I’ve taken to aggreggating a list of all the tributes and
obituaries for Hitchens, rather than post them all on Facebook to
friends who were no doubt getting bludgeoned with it. Feel free to
tweet at me (or post in
the comments) links to ones I’ve missed.
Peter Hitchens (Christopher’s brother), in the Daily
Mail:
Here’s a thing I will say now without hesitation, unqualified
and important. The one word that comes to mind when I think of my
brother is ‘courage’. By this I don’t mean the lack of fear which
some people have, which enables them to do very dangerous or
frightening things because they have no idea what it is to be
afraid. I mean a courage which overcomes real fear, while actually
experiencing it.
I don’t have much of this myself, so I recognise it (and envy
it) in others. I have a memory which I cannot place precisely in
time, of the two of us scrambling on a high rooftop, the sort of
crazy escapade that boys of our generation still went on, where we
should not have been.
Matt Labash, the Weekly Standard:
“I don’t usually start this early,” he said, his glass already
gratefully extended, “but holding yourself to a drinking schedule
is always the first sign of alcoholism.” With our soldiers already
rolling across the desert, the humanitarian channels to hitch rides
were gummed up, stranding hundreds of reporters on the bench. But
Hitchens would not be deterred. On assignment for Vanity Fair, he
only had a few days to touch Iraqi soil, and watching him get there
was a study in forward motion, as he charged just as hard, if not
harder, than Lord Cardigan’s Light Brigade.
Christopher Buckley, in the New Yorker:
But even W.F.B., who tolerated pretty much anything except
attacks on his beloved Catholic Church and its professors, couldn’t
help but forgive. “Did you see the piece on Chirac by your friend
Hitchens in the Journal today?” he said one day, with a smile and
an admiring sideways shake of the head. “Absolutely
devastating!”
Nick
Gillespie, in Reason:
It’s easy to mistake his thoroughgoing iconoclasm - this is the
guy, after all, who wrote jeremiads against Henry Kissinger and
Mother Theresa - for a reflexive, even juvenile cynicism, but there
was far more than that going on. Whether the target of his scorn
was much-beloved (he thought Gandhi a great villain for the way he
lionized poverty and preindustrial living practices) or thoroughly
hated by the wide world (Saddam Hussein, for one), Hitchens was
never a cheap-shot artist.
(And this
interview is good)
Peter
Robinson, in Ricochet:
I repeat my side of our old argument, insisting that what
Christopher experienced today was not, as he insisted it would be,
extinction—and that, just as I told him he would—told him as he
shook his head in amused disbelief—he has now had a happy if
temporarily embarrassing surprise, finding himself in the presence
of the only Being with the capacity to love him even more than did
his friends. I repeat my side—but never—never—have I so
regretted having the last word.
Peter Wehner, in Commentary:
He had gone out to smoke, which wasn’t unusual - and he confided
to me that he was nervous, which was. The words “Christopher
Hitchens” and “nervous” don’t usually belong in the same sentence.
He also wore a tie, which he indicated to me he hadn’t done in
years - and, he told me, he had gotten his shoes shined before the
speech, which he didn’t recall ever having had done.
It wasn’t hard for me to fit the pieces together. Christopher
felt it was an honor for him, a British citizen, to speak at the
White House. For all his reputation for being a bon vivant, an
iconoclast, and a man not known for his devotion to protocol, he
was in fact quite moved to be a guest at one of the great symbols
of American democracy. It was, I thought, something of a touching
moment.
Jeremy Lott, in AmSpec:
The Hitchens of 1994 would have stopped there but his more
mature self needed to go further. “However,” he wrote, “there came
a day when Mikhail Gorbachev visited Washington” and the world
changed forever. Hitchens had huddled at the Marriott Hotel “from
dawn to dusk with friends, wondering if it could be real.”
