Go Back   Bloggingheads Community > Diavlog comments
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Diavlog comments Post comments about particular diavlogs here.
(Users cannot create new threads.)

Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 12-21-2011, 04:22 PM
basman basman is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 648
Default Re: The Week in Blog: Lightning Is Delicious (Bill Scher & Kristen Soltis)

Originally Posted by ohreally View Post
American journos, who by and large can't write their way out of a paper bag, were deadly envious of Hitch's nonnegligible literary skills. That said, Hitchens lived in a world of words, not a world of ideas. Logical thinking was not his thing. Abstract concepts were beyond his grasp. And he didn't age well. When your shtick is dining with Wolfowitz and vomiting on Mother Teresa, you ought to know your game is up.

The thought of the humorless, witless Katha Pollitt taking on Hitch's sexism is, well, amusing. When Hitchens wrote that women are not funny, I bet he had an image of Katha and her earnestly dull Nation sisters floating in his scotch-addled head.
ohreally, whoever you are, here the handle fits if it's followed by a question mark and then an exclamation point.

Tell me when the anti self satisfied anti imperious medication kicks in.

Everything you say here smacks of your need for these pills.

"American journos" "by and large" write just fine. Give me a few examples of "by and large" reputable ones who don't.

How do you know who was envious of what relating to Hitchens? Evidence please?

"Non negligible" literary skills: what kind of piss ant condescension is this?

Hitchens lived in a world of words not a world of ideas? Whatever are you talking about? Are you saying his rhetoric supplanted analysis? Are you saying he didn't make logical arguments? Are you saying he did not understand well the vast array or subjects he treated? Where do you come to utter such inanity? To make an admittedly credentialist point: can so many public intellectuals be wrong in attributing to him excellence in the very thing you deny him, the formidable breadth and depth of his public reasoning? Again, give me some examples where his conceptual inadequacy shines through, where his "logical thinking" --"not his thing," quite the heights of eloquent expression here, right up there with "jounos" and "shtick"--falls so self evidently apart, where his reach toward abstract concepts exceeds his grasp, prithee?

Reports poured in about Hitchens's ironic humour about his condition, about his unflinching and principled acceptance of it, about how he kept working right till the end, how he valued and lived by the disciplined ethic and principles that serious writing imposes necessarily. You say he didn't age well. Why: because he rightly railed against Mother Theresa who allowed her fanatical Catholicism to stand against remedies that would have helped alleviate the condition of immiserated women, because he spat on the inverted cultural veneration that honoured her, because he had lunch with someone you apparently disagree with and don't like?

Hitchens's game was up the moment he died, not before.

I don't know who Pollitt is so I'll keep an open mind about her. But just by reason of your dismissal of her, I'm going to give her the intellectual benefit of the doubt.

The high horse you think you’re on is but vaporous self regard and self satisfaction, imho.

Itzik Basman

Last edited by basman; 12-21-2011 at 04:29 PM..
Reply With Quote

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:34 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.