What do you think?
Rate this book
A Hitch in Time: Reflections Ready for Reconsideration
“An extended spa treatment that stretches tired brains and unkinks the usual habitual responses where Hitchens is concerned.” —James Wolcott in his introduction
An outstanding new collection, A HITCH IN TIME is a must have for Hitchens completists and the perfect starting point for understanding one of the most brilliant essayists of all time.
Anthologized here for the first time, A HITCH IN TIME is a choice selection of Christopher Hitchens’s finest reviews, diary entries and essays - along with a smattering of ferocious letters. Familiar bêtes noires— Kennedy, Nixon, Kissinger, Clinton —rub shoulders with lesser-known P.G. Wodehouse, Princess Margaret and, magisterially, Isaiah Berlin . A HITCH IN TIME is a banquet of entertaining stories ranging from his thoughts on Salman Rushdie to being spanked by Margaret Thatcher in The House of Lords and the night he took his son to the Oscars. The broad scope and high caliber of Hitchens’ essays allows his work to transcend the occasion for which it was written and continues to be essential reading.
Along with an introduction by James Wolcott, A HITCH IN TIME recaptures the brilliance of Hitchens - barnstorming, cauterizing, and ultimately uncontainable.
An outstanding new collection, A HITCH IN TIME is a must have for Hitchens completists and the perfect starting point for understanding one of the most brilliant essayists of all time.
Anthologized here for the first time, A HITCH IN TIME is a choice selection of Christopher Hitchens’s finest reviews, diary entries and essays - along with a smattering of ferocious letters. Familiar bêtes noires— Kennedy, Nixon, Kissinger, Clinton —rub shoulders with lesser-known P.G. Wodehouse, Princess Margaret and, magisterially, Isaiah Berlin . A HITCH IN TIME is a banquet of entertaining stories ranging from his thoughts on Salman Rushdie to being spanked by Margaret Thatcher in The House of Lords and the night he took his son to the Oscars. The broad scope and high caliber of Hitchens’ essays allows his work to transcend the occasion for which it was written and continues to be essential reading.
Along with an introduction by James Wolcott, A HITCH IN TIME recaptures the brilliance of Hitchens - barnstorming, cauterizing, and ultimately uncontainable.
336 pages, Hardcover
First published January 2, 2024
95 people are currently reading
196 people want to read
About the author
Christopher Hitchens
164 books7,917 followersChristopher Hitchens was a British-American author, journalist, and literary critic known for his sharp wit, polemical writing, and outspoken views on religion, politics, and culture. He was a prolific essayist and columnist, contributing to publications such as The Atlantic, Vanity Fair, Slate, and The Nation.
A staunch critic of totalitarianism and organized religion, Hitchens became one of the most prominent public intellectuals of his time. His book God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything (2007) became a bestseller and solidified his place as a leading figure in the New Atheism movement. He was equally fearless in political criticism, taking on figures across the ideological spectrum, from Henry Kissinger (The Trial of Henry Kissinger, 2001) to Bill and Hillary Clinton (No One Left to Lie To, 1999).
Originally a socialist and supporter of left-wing causes, Hitchens later distanced himself from the left, particularly after the September 11 attacks, when he became a vocal advocate for the U.S. invasion of Iraq. His ideological shift, combined with his formidable debating skills, made him a controversial yet highly respected figure.
Hitchens was also known for his literary criticism, writing extensively on figures such as George Orwell, Thomas Jefferson, and Karl Marx. His memoir, Hitch-22 (2010), reflected on his personal and intellectual journey.
In 2010, he was diagnosed with esophageal cancer but continued to write and speak publicly until his death in 2011. His fearless engagement with ideas, incisive arguments, and commitment to reason remain influential long after his passing.
A staunch critic of totalitarianism and organized religion, Hitchens became one of the most prominent public intellectuals of his time. His book God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything (2007) became a bestseller and solidified his place as a leading figure in the New Atheism movement. He was equally fearless in political criticism, taking on figures across the ideological spectrum, from Henry Kissinger (The Trial of Henry Kissinger, 2001) to Bill and Hillary Clinton (No One Left to Lie To, 1999).
