Christopher Hitchens has some strange views. But it’s not hard to see why he gets published. Triffic writing – as for example in this post on Robert Hughes.
Recent Comments
- Nicholas Gruen on John Quiggin and the Overton Gradient
- Chris Lloyd on John Quiggin and the Overton Gradient
- Not Trampis on John Quiggin and the Overton Gradient
- Nicholas Gruen on John Quiggin and the Overton Gradient
- Chris Lloyd on John Quiggin and the Overton Gradient
- Nicholas Gruen on Market – what market? The catch 22 that stops ‘scaling’ innovation in government in its tracks
- Nicholas Gruen on Standards Part One (and now Parts Two and Three): Standards as windows on an alternative universe
- Australia’s Lost Policy Exceptionalism w/ Nicholas Gruen – EP248 – Economics Explored on Compare and contrast
- Stations of the cross: The tenth anniversary of The Cluetrain Manifesto | Woolly Days on Adam Smith 2.0: Emergent Public Goods, Intellectual Property and the Rhetoric of Remix
- Wade on Blinded by the Moon?
- Nicholas Gruen on Standards Part One (and now Parts Two and Three): Standards as windows on an alternative universe
- Nicholas Gruen on The academy and partners try wellbeing frameworks
- Anon on Child abuse? Not in the “good old days”
- A metaphor, a hack, a ladder: On the difficulty of telling yourself the truth | Club Troppo on Strategic planning, strategic diagrams and complete nonsense
- Nicholas Gruen on Escape from planet sensible: Stunning listening
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Categories
-
Authors
Archives
Author login and feeds
Academic
Alternative media (Australian)
Alternative media (international)
Arts
Business
Centrist
Economics and public policy
Left-leaning
Legal
Online media digests
Psephology/elections
Right-leaning
Thanks for the link. I always enjoy Christopher Hitchins as much as I enjoy Robert Hughes.
Yes, Hitch was on song there, pulling together a 1500 word commission into beautifully digressive yet well wrapped up little aria.
Also amusing to note that when it comes to writing about Antipodeans abroad in the big world, Hitch is influenced more by his old drinking Clive James than vice versa. All those elisions, allusions and transitions between the didactic and demotic are very Jamesian.
But mad props to Hitch for wringing unexpected new mileage out of moribund words like’Pentimentos’ and ‘Freshet’.
This was also a very nice observation: “Women were often kind, as they can be to those, however chaotic, who appreciate them.”
Yep, it’s both wonderful and appalling about how much women will put up with from men who, no matter how fucked up they are, make it clear how and why they appreciate the opposite sex beyond just a fuck.
But I digress, to state the obvious. Like Hitch does here:
“To say that Hughes was lucky to survive the wreck of the vehicle would be banal.”Antipodean
Then why say it you silly sausage? To beef up the word count while your head went on autopilot for a while?
And I also feel this point was half-baked.
“Australian style in its native form is hyperbolic and enthusiastic and populist. Hughes’s self-deprecation and understatement, by contrast, are almost exaggerated.”
Australian style at its best is hyperbolic self-deprecation and enthusiastic understatement, mixed in with a boxer’s timing about when to employ the ken oath vernacular, wrapped up in a love of wordplay played back at your interlocutor in noihsaf yrartnoc.
I look forward to a review of my review of a link to a review of a reviewer’s life.
Insert the words “to”, “drinking”, “hostage” and “Moghul Emperor sex scandal” as needed and delete the second use of “Antipodean.”
Otherwise stet.
Forgive me, but I can only read the piece as one wanker writing about another.
ca
And yet another doing the reading, per chance? :)
CS,
Yep, I’d agree with that interpretation as well.
“Hughes’s self-deprecation and understatement”??
Must be two Robert Hugheses. Who knew.