Sean
O’Neil, in The Onion A/V Club:
Many eulogizers have prefaced their obits with “love him or hate
him…,” but that’s not quite right. You both loved and hated
Christopher Hitchens, as even when he wasn’t on your side-and even
when he was on your side, yet still being a smug prick about it-you
had to admire his tenacity and envy his eloquence.
David Frum, in National Post:
I vetoed the idea [of meeting Hitchens, proposed by Danielle
Frum]. I knew Christopher’s writing and had encountered him a few
times in the 1980s. He was an impressive person, no question about
that, but I objected to his ad hominem attacks on people I greatly
admired. Then a few weeks later, I had my own face-to-face
encounter with him. We were guests together on C-Span’s morning
program, which convened at 7 AM. He rolled in looking absolutely
like hell. Of the dead, nothing should be said but good, but …
wow. Christopher’s eyes were bloodshot, his clothes were crumpled,
his face was ghastly. And then he started to talk. And then he made
me laugh and laugh and laugh.
The show ended at 8 AM. Even for Christopher, that was not
drinking time. We adjourned to the nearby Phoenix Park hotel for a
coffee, and two more hours of talk. When I did finally get home I
had to admit to my wife, “OK, you were right.”
Eli Lake, in the Daily Beast:
Sometimes Christopher is called a “contrarian,” but I never
thought that label was right. It’s true that he delighted in
argument and intellectual confrontation. But he did not just
believe things because they were controversial or because no one
else in his circle was making the arguments. On the Iraq war, he
never stopped saying and writing that the war was just and that
American arms were needed to end the regime of Saddam Hussein. But
Christopher did not arrive at this position simply because his old
colleagues at the Nation Magazine did not. He came to support the
Iraq war after befriending many Iraqis, and particularly Kurds, who
told him about the horrors of that dictatorship. For Christopher,
supporting the war was an expression of his anti-totalitarianism.
He would later say that the war pitted the anti-totalitarian left
against the anti-imperialist left.
Tammy Haddad, The Huffington Post:
Pat Buchanan, a great verbal brawler in his own right, is the
only person I ever saw who could anticipate the blows. Hitch had a
big fight with Bob Novak once on Crossfire and Bob banned him from
the show for a while. It was like losing a world champion. I think
Bob finally let us bring him back because he knew Hitch had real
fight in him, and we kept bringing up his name.
Andrew
Sullivan, in the Daily Beast:
I could sense it coming. But I couldn’t write anything
beforehand and I cannot write anything worthy of him now. So I just
sat down an hour ago when I heard the news - Aaron told me as he
clicked on Gawker - and sat a while and got up to write and then
blubbered a bit and, staring at the screen, read through some
emails from him.
The Daily Beast’s tribute
Dave Zirin, in The Nation:
Hitchens then looked me up and down and spit his unlit cigarette
against my chest. As my mouth dropped wide, he turned one last time
and walked to his table. I stood there stunned, embarrassed and
oddly proud.
Peter Rothberg, in The Nation: (Videos, as well, fun to
watch.)
When I was a Nation intern, Christopher Hitchens was, by far,
our group’s favorite writer for the magazine. Beyond being a
spellbindingly brilliant orator and the most prolific and incisive
writer any of us had ever seen, on a very basic level he treated us
well and with respect.
D.D.
Guttenplan, in The Nation:
Five years later he got me out of trouble in Cyprus after I’d
crashed a rented car into a police Land Rover, telling the
authorities I was “an influential American journalist”-a fib that
not only gained my freedom but resulted in a free hotel room as
well.
Jazz Shaw, Hot Air:
In one of the many jewels among his collection of essays, I was
particularly moved by the stark image he painted of North Korea
following a trip there in the nineties. Titled, “Visit to a Small
Planet,” (an ironic homage to the Jerry Lewis film of the same
name) he crafted a meticulous, insult laden assault on the late Kim
Il Sung and his hapless, seemingly inbred progeny. He describes his
visit to the U.S.S. Pueblo with a visceral, white hot anger, but
then goes on to convey the shame he experienced for feeling hungry
in a land filled with hopeless, starving peasants.