Originally a socialist and supporter of left-wing causes, Hitchens later distanced himself from the left, particularly after the September 11 attacks, when he became a vocal advocate for the U.S. invasion of Iraq. His ideological shift, combined with his formidable debating skills, made him a controversial yet highly respected figure.
Hitchens was also known for his literary criticism, writing extensively on figures such as George Orwell, Thomas Jefferson, and Karl Marx. His memoir, Hitch-22 (2010), reflected on his personal and intellectual journey.
In 2010, he was diagnosed with esophageal cancer but continued to write and speak publicly until his death in 2011. His fearless engagement with ideas, incisive arguments, and commitment to reason remain influential long after his passing.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews
June 2, 2024
An interesting collection of essays, the one about Isaiah Berlin is particularly relevant, right now. But strong set of insights into past events and peoples. Hitchens is a strong voice and reasoned, whether or not you agree with his ideological bent. Like I said, a wonderful trip in the wayback time machine.
February 14, 2024
A library copy appeared, thanks to my wife (who's a Dwight Garner fan). So I spent the evening reading, browsing, and skimming. This was my first concentrated exposure to Hitchens' writing, and I wasn't very impressed. But there were certainly moments. Such as his skewering of Bill Clinton, and his long-ago spanking by Lady Thatcher. Leading to a long discussion of schoolboy caning and humiliation in Britain. . .
I didn't much care for his histrionic style. I read or skimmed about half the book. I see another reviewer noting that he loves Hitchens, but these are the dregs. Ostensibly these were book reviews, and he didn't like most of the books. I wouldn't have, either.
So. Your mileage may vary. Maybe I'll come back sometime and read his memoir. Or not. What I read/skimmed was maybe 2.5 star material, rounded up.
Dwight Garner's pungent review, which you should read too.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/01/bo...
Excerpt:
"Hitchens had that quality, rarer than it should be, of knowing what to notice. In a review of Gore Vidal’s memoir, “Palimpsest,” he reminds us that Vidal wrote: “I should note that the only advantage for a child in having an alcoholic parent is that you acquire, prematurely, quite a bit of valuable data.” Spying Henry Kissinger in the Sistine Chapel gawping at the Hell section of “The Last Judgment,” Vidal commented: “Look, he’s apartment hunting.” "
I didn't much care for his histrionic style. I read or skimmed about half the book. I see another reviewer noting that he loves Hitchens, but these are the dregs. Ostensibly these were book reviews, and he didn't like most of the books. I wouldn't have, either.
So. Your mileage may vary. Maybe I'll come back sometime and read his memoir. Or not. What I read/skimmed was maybe 2.5 star material, rounded up.
Dwight Garner's pungent review, which you should read too.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/01/bo...
Excerpt:
"Hitchens had that quality, rarer than it should be, of knowing what to notice. In a review of Gore Vidal’s memoir, “Palimpsest,” he reminds us that Vidal wrote: “I should note that the only advantage for a child in having an alcoholic parent is that you acquire, prematurely, quite a bit of valuable data.” Spying Henry Kissinger in the Sistine Chapel gawping at the Hell section of “The Last Judgment,” Vidal commented: “Look, he’s apartment hunting.” "
March 13, 2024
It seems that a posthumous collection of Christopher Hitchens’ essays for the London Review of Books, A Hitch in Time, has been released. It covers the years between 1983-2002 and none of the essays have been anthologized elsewhere. He mainly takes on political, literary, academic, and social topics in this collection of essays. I think Hitchens has always been at his best with these topical types of essays. Thankfully this covers the period before he migrated to the right wing and became an Iraq war hawk. It includes a Foreword from former colleague James Wolcott. The first book review is an entertaining evisceration of Tom Wolfe: “The Wrong Stuff: On Tom Wolfe” (1983). Next up is “Diary: Operation Desert Storm” (1991), in which he criticizes the military operation, which is ironic because by 2002 he has drifted over their side. “Oh, Lionel! On