that to be true in Hitchens’s writing. He comes to the Bible expecting it to be a certain specific thing, and then when he discovers something that contradicts that expectation, he triumphantly declares the whole thing to be worthless. In one essay, Hitchens derides the Ten Commandments for being “situationist ethics,” and then unironically proposes his own new set of commandments which includes “Turn off that fucking cell phone” (422). Facepalm.
Those criticisms aside, however, what impresses me about Hitchens is that he was deeply, holistically pro-life. Though he abhorred certain beliefs among certain people, in no way would he ever have abided by limitations on anyone’s freedom of speech. It’s an attitude that often seems absent in public discourse today: the ability to disagree with a person’s beliefs but not wish that person would fall off the face of the earth; and also, the patience to put together arguments and conversations that are really meant to educate, not to attack or “win points” against “opponents.”
Hitchens fans also frequently praise him for how funny he was. Though I didn’t find him extremely amusing in this collection (his wit often felt a little forced or obvious to me), he does express some things really well—for example, in an essay about political campaign jargon:
Pretty soon, we should be able to get electoral politics down to a basic newspeak that contains perhaps ten keywords: Dream, Fear, Hope, New, People, We, Change, America, Future, Together. Fishing exclusively from this tiny and stagnant pool of stock expressions, it ought to be possible to drive all thinking people away from the arena and leave matters in the gnarled but capable hands of the professional wordsmiths and manipulators. (731)He would be disappointed but not surprised to learn that things in that area haven’t improved since he died.
The essays in this volume aren’t grouped chronologically, but more into lightly connected themes—so you might read three essays in a row on the topic of the Holocaust, or current events in Iran. It was an interesting arrangement, and kudos to the editor for working through all that material and finding a structure to contain it all. Reading this book also showed me some of the dominant themes in Hitchens’s writing and thinking. George Orwell, for example, is never more than a couple of pages away, with references to P. G. Wodehouse lagging only slightly behind. I knew Hitchens’s reputation as an atheist, but I’m glad to know more of him now. It’s a shame that he is so well-known in that one area (where I think he wasn’t at his best), when his mind was constantly bringing together information from many, many areas of life, literature, and history. This didn’t translate into him becoming a “wise guide for life,” but it makes him an interesting author to try to keep up with.
Reading this collection is almost certainly more Hitchens than even the most devoted fan needs, but I’m glad to now have this overview of someone who was such an intellectual force during his lifetime. It’s enough Hitchens for me for a long, long time, but I have gleaned a number of lessons from his writing that will enhance mine.
paladintodd's review against another edition
2.0
My first foray into Hitchens and it didn't go particularly well. Perhaps a mass collection of essays was not the best starting point.
A good part of that blame lies with me - I'm simply not educated enough to judge most of this writing. Hitchens may be making amazing points in analyzing Jefferson's motives for engaging the Barbary pirates, but since I know near nothing about the Barbary pirates I can't judge his conclusions. Thus, the first 400 pages were spent reading the first paragraph of each essay, realizing I didn't know enough to understand what Hitchens would be talking about, and thus skipping to the next. (It does not speak well of me that I had to skip the essays on American history and contemporary authors for lack of understanding, while the first essay I could read in entirety and understand was the one on BJs.)
Things didn't really get better once I understood them. Essays I could follow didn't challenge my thinking, solidify beliefs I already held, or provide particular insights. I didn't find myself slapping my head and thinking "great point!". Shouldn't an essay be doing that?
It wasn't all a loss though. I did enjoy some of the tourist-type essays. Reading about Sudan, Kurdish portion of Iraq, and other travels were interesting. I was just expecting to be moved more by a guy known as a great thinker.
A good part of that blame lies with me - I'm simply not educated enough to judge most of this writing. Hitchens may be making amazing points in analyzing Jefferson's motives for engaging the Barbary pirates, but since I know near nothing about the Barbary pirates I can't judge his conclusions. Thus, the first 400 pages were spent reading the first paragraph of each essay, realizing I didn't know enough to understand what Hitchens would be talking about, and thus skipping to the next. (It does not speak well of me that I had to skip the essays on American history and contemporary authors for lack of understanding, while the first essay I could read in entirety and understand was the one on BJs.)
Things didn't really get better once I understood them. Essays I could follow didn't challenge my thinking, solidify beliefs I already held, or provide particular insights. I didn't find myself slapping my head and thinking "great point!". Shouldn't an essay be doing that?
It wasn't all a loss though. I did enjoy some of the tourist-type essays. Reading about Sudan, Kurdish portion of Iraq, and other travels were interesting. I was just expecting to be moved more by a guy known as a great thinker.
davidjme's review against another edition
3.0
All in all: yeah, pretty good, a little uneven.
I like Hitchens The Journalist a heck of a lot more than Hitchens The Critic. The man had a grand talent for recounting his experiences and making you feel as if you were part of them yourself. I suppose that's why I count Mortality (Hitchens' notes while dying of cancer) as far and away the author's best book.
Then again, I found the tone of the literary reviews and editorials a bit condescending. It sort of like that university professor who launches right the thick of his subject and looks at you despairingly if you stop to ask a question. Is that professor informed? Absolutely. Was his lecture informing? Absolutely not.
