Unacknowledged Legislation

by Christopher Hitchens

Book Overview

In this discussion of novels and their authors, Hitchens takes inspiration from Shelley's description of the poet as an unacknowledged legislator and shows that, while the encounter between writers... This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 1859843832
• ISBN13: 9781859843833
• Release Date: January 2003
• Publisher: Verso
• Length: 430 Pages
• Weight: 1.40 lbs.
• Dimensions: 1.1" x 6.0" x 8.2"

Customer Reviews

An Enjoyable Course on Writers

From Tom Clancy to Oscar Wilde, this collection provides an excellent array of essays and reviews. Hitchens has been extremely popular (or unpopular), lately, for his views on anti-theism and the war in Iraq, but it is in the literary realm that he kicks the most ass. His vast historical/cultural/political knowledge enables him to see his subjects wholly, in all of their context, or at least as close as any primate can get, which Hitchens displays is rather far, indeed.

Outstanding Effort

Christopher Hitchens synthesizes his daunting knowledge of politics with his love of fine literature and letters in Unacknowledged Legislation, arguably his best collection of essays to date. Hitchens seeks to bridge the gap between art and politics through a critical review of the major English-speaking author's political views in the 20th century. Perhaps this critical effort could be construed as showboating as Hitchens' profession is political journalism, and this is one of his few collections which fits squarely into the literary criticism section. However, Hitchens is a fine writer and he knows his literature as well as anybody still living. In this collection, we get a wonderful set of essays about Oscar Wilde and his contribution to the art of play-writing and support for socialism followed by his horrendous victimization as a homosexual. There's a passage from this section that I cannot resist quoting, "Wilde was able to be mordant and witty because he was, deep down and on the surface, un home serieux. May his memory stay carnation-green. May he ever encourage us to think that the bores and the bullies and the literal minds need not always win. May he induce us to rise from our semi-recumbent postures" (pg. 9). Hitchens proceeds to run through nearly all of the crucial English writers of our era. He of course writes about Orwell, which I thought was a mute point after his Why Orwell Matters, but hey, the guy loves his Orwell. He discusses the anti-Semitism and fascism in T.S. Eliot, the racism of Rudyard Kipling, the historical depth of Gore Vidal, the heavy-handedness of Norman Podhoretz, Allan Bloom's influence on Saul Bellow, and of course, his solidarity with Salman Rushdie upon the declaration of the fatwa among Islamic Jihads, an action for which Hitchens rightfully boasts. Hitchens also provides critical summaries of the arch-sensationalist Tom Wolf, and hack, Tom Clancy. He offers simply biting criticism of the former, and much needed as Wolf as enjoyed ludicrous financial and critical success for his quasi-journalism over the last few decades. Hitch examines Wolf's reliance on the cliché, and the cultural and racial stereotype for the sake of provocation. Clancy, while less deserving of a critical review than Wolf, is quickly wrapped up in a body bag and tossed overboard by Hitch. Unacknowledged Legislation may be Hitchens' finest blend of the political and the literary, and it may be the best example of his prolific gifts. Don't miss this volume.

A very different Hitchens

I recommend this volume to my friends not only as a great collection of literary essays but as a rare event for Hitch-watchers: for most of the book, Christopher Hitchens is not kvetching! Granted, he gets in some very nice digs at Right-wing ideologues Tom Wolfe and Norman Podhoretz,and manages to include a laughably ignorant piece on the Ebonics debate, but the majority of the essays here are encomia to authors whose writing and political actions the Hitchster admires! It's uplifting, informative, and very moving. Oh, Hitchypoo's usual detractors will come up with the usual non sequitors: he doesn't like religion, he whitewashes George Orwell's sins, he fails to distort a rumor spread by Frank Harris about Oscar Wilde, he's abonded his old political loyalties since he wrote this book. But Unacknowledged Legistlation will remain a generous and valuable work, respected by all who care about literary courage.

Fine wine and conversation at the bloody Crossroads

Admiring Christopher Hitchens is very easy and for excellent reasons. He is cultured, witty, humane, passionate and principled. Most people compared to George Orwell are humbugs and frauds, but Hitchens is one who shares Orwell's indignation, passion for truth and unstinting honesty. Hitchens often quotes Orwell, and indeed prays upon him in aid. Unlike Orwell, Hitchens is not one for the ascetic life, and his deflation of cliche and euphemism owes more to Dwight Macdonald. This collection praises many writers, such as Oscar Wilde, Salman Rushdie, and P.G. Wodehouse. It offers nuanced portraits of other writers, such as Philip Larkin, H.L. Mencken and Anthony Powell. And it provides slashing polemics against the likes of Tom Wolfe and Tom Clancy, and details the sad declension of Conor Cruise O'Brien. What unites this collection is a rather vague disquisition on the clash between politics and literature. Naturally enough, says Hitchens, one should avoid crass politicization and ideological traps, and instead be generous, open-minded, but not uncritical.For so controversial a writer these are rather anodyne sentiments. There are disturbing signs that Hitchens is becoming an "unpredictable" socialist, who is hardest on his own side and generous to the other side. What is wrong with that, one may ask? Well there is the problem that this refrain has been echoed for two decades by the New Republic and by the Bill Clinton that Hitchens so sincerely loathes. And while Hitchens is very generous to Rudyard Kipling and Philip Larkin, and perhaps even a bit too generous to T.S. Eliot, I don't think he would treat the Catholicism of Waugh and Greene with the same respect. It is one thing to concede Alger Hiss' guilt, but must we concede Sacco and Vanzetti's as well (especially when the book by David Kaiser and William Young screams reasonable doubt at every stage of the proceedings)? And is Allan Bloom's Love and Friendship really superior to say, F.R. Leavis or Joseph Epstein, let alone Frederic Jameson simply because his fellow Straussians wouldn't tolerate his homosexuality? (Personally I think Bloom's dogmatically presented paraphrase amounts to Coles Notes with megalomania.) Finally, praising Jorge Luis Borges' criticism of the Falklands war (at Gabriel Garcia Marquez's expense) foreshortens Borges' consistent support for Argentinian military regimes not led by Peron. One may also point out Hitchens' complete failure to appreciate or understand the religious impulse. Much religious discourse in the United States is empty, but that's no excuse for comparing Christmas to Stalinism or saying that Stephen Hawking is more awe-inspiring than Genesis or Ezekiel. Similarly even if one concedes that Gore Vidal is a brilliant essayist and that Saul Bellow is too uncritical about Israel's aggressive policies, one cannot deny that Bellow is clearly the superior novelist. At his best though Hitchens is a brilliant and stimulating critic. The at