P.G. Woodenhouse” (1992) is an appreciation of the author and I still have yet to read a single book of his, maybe this year? This followed by another entertaining take down in “Mary, Mary: On J. Edgar Hoover” (1993). It is also clear that Hitchens is no fan of Harold Wilson in “Say What You Will About Harold: On Harold Wilson” (1993). In “Diary: The Salman Rushdie Acid Test” (1994) he discusses the fatawa on its fifth anniversary and takes score on who is, and, isn’t supporting Rushdie. Next in “Diary: Spanking (1994) Hitchens inexplicably has a discussion about this act in terms of corporal punishment and in context of British politics, I think. “Who Runs Britain? Police Espionage (1995) is also obscure for the American since he refers to a book on Maxwell and the Scargill Affair, which I am ignorant of, but he seems not to have much respect for the government shenanigans concerning the incident. Spies and espionage are the subject of the next offering, “Lucky Kim: On Kim Philby” (1995). A take down of Hollywood is next on the agenda in “Diary: At the Oscars” (1995). “Look Over Your Shoulder: The Oklahoma Bombing” (1995) is a look at right wing ideology in the in 90s-it only gets worse with Trump. This followed by “Letters” where Hitchens corrects a false claim forma reader regarding Pat Robertson’s anti-semantic references in his The New World Order. Hitchens reviews Gore Vidal’s Palimpsest: A Memoir in “After-Time: On Gore Vidal” (1995). Next Hitchens evaluates Bill Clinton during his re-election campaign in “A Hard Dog to Keep on the Porch: On Bill Clinton (1996). I feel that having watched The Crown I was well-equipped to appreciate “The Trouble with HRH: On Princess Margaret” (1997). Hitchens takes a look back in “Brief Shining Moment: Kennedy and Nixon” (1998) and Kennedy doesn’t come off well in his estimation. This is followed by a letter from Arthur Schlesinger Jr. about the essay and Hitchens’ eviscerating response. “Acts of Violence in Grosvenor Square: On 1968, 1998” (1998) a look back at the tumultuous year of 1968 in 1998. “Diary: “Almanch de Gotha” (1998) on royalty…yawn. “Moderation or Death: On Isiah Berlin”(1999) about the intellectual Berlin after his death along with Letters about and from Hitchens. Hitchens dresses down socialite and fascist Diane Mosley in “What a Lot of Parties: On Diana Mosely” (1999). The final essay in the collection is “11 September 1973: Pinochet and Britain” (2002). It is a somewhat uneven collection, but it has its moments and was largely an enjoyable read for this Hitchens fan.
January 4, 2024
I love me some Hitch, but these are the dregs 🙁
January 8, 2024
The world of political commentary lost one of its most prolific and stimulating members when Christopher Hitchens died in 2011 at the age of 62. Now, thanks to A HITCH IN TIME, readers who enjoyed his often acidic but always eloquent writing can revisit its pleasures.
The 23 entries in this volume (first published in the United Kingdom in 2021) are invariably smart, unabashedly opinionated and frequently witty. As his former Vanity Fair colleague James Wolcott describes him in the book’s foreword, Hitchens was “the last of the living-large two-fisted provocateurs, ready to conquer ideological foes and hecklers alike as a lick of hair flopped over his forehead like Elvis Presley.” Despite all the ways they embody Hitchens’ quintessential qualities, the appeal of a substantial number of the pieces may be diminished for those who aren’t already interested in their subject matter or don’t at least possess some of the knowledge he presumes in his readers.
The majority of these pieces, most of which are book reviews, are selected from Hitchens’ contributions to the London Review of Books between 1983 and 2002, with all but two from the 1990s. Added to this are a smattering of entries labeled “Diary” and a few published letters. Among those that focus exclusively on British political leaders and issues decades in the rear-view mirror are a takedown of two-time Labour Prime Minister Harold Wilson (“a consummate liar and phony”), the role of British espionage in trying to destroy the National Union of Mineworkers (an example of how “deniability has replaced accountability as a principle of our unwritten constitution”), and an unsurprisingly negative assessment of Diana Mosley, wife of the British fascist Sir Oswald Mosley, whose life demonstrated how “vulgar bigotry can be veneered with sophistication.”