Tom Elliot, on Funky Pundit:
Afterward, I settled back into my seat and accidentally mistook
his water for mine, immediately realizing he was actually drinking
straight vodka. Mind you this was 10 AM. And if memory serves,
after his cancer diagnosis.
Slate’s collection
David Corn,
James Fenton,
June Thomas (Hitchens’ editor),
Julian Barnes,
Jacob Weisberg,
Jonathan Karp (publisher, Simon & Schuster),
Anne Applebaum,
Fred Kaplan,
Peter Florence,
Alexander Chancellor,
Timothy Garton Ash,
Victor Navasky.
Derek Leaberry| 12.16.11 @ 2:23PM
Funny how lachrymose so many conservative pundits are over Christopher Hitchens' death as conservatism was repellent to him. He hated almost everything a conservative should hold dear. Yet when conservative giant Joe Sobran died last year, most conservative pundits were silent or, in the case of David Frum, openly contemptuous. Christopher Hitchens was the sort of man who would run Mother Theresa, Christianity, Western Civilization, Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher through the sewer yet he is beloved by a certain sort of conservative. The sort of conservative who would rush to bootlick a lefty to gain favor with the dominant leftist culture.
When Pat Buchanan dies some time in the fairly near future, I imagine many conservatives will rush to trash and smear Buchanan. Most of these are the sorts who are lionizing Hitchens today.
J.P. Freire| 12.16.11 @ 2:40PM
You're wrong. He was a complex character, sure, but you have to respect an intellect when you find it. Buchanan may be owed his due, but I'm writing about Hitchens. This is an excellent opportunity to read up.
Tom| 12.16.11 @ 4:37PM
There is absolutely nothing commendable about Christopher Hitchens. He was, as are all atheisst, the most stupid and foolish of men. He spat in the face of his Lord, God, Creater, and Owner. Now he has absolutely nothing to look for but to spend all eternity in the fiery depths of hell.
Quartermaster| 12.16.11 @ 8:31PM
Tom, you are of course correct. I would add that I am saddened by his fate. His iconoclasm got him to that place, and it could have been avoided and that is the tragedy of it.
Arrogance almost always has that sad result.
sirbourbon| 12.17.11 @ 12:17AM
The daily channler
received a message from Christopher Hitchens: I wish, I ...Only truly wish that I had taken my Christian name a bit more seriously. There really is a God.
Mike w| 12.17.11 @ 9:30AM
Despite attempts by those on the new right to idolize him, conservatives who have followed politics for years will still remember him for the vile creep that he was. He was wrong about so many issues already before the Iraq war came along but then when he embraced that atrocity he made himself completely un-redeemable.
Good riddance and it is a shame that he had that many years to pollute public discourse with his semi intellectual rubbish
Simon Templar| 12.17.11 @ 12:01PM
Truth is seldom in demand these days, being nice seems better particularly when it suits your agenda, if not blast the hell out of them with lies.
Here is a little truth.
The man was a testimony to the late 20th century, post sixties world we live in. He was the quintessential example of fame, fortune and attention bought with brashness and profanity.
He was the brash and the profane.
He offered little of substance or originality like most of his generation but rather just simple self absorption to which he would later admit.
His political analysis was nothing we have not heard before and have shown to be immature, innacurate, and historically ungrounded. I do not even believe he was a good atheist.
The real tradgedy is that so many have sunk to his debased attitude, lack of class, and intolerance that he was able to get so much attention and wealth. He threw intellectual tantrums and insults like a spoiled brat who had parent and authority issues and was praised for it by a sick sycophant segment of the liberal elite and some very misguided and rather simple minded conservatives.
It was not his atheism that really was an issue, it was his hatred, intolerance, immaturity, and profanity that was quite frankly useless, boring, and damaging to true intellectualism, political discourse, and human progress. He lived and worked in this nation but never really understood it.