Scan barcode
jobinsonlis's review against another edition
3.0
Christopher Hitchens was a very gifted essayist and was extremely knowledgeable about a wide variety of topics, such as literature, history, and, yes, of course, religion. However this last collection of essays from him was at times an almost unbearable slog to get through. The high number of essays grouped together by content meant that I had to read several that seemed almost identical to one another and after a while my eyes just started to glaze over in an attempt to get me to go do something else more productive. I didn't really dislike any of the essays except for one bizarre piece rehashing why women aren't as funny as men (an argument I thought had been put to bed when everybody in the world realized that they personally knew lots of funny women so this couldn't possibly be true). However none of the essays really stuck out for me. For a gifted and controversial figure like Hitchens this seems almost worse than just not liking them. I'm happy that I read this for the book recommendations I picked up but I'm more happy that I'm finally done with this doorstopper.
beatsbybeard's review against another edition
4.0
Any attempt at illustrating the breadth and depth of Hitchens's intellect is an exercise in futility. This book of over 100 essays isn't even a complete collection; it samples his output from only the last fifteen-or-so years of his life, right up to his death in December 2011. The breathtaking scope and volume of that output is – in profound understatement – impressive. Topics range from historical figures, global politics, and totalitarianism to "Why Women Aren't Funny" and an analytical history of blowjobs. Clocking in at almost 800 pages, this is not a light read, but an invigorating one, and a fitting legacy for an author who, even posthumously, is in equal parts incensing and inspiring.
pengudatu's review against another edition
2.0
Way too many book reviews, if you're not already familiar with the topic the book being reviewed is centered on it becomes near impossible to understand what is being written.
There are thankfully less reviews towards the end of the book but I'd still give this a two overall, difficult to get through it.
There are thankfully less reviews towards the end of the book but I'd still give this a two overall, difficult to get through it.
bitters's review against another edition
This collection engages an interest in the world. I didn't even *know* I wanted to know about certain topics or events or persons until I started reading. I'll often have to start by looking up just who or what the particulars are but then Hitchen's enthusiasm, humor, and cascading analysis grabs hold and doesn't release. This fella' enjoys language and his usage of it is razor sharp. Every sentence feels fresh and precise in its construction, regardless of what is being written about. He's also exceptionally good at getting a reaction out of his reader; I left this collection mad, glad, and anxious to pursue other books and outlets on some of the subjects he highlights.
socraticgadfly's review against another edition
5.0
Five stars for the content, four to four-plus for what is revealed about Hitchens.
Many of the essays in here are great. On matters religious, Hitchens postulates that Ben Franklin was an atheist, not a deist, that Lincoln was even more skeptical about organized religion than has been portrayed in the past and other things.
Much of this comes from reviews of books from various magazines. I read most of these, though skipping a few about modern British authors.
His take on Gore Vidal is great; Vidal was, indeed, "all that" until 9/11, when he went in the "truther" bin, among other things.
That said, some of his essays are clunkers, and others reflect that Hitch refuses to shine the light of logic on his own positions at times.
Take his continued "bleeding heart" stance on behalf of the Kurds, and using this to justify Bush's invasion of Iraq. Well, in all of his American reading, I'm sure he's heard the old phrase, "You dance with them what brung you." How he can excoriate Bush in other posts (yet not understand how this could, even without other evidence, fuel some "Truthers") yet defend not just an invasion of Iraq in the abstract but by George W. Bush is one of those places where logic and self-awareness fail him. (As does Realpolitik; he does mention that Kurds are a higher percentage of the population in Turkey than in either Iraq or Iran, but won't admit that the PKK is a terrorist group, nor will he wrestle with what a Greater Kurdistan might cause in the larger Middle East.)
And, he can erect the occasional straw man. Like Sam Harris, he now seems to believe that all left liberals are ethical relativists who won't "stand up to Islam." He raises this canard in his essay on Ayaan Hirsi Ali's "Infidel," claiming first that, and second that many said left-liberals have gone on to call her a fundamentalist.
No, Hitch, we've taken her to task for going to bed with the same neocons you have. If there's been more essays of this nature in the book, it would have gotten downgraded a star. Or more.
Many of the essays in here are great. On matters religious, Hitchens postulates that Ben Franklin was an atheist, not a deist, that Lincoln was even more skeptical about organized religion than has been portrayed in the past and other things.
Much of this comes from reviews of books from various magazines. I read most of these, though skipping a few about modern British authors.
His take on Gore Vidal is great; Vidal was, indeed, "all that" until 9/11, when he went in the "truther" bin, among other things.
That said, some of his essays are clunkers, and others reflect that Hitch refuses to shine the light of logic on his own positions at times.
Take his continued "bleeding heart" stance on behalf of the Kurds, and using this to justify Bush's invasion of Iraq. Well, in all of his American reading, I'm sure he's heard the old phrase, "You dance with them what brung you." How he can excoriate Bush in other posts (yet not understand how this could, even without other evidence, fuel some "Truthers") yet defend not just an invasion of Iraq in the abstract but by George W. Bush is one of those places where logic and self-awareness fail him. (As does Realpolitik; he does mention that Kurds are a higher percentage of the population in Turkey than in either Iraq or Iran, but won't admit that the PKK is a terrorist group, nor will he wrestle with what a Greater Kurdistan might cause in the larger Middle East.)
And, he can erect the occasional straw man. Like Sam Harris, he now seems to believe that all left liberals are ethical relativists who won't "stand up to Islam." He raises this canard in his essay on Ayaan Hirsi Ali's "Infidel," claiming first that, and second that many said left-liberals have gone on to call her a fundamentalist.
No, Hitch, we've taken her to task for going to bed with the same neocons you have. If there's been more essays of this nature in the book, it would have gotten downgraded a star. Or more.
storiwa's review against another edition
4.0
I have so many caveats to my rating of this book. Hitchens was an amazing writer & thinker. He was also extremely frustrating because I disagree to a large degree with quite a few of his viewpoints...even to the point of being very pissed off by them at times. However, I think his writing is important to be familiar with - especially for the time in history they encompass. If nothing else, in reading him, you'll grow your vocabulary substantially and learn things about world history and/or literature that you didn't know before.
narayan17's review against another edition
challenging
dark
informative
reflective
medium-paced
3.75