But American readers are likely to become more attentive when it comes to a piece like “Brief Shining Moments: Kennedy and Nixon.” It’s a sharp-elbowed critique of the 35th president, a man whom Hitchens --- who moved to the United States in the 1980s, eventually acquiring citizenship in 2007 --- condemns for his “frantically sordid private life” and his “sorry term in office.” In Hitchens’ eyes, Kennedy and his 1960 opponent will be forever linked by the way that “whenever Nixon sought to justify an illegality or an atrocity, he did so by envious and bitter reference to the charming Kennedy ability to commit such crimes and get away with them.”
And as he shows in “A Hard Dog to Keep on the Porch: On Bill Clinton, 1996,” Hitchens holds a president who tried to forge himself in something like Kennedy’s image in similarly low regard. He was casually acquainted with Clinton during his time at Oxford in the late 1960s. He’s critical of what he sees as Clinton’s effort to move the Democratic Party to the center-right and how his “ambition became the same thing as his politics.”
One of the more entertaining and accessible pieces is Hitchens’ account of attending the 1995 Academy Awards ceremony with his 10-year-old son. That was the year Forrest Gump earned six Oscars (to his dismay). He takes the opportunity to deride Hollywood’s “attachment to formula itself; the sort of derivative, poll-driven, synthetic compromise…that is turning out turkey after turkey.” By that standard, things haven’t changed much in nearly 30 years.
In an essay on the weird popularity of spanking in British life, Hitchens recounts his argument with Margaret Thatcher at a book party in the House of Lords two years before she ascended to the office of Prime Minister. It ended with her whacking him on the behind with a rolled-up parliamentary document after he “stooped lower, with an odd sense of having lost all independent volition.” The incident becomes a metaphor for Thatcher’s term as PM: “‘Naughty boy,’ she sang out over her shoulder as she flounced away. Nothing that happened to the country in the next dozen years surprised me in the least.”
One of the delights of just about any Hitchens piece is his willingness to lob verbal grenades in the direction of his targets. Of the public intellectual Isaiah Berlin, he writes that he “sometimes felt or saw the need to be courageous, but usually --- oh dear --- at just the same moment that he remembered an urgent appointment elsewhere.” He describes the late Princess Margaret, the party-loving sister of Queen Elizabeth II, as “the forerunner of the public, vulgar Windsor style” and bemoans the fact that “so much Establishment time has been spent on the ‘containment’ of an averagely-volatile woman from a disadvantaged family.”
Given the volume and variety of work Hitchens produced, it’s unlikely that A HITCH IN TIME will be his final posthumous book. In particular, as James Wolcott points out in his foreword, it will be intriguing to fully assess Hitchens’ advocacy for the Iraq War, which alienated many of his longtime allies on the left. Regardless, he was a brilliant, if undeniably controversial, journalist who’s almost more fun to read when one disagrees with him as when his views align with one’s own.
Reviewed by Harvey Freedenberg
The 23 entries in this volume (first published in the United Kingdom in 2021) are invariably smart, unabashedly opinionated and frequently witty. As his former Vanity Fair colleague James Wolcott describes him in the book’s foreword, Hitchens was “the last of the living-large two-fisted provocateurs, ready to conquer ideological foes and hecklers alike as a lick of hair flopped over his forehead like Elvis Presley.” Despite all the ways they embody Hitchens’ quintessential qualities, the appeal of a substantial number of the pieces may be diminished for those who aren’t already interested in their subject matter or don’t at least possess some of the knowledge he presumes in his readers.
The majority of these pieces, most of which are book reviews, are selected from Hitchens’ contributions to the London Review of Books between 1983 and 2002, with all but two from the 1990s. Added to this are a smattering of entries labeled “Diary” and a few published letters. Among those that focus exclusively on British political leaders and issues decades in the rear-view mirror are a takedown of two-time Labour Prime Minister Harold Wilson (“a consummate liar and phony”), the role of British espionage in trying to destroy the National Union of Mineworkers (an example of how “deniability has replaced accountability as a principle of our unwritten constitution”), and an unsurprisingly negative assessment of Diana Mosley, wife of the British fascist Sir Oswald Mosley, whose life demonstrated how “vulgar bigotry can be veneered with sophistication.”