I like Hitchens The Journalist a heck of a lot more than Hitchens The Critic. The man had a grand talent for recounting his experiences and making you feel as if you were part of them yourself. I suppose that's why I count Mortality (Hitchens' notes while dying of cancer) as far and away the author's best book.
Then again, I found the tone of the literary reviews and editorials a bit condescending. It sort of like that university professor who launches right the thick of his subject and looks at you despairingly if you stop to ask a question. Is that professor informed? Absolutely. Was his lecture informing? Absolutely not.
endovelico's review against another edition
5.0
And here I am, a whole year-and-a-half later after starting Arguably, finally submitting my review on this Behemoth.
To be fair, I haven’t even read it wholly piece-by-piece as a work of this weight, altitude and breadth eventually makes it evident that to attempt a linear read as I did – Seriously, just DON’T - is as burdensome as trying to serve it as a meal.
Cristopher Hitchens’ prose – I found out - demands patience and maturity from the reader, since he rarely shows qualms in bringing up obscure events, citations or book passages or in resorting to lengthy, intricate reveries; if you’ve never been exposed to Christopher’s writings, you might think you already know all about his scholarly range and interests. Except, you really don’t. Hitchens’ intellect branches into the literary criticism of Sam Bellow or – Chris’ own hero - George Orwell with the same acute ferocity as he crafts the Darwinian argument for why, in the authors’ own words, Women aren’t funny.
And therein lies the largest merit of his writing. Because as self-involving – admittedly, even masturbatory at times – as his cogitations are, they matter-of-factly reflect the seemingly intricate character that we’ve always known Christopher Hitchens to be. Unless you’re deeply religious – for which Hitchens has a special brand of feverish repudiation – you’ll likely find yourself both marveled and maddened at his denunciations and expositions as he plows through nearly every topic as seen in nighttime network punditry.
Now more than ever, this book should be treasured not only as a brilliant work of essayism but also as a fantastic study on Hitchens’ trajectory, political identity and persona.
To be fair, I haven’t even read it wholly piece-by-piece as a work of this weight, altitude and breadth eventually makes it evident that to attempt a linear read as I did – Seriously, just DON’T - is as burdensome as trying to serve it as a meal.
Cristopher Hitchens’ prose – I found out - demands patience and maturity from the reader, since he rarely shows qualms in bringing up obscure events, citations or book passages or in resorting to lengthy, intricate reveries; if you’ve never been exposed to Christopher’s writings, you might think you already know all about his scholarly range and interests. Except, you really don’t. Hitchens’ intellect branches into the literary criticism of Sam Bellow or – Chris’ own hero - George Orwell with the same acute ferocity as he crafts the Darwinian argument for why, in the authors’ own words, Women aren’t funny.
And therein lies the largest merit of his writing. Because as self-involving – admittedly, even masturbatory at times – as his cogitations are, they matter-of-factly reflect the seemingly intricate character that we’ve always known Christopher Hitchens to be. Unless you’re deeply religious – for which Hitchens has a special brand of feverish repudiation – you’ll likely find yourself both marveled and maddened at his denunciations and expositions as he plows through nearly every topic as seen in nighttime network punditry.
Now more than ever, this book should be treasured not only as a brilliant work of essayism but also as a fantastic study on Hitchens’ trajectory, political identity and persona.
stolencapybara's review against another edition
4.0
What a thing to read. What a wonderful to spend hours loudly arguing with, learning from, being entertained by, being surprised by. Read it. It's like a great argument with a friend; a very well-read, fearless friend.
hullabaloo87's review against another edition
4.0
Christopher puts the weight of the world on his shoulders. He has true empathy for the people he engage with for better and for worse. Ranging from History, Literature to current affairs he delves deep into each topic and treats his readers as intelligent as himself and conveys his messages with seriousness, charm and humor.
His writings on culture and war, for a lack of a better term, shows us that you can be an Atheist and have a deep rooted understanding of right from wrong without celestial dictatorship and sadly seems to be unable to shake of the burden of the worlds problems. From the plights of the Afghans, to the civil war torn countries of Africa, the massacred Kurds of northern Iraq, the slaves of North Korea and it's concentration camps and many more, his writing truly conveys a man who willingly looks into the abyss and scorns it as only a Brit can when it dares to looks back.
Christopher Eric Hitchens, 1949 to 2011, a friend I never met but feel as though would always have my back, sincerely your Comrade and Friend.
His writings on culture and war, for a lack of a better term, shows us that you can be an Atheist and have a deep rooted understanding of right from wrong without celestial dictatorship and sadly seems to be unable to shake of the burden of the worlds problems. From the plights of the Afghans, to the civil war torn countries of Africa, the massacred Kurds of northern Iraq, the slaves of North Korea and it's concentration camps and many more, his writing truly conveys a man who willingly looks into the abyss and scorns it as only a Brit can when it dares to looks back.
Christopher Eric Hitchens, 1949 to 2011, a friend I never met but feel as though would always have my back, sincerely your Comrade and Friend.
mark_lm's review against another edition
5.0
One can't agree with every position that Hitchens takes in these 107 essays published the year that he died, but it is almost always a pleasure to read him, and you are likely to learn some new words, quotes, and history from his massive erudition.
caroparr's review against another edition
3.0
I dipped in and out of this enormous compendium of essays, reviews and political rants. I most enjoyed his assessments of Philip Larkin(ick), Dickens, Orwell and other writers.