I’m a life-long Vidal fan. However, only an idiot could miss how he went rapidly downhill toward the end of his life. It was painful to see. I admire much of Hitchens’ work; this essay, while essentially true, is just as mean-spirited as he accuses Vidal of being. Hitchens took some weird turns in his intellectual life as well, so I guess he and Vidal were sort of mirrors to one another. Thanks for sharing the essay and sorry this is so long-winded.
Tbh it was always kinda there, it just became more intense and less charming towards the end of Vidal's life. He just hide it better with his well tuned wit. The example that comes to mind is his weird conclusions to the second world war and praising Charles Lindbergh. As he grew older he just became more frantic and willing to double down on his isolationism.
@@jdkessey I can remember some of his earlier essays railing against the establishment, predicting and hoping for a revolution of some sort. I’d always think, “Oh, Gore, for heavens’ sake! You’d be one of the first they take off for re-education.” But I loved his style, both physical and writing, and his refreshingly snarky wit. I also admired the depth of his research for his historical fiction. He was brilliant but a bit loony. All that said, I still thoroughly enjoy that historical fiction, and many of his serious essays about literature.
@@gaildoughty6799 Oh ya defitely. To me, Gore is the example of someone who got away with the opinions he had because he's incredibly charming and funny.
I believe Hitchens was intending to pay Vidal a kind of compliment by igniting a feud of the kind Vidal and Hitchens both enjoyed. It had a "let's recapture the old days" feel to it. But I'm not sure Hitchens realised quite the extent to which Vidal at this stage had deteriorated mentally so much as to be pretty much incapable of a reply. Vidal's descent was fuelled by grief, depression and alcoholism. All said, I don't think Hitchens ever lost his fondness or admiration for *the earlier) Vidal. See his essays in "Unacknowledged Legislation" and a joint event they did on UA-cam.
I love that article by Hitchens. I love both Hitchens and Vidal but Vidal became quite the crank at the end of his life. He'd always had some unsavoury views but the Bush administration brought out all his worst qualities.
Well, I don't know what to say. "Vidal Loco" is not one of Hitchens' finest moments. In the documentary "The United States of Amnesia," which chronicles the last few years of Vidal's life, he and Hitchens bump into one another at some event, and Hitchens tries being conciliatory and friendly toward Vidal but Vidal cuts him dead. Hitchens is then seen crying (not figuratively but literally) and you can see how painful the loss of this friendship was for him. But who cares, really? They were good friends for decades and admirers of each other's work. The rupture at the very end should not overshadow their long history of mutual admiration.
I’m a life-long Vidal fan. However, only an idiot could miss how he went rapidly downhill toward the end of his life. It was painful to see.
I admire much of Hitchens’ work; this essay, while essentially true, is just as mean-spirited as he accuses Vidal of being.
Hitchens took some weird turns in his intellectual life as well, so I guess he and Vidal were sort of mirrors to one another.
Thanks for sharing the essay and sorry this is so long-winded.
There's no such thing as a long-winded comment on this channel!
Tbh it was always kinda there, it just became more intense and less charming towards the end of Vidal's life. He just hide it better with his well tuned wit. The example that comes to mind is his weird conclusions to the second world war and praising Charles Lindbergh. As he grew older he just became more frantic and willing to double down on his isolationism.
@@jdkessey I can remember some of his earlier essays railing against the establishment, predicting and hoping for a revolution of some sort. I’d always think, “Oh, Gore, for heavens’ sake! You’d be one of the first they take off for re-education.” But I loved his style, both physical and writing, and his refreshingly snarky wit. I also admired the depth of his research for his historical fiction. He was brilliant but a bit loony. All that said, I still thoroughly enjoy that historical fiction, and many of his serious essays about literature.
@@gaildoughty6799 Oh ya defitely. To me, Gore is the example of someone who got away with the opinions he had because he's incredibly charming and funny.
I believe Hitchens was intending to pay Vidal a kind of compliment by igniting a feud of the kind Vidal and Hitchens both enjoyed. It had a "let's recapture the old days" feel to it. But I'm not sure Hitchens realised quite the extent to which Vidal at this stage had deteriorated mentally so much as to be pretty much incapable of a reply. Vidal's descent was fuelled by grief, depression and alcoholism. All said, I don't think Hitchens ever lost his fondness or admiration for *the earlier) Vidal. See his essays in "Unacknowledged Legislation" and a joint event they did on UA-cam.
Very interesting! You're working on cognitive levels I could only aspire to!
@@JoeSpivey02 Ah
Hitchens at his worst
I love that article by Hitchens. I love both Hitchens and Vidal but Vidal became quite the crank at the end of his life. He'd always had some unsavoury views but the Bush administration brought out all his worst qualities.
Eh, what?
Well, I don't know what to say. "Vidal Loco" is not one of Hitchens' finest moments. In the documentary "The United States of Amnesia," which chronicles the last few years of Vidal's life, he and Hitchens bump into one another at some event, and Hitchens tries being conciliatory and friendly toward Vidal but Vidal cuts him dead. Hitchens is then seen crying (not figuratively but literally) and you can see how painful the loss of this friendship was for him. But who cares, really? They were good friends for decades and admirers of each other's work. The rupture at the very end should not overshadow their long history of mutual admiration.