But American readers are likely to become more attentive when it comes to a piece like “Brief Shining Moments: Kennedy and Nixon.” It’s a sharp-elbowed critique of the 35th president, a man whom Hitchens --- who moved to the United States in the 1980s, eventually acquiring citizenship in 2007 --- condemns for his “frantically sordid private life” and his “sorry term in office.” In Hitchens’ eyes, Kennedy and his 1960 opponent will be forever linked by the way that “whenever Nixon sought to justify an illegality or an atrocity, he did so by envious and bitter reference to the charming Kennedy ability to commit such crimes and get away with them.”
And as he shows in “A Hard Dog to Keep on the Porch: On Bill Clinton, 1996,” Hitchens holds a president who tried to forge himself in something like Kennedy’s image in similarly low regard. He was casually acquainted with Clinton during his time at Oxford in the late 1960s. He’s critical of what he sees as Clinton’s effort to move the Democratic Party to the center-right and how his “ambition became the same thing as his politics.”
One of the more entertaining and accessible pieces is Hitchens’ account of attending the 1995 Academy Awards ceremony with his 10-year-old son. That was the year Forrest Gump earned six Oscars (to his dismay). He takes the opportunity to deride Hollywood’s “attachment to formula itself; the sort of derivative, poll-driven, synthetic compromise…that is turning out turkey after turkey.” By that standard, things haven’t changed much in nearly 30 years.
In an essay on the weird popularity of spanking in British life, Hitchens recounts his argument with Margaret Thatcher at a book party in the House of Lords two years before she ascended to the office of Prime Minister. It ended with her whacking him on the behind with a rolled-up parliamentary document after he “stooped lower, with an odd sense of having lost all independent volition.” The incident becomes a metaphor for Thatcher’s term as PM: “‘Naughty boy,’ she sang out over her shoulder as she flounced away. Nothing that happened to the country in the next dozen years surprised me in the least.”
One of the delights of just about any Hitchens piece is his willingness to lob verbal grenades in the direction of his targets. Of the public intellectual Isaiah Berlin, he writes that he “sometimes felt or saw the need to be courageous, but usually --- oh dear --- at just the same moment that he remembered an urgent appointment elsewhere.” He describes the late Princess Margaret, the party-loving sister of Queen Elizabeth II, as “the forerunner of the public, vulgar Windsor style” and bemoans the fact that “so much Establishment time has been spent on the ‘containment’ of an averagely-volatile woman from a disadvantaged family.”
Given the volume and variety of work Hitchens produced, it’s unlikely that A HITCH IN TIME will be his final posthumous book. In particular, as James Wolcott points out in his foreword, it will be intriguing to fully assess Hitchens’ advocacy for the Iraq War, which alienated many of his longtime allies on the left. Regardless, he was a brilliant, if undeniably controversial, journalist who’s almost more fun to read when one disagrees with him as when his views align with one’s own.
Reviewed by Harvey Freedenberg
August 17, 2024
This felt like Christopher Hitchens' B-sides or demos.
April 11, 2024
Just as I enjoyed reading William Buckley despite our sometimes marked political differences, I enjoyed reading these old essays of Hitchens from the London Review of Books. He is someone who wrote:
Concerning those who declined to criticize the fatwa against Salman Rushdie because of their purported multiculturalism: It is impossible to be sufficiently irritated by such people.
Of the Mormon church's International Genealogical Index: a classical piece of micro-megalomania where the monstrous scale of the effort dwarfs the essential pettiness of the enterprise.
Of antisemitism: A dead giveaway, in distinguishing the obsessive or morbid antisemite from the garden variety, is an inability to stay off the subject.
Concerning Sir Rhodes Boyson's comment that caning had done him no harm: Why do people invariably make this claim; usually before anyone has asked them?
==================
Problems with this collection included:
1. the sometimes eventual numbing pattern of Hitchen's writing that recalled Wolcott Gibbs' famous satire of Time magazine, Backward ran sentences until reeled the mind.
2. pieces about which I knew little – I know who Harold Wilson was, but it was difficult to follow arch comments about the members of his cabinet and their friends and acquaintances.
3. Hitch could, it is said, bang these essays out in a very short time. In some cases, the structure of the essay might have benefited from slightly longer contemplation.
Concerning those who declined to criticize the fatwa against Salman Rushdie because of their purported multiculturalism: It is impossible to be sufficiently irritated by such people.
Of the Mormon church's International Genealogical Index: a classical piece of micro-megalomania where the monstrous scale of the effort dwarfs the essential pettiness of the enterprise.
Of antisemitism: A dead giveaway, in distinguishing the obsessive or morbid antisemite from the garden variety, is an inability to stay off the subject.
Concerning Sir Rhodes Boyson's comment that caning had done him no harm: Why do people invariably make this claim; usually before anyone has asked them?
==================
Problems with this collection included:
1. the sometimes eventual numbing pattern of Hitchen's writing that recalled Wolcott Gibbs' famous satire of Time magazine, Backward ran sentences until reeled the mind.
2. pieces about which I knew little – I know who Harold Wilson was, but it was difficult to follow arch comments about the members of his cabinet and their friends and acquaintances.
3. Hitch could, it is said, bang these essays out in a very short time. In some cases, the structure of the essay might have benefited from slightly longer contemplation.
August 28, 2024
I have friends who love Hitch on the debate stage, where his learning and verbal nimbleness shine. I always prefer his essays, especially his book reviews in The Atlantic. This is a book of, as I understand it, never previously collected essays, many from Vanity Fair. As with any collection, some pieces are more attractive than others. I have little interest in Hitch's opinion of the Clintons, and many of the other essays assume background knowledge that I don't have and am not going to pick up just so that I can read the essay. Nevertheless, here is the work of a man who was an excellent writer and who had an extraordinary ability to recall facts, documents, anecdotes, and ancient gossip, and to weave them into his pieces, some of which are brilliant.
I received a review copy of this book from the publisher through NetGalley.com.
I received a review copy of this book from the publisher through NetGalley.com.
May 1, 2024
Dated, inevitably
These London Review of Books reviews 1992-2002 fill the gap remaining in what needs to be anthologized by this worthy critic. But their passions haven't dated well, and although Hitchens can't be blamed, this collection serves more to gather up what's left after previous collections have skimmed off the richer content. I like Hitchens even when I disagree with him, sure. And it's not any drawback they naysay another look at his output. But my attention rarely was captured, and his wit and precision, never wanting, nonetheless I these articles shows a workaday output. By other standards superb, maybe, but by his own admirable talents, not quite top-drawer.
These London Review of Books reviews 1992-2002 fill the gap remaining in what needs to be anthologized by this worthy critic. But their passions haven't dated well, and although Hitchens can't be blamed, this collection serves more to gather up what's left after previous collections have skimmed off the richer content. I like Hitchens even when I disagree with him, sure. And it's not any drawback they naysay another look at his output. But my attention rarely was captured, and his wit and precision, never wanting, nonetheless I these articles shows a workaday output. By other standards superb, maybe, but by his own admirable talents, not quite top-drawer.
May 8, 2024
DNF...... Half of this was enough for me to realize that it was dated, obscure and of little relevance to me. Most of the selected "reflections" were from the 1980's and 90's, the most recent ONE was dated 2002. Historically and journalistically there perhaps is value in a book like this.
Hitchens was an erudite social figure, and a scholarly wordsmith. But in practical terms, unless you are a historian or student of journalism, essays and letters about British and American politicians, philosophers and public issues, are flat. They just don't stand up to 3 or 4 decades of relevant changes. Opinions don't always age well, and the issues themselves are vanished or moot.
But I wasn't enjoying the book. Sorry, but true. Too many good and great reading experiences await me instead.
Hitchens was an erudite social figure, and a scholarly wordsmith. But in practical terms, unless you are a historian or student of journalism, essays and letters about British and American politicians, philosophers and public issues, are flat. They just don't stand up to 3 or 4 decades of relevant changes. Opinions don't always age well, and the issues themselves are vanished or moot.
But I wasn't enjoying the book. Sorry, but true. Too many good and great reading experiences await me instead.
June 22, 2025
After experiencing Hitchens on various internet clips I thought I needed to learn more about his writings (and opinions) and decided on "A Hitch in Time". Although some of the books sections did interest me, mostly it reminded me of the Monty Python skit "Take Your Pick". In that skit the contestant was asked, "What great opponent of Cartesian duelism resists the reduction of psychological phenomena to physical states?". I can now only imagine how that contestant felt after being asked such a highbrow question. Definitely a book for intellectuals, not an easy read.
On the bright side, if you're suffering from insomnia it's definitely a good non medicinal alternative to help with your condition.
On the bright side, if you're suffering from insomnia it's definitely a good non medicinal alternative to help with your condition.
March 11, 2024
Christopher Hitchens passed in 2011 so any new collections of his writing spark immediate interest. Within the pages of this compilation are reviews that he wrote in the London Review of Books, and, hilariously, letters from people writing to challenge Mr Hitchens’ assertions.
It doesn’t go well for them.
Mr Hitchens was and is a great hero of mine. It’s a goal of mine to be as quick on my feet as he and to also have the mental compartmentalization of the polymath. He writes with such a moral and intellectual clarity, you would be forgiven for not knowing he was a world class imbiber. Even in all of years his gone, the material is as prescient as ever.
It doesn’t go well for them.
Mr Hitchens was and is a great hero of mine. It’s a goal of mine to be as quick on my feet as he and to also have the mental compartmentalization of the polymath. He writes with such a moral and intellectual clarity, you would be forgiven for not knowing he was a world class imbiber. Even in all of years his gone, the material is as prescient as ever.
March 17, 2025
I wanted to read this primarily for the updated bits about the Mitford sisters and family members, which was quite minimal. I read most of the other essays, which were mildly interesting. The book's content ends before the 2000s and Hitchens died in 2011, so his thoughts in his final years aren't included, which is too bad. Oh well, at least I read what I wanted to glean from it. I will read his autobiography and continue his voluminous tome of essays, "Arguably," as soon as I feel able to enter his mind again. He's a very complex writer to read.
February 27, 2024
A culture’s vitality can be measured by its major figures’ willingness to start fights and spread gossip. Minor or major, substantive or petty, it doesn’t matter. Writers, editors, and artists can best show they care about the life of the mind by getting into a scrape about it; the bitchier, the better...
Feature article is at PopMatters.
Feature article is at PopMatters.
February 8, 2025
An assortment of Hitchens' essays, book reviews, and articles. As always, when he steers clear of atheism, as he does here, he's a very interesting read. He gives readers the feeling we are part of the action as he mixes in what were current meetings and conversations with their historic foundations, pulling from an amazingly wide variety of interesting sources.
The quality of the essays varies widely, with the last long essay being the weakest.
Recommended.
The quality of the essays varies widely, with the last long essay being the weakest.
Recommended.
April 19, 2024
I like Christopher Hitchens, but this book was awful. It was a struggle to get through it. It's a collection of previously un-anthologized essays. Well, there's a reason these essays have not been published. A few were interesting; most weren't. And I skipped several. Hitchens uses big words and makes obscure references. Not for my taste.
April 23, 2024
This started weakly and won me back. Hitchens had a depth of knowledge combined with a righteous fury and a command of language that made him unstoppable. Part of me wishes he was still here but reading this reminds me that the world he inhabited is vanishing. For better and worse. Standout entries were the articles on the Oklahoma bombing and the atrocities in Chile
September 30, 2025
If I had read this 20 years ago, it would have more timely and probably had a greater impact on my review. However, these essays have aged and don’t seem as germane. They do bring up ideas I hadn’t considered and it makes me look at things I would rather ignore. At best this book is a high 3 with essays that do hit the 4- and 5- star mark.
March 3, 2024
It has its moments but most of the essays are either anachronistic (very topical at the time of writing I’m sure but irrelevant today) or obscure for a reader not into British politics.
Read
March 7, 2024This is mostly a DNF. Some of the essays were excellent and interesting but most I simply couldn’t get through.
May 2, 2024
Series of articles from London Review - eloquent if a bit slanted and at times perhaps veering into sketchy.
December 24, 2024
a selection of previously unanthologized pieces. out of 20 some pieces only 9 were worthy.
March 5, 2024
Politically, Hitchens may be suspect but my God, can he write. This incorporates his writing about the 1960s and 70s, and, if you have the patience for him, you'll be rewarded.
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews