Washington, D.C.

Narratives of Empire #6

by Gore Vidal

Washington, D.C., is the sixth installment in Gore Vidal's acclaimed seven-volume series of historical novels about the American past. It offers an illuminating portrait of our republic from the time of the New Deal to the McCarthy era.

Widely regarded as Vidal's ultimate comment on how the American political system degrades those who participate in it, Washington, D.C. is a stunning tale of corruption and diseased ambitions. It traces the fortunes of James Burden Day, a powerful conservative senator who is eyeing the presidency; Clay Overbury, a pragmatic young congressional aide with political aspirations of his own; and Blaise Sanford, a ruthless newspaper tycoon who understands the importance of money and image in modern politics. With characteristic wit and insight, Vidal chronicles life in the nation's capital at a time when these men and others transformed America into "possibly the last empire on earth."

Genres: Historical Fiction, Fiction, Politics, Literature, American, Novels, Historical

432 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1967

About the author

Works of American writer Eugene Luther Gore Vidal, noted for his cynical humor and his numerous accounts of society in decline, include the play The Best Man (1960) and the novel Myra Breckinridge (1968) .

People know his essays, screenplays, and Broadway.
They also knew his patrician manner, transatlantic accent, and witty aphorisms. Vidal came from a distinguished political lineage; his grandfather was the senator Thomas Gore, and he later became a relation (through marriage) to Jacqueline Kennedy.

Vidal, a longtime political critic, ran twice for political office. He was a lifelong isolationist Democrat. The Nation, The New Yorker, Vanity Fair, The New York Review of Books, and Esquire published his essays.

Essays and media appearances long criticized foreign policy. In addition, he from the 1980s onwards characterized the United States as a decaying empire. Additionally, he was known for his well publicized spats with such figures as Norman Mailer, William F. Buckley, Jr., and Truman Capote.

They fell into distinct social and historical camps. Alongside his social, his best known historical include Julian, Burr, and Lincoln. His third novel, The City and the Pillar (1948), outraged conservative critics as the first major feature of unambiguous homosexuality.

At the time of his death he was the last of a generation of American writers who had served during World War II, including J.D. Salinger, Kurt Vonnegut, Norman Mailer and Joseph Heller. Perhaps best remembered for his caustic wit, he referred to himself as a "gentleman bitch" and has been described as the 20th century's answer to Oscar Wilde

Also used the pseudonym Edgar Box.

+++++++++++++++++++++++
Gore Vidal é um dos nomes centrais na história da literatura americana pós-Segunda Guerra Mundial.

Nascido em 1925, em Nova Iorque, estudou na Academia de Phillips Exeter (Estado de New Hampshire). O seu primeiro romance, Williwaw (1946), era uma história da guerra claramente influenciada pelo estilo de Hemingway. Embora grande parte da sua obra tenha a ver com o século XX americano, Vidal debruçou-se várias vezes sobre épocas recuadas, como, por exemplo, em A Search for the King (1950), Juliano (1964) e Creation (1981).

Entre os seus temas de eleição está o mundo do cinema e, mais concretamente, os bastidores de Hollywood, que ele desmonta de forma satírica e implacável em títulos como Myra Breckinridge (1968), Myron (1975) e Duluth (1983).

Senhor de um estilo exuberante, multifacetado e sempre surpreendente, publicou, em 1995, a autobiografia Palimpsest: A Memoir. As obras 'O Instituto Smithsonian' e 'A Idade do Ouro' encontram-se traduzidas em português.

Neto do senador Thomas Gore, enteado do padrasto de Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, primo distante de Al Gore, Gore Vidal sempre se revelou um espelho crítico das grandezas e misérias dos EUA.

Faleceu a 31 de julho de 2012, aos 86 anos, na sua casa em Hollywood, vítima de pneumonia.

Reviews

[Jeffrey Keeten · Rating 3 out of 5]

"The apes have always governed us, and our complaints are simply monkey chatter."

The local library had a fistful of Gore Vidal's to pick from, but I had already decided I was going to pick up this novel for several reasons. First, it is the first novel in the Narratives of Empire series. Second, it was published in 1967. The year of my birth. It is interesting for me to see what was published, and what was on the minds of the people the year I was born. Third, I own a signed first edition that I really didn't want to haul around with me. Any inadvertent scuffing that the spine split library copy I borrowed received in my hands would not be noticeable.

Gore Vidal was 42 in 1967, so he is spotting me 42 years, and given his seemingly firm grasp on life I can only hope that I can manage to outlive the silver tongued devil.



Above is Gore Vidal in 1967.

From what I've heard about this book I knew it was going to be the least historical based of the series and also one of the weaker books in the series. With Vidal's connection to politics I believe it was really just a vehicle for him to put together some of his observations of politicians and their satellite community of supporters and enemies. If he skewered a few of his own enemies in the process all the better. The novel begins in the final years of FDR and ends under Eisenhower. During that span we see the power of the old guard politicians being pushed aside by the "in a hurry" war generation. Corruption has always been a part of politics, but during this generational switch the rules change. "Now of course hardly anyone even pretended to worry about right and wrong. Today's man knew no motive but interest, acknowledged no criterion but success, worshiped no god but ambition."

I was out to lunch with a retired politician the other day. He still makes the trek to Topeka to petition those in power for pet projects or to help out some of his friends. He bemoaned the changing times and how irritating he found these young politicians. I had to bite my tongue, nod my head, and make sympathetic noises at the appropriate times, but I wanted to say have you read Washington, D.C.. He would have found that Senator James Burden Day from the 1950s had the same complaints as he does in 2012.

The book confirmed for me that things never really change. Every new group of politicians may start out with the best intentions, but eventually succumb to the power and influence of Washington. The parties, the rampant infidelity, the greed, the deals, and the constant jockeying for position. A reader might experience whiplash with the Mach 1 velocity of some of the changing alliances. The family, friends, and associates of the politicians are as swept up in the unseemliness of Washington power politics as much, if not more, than the politician they are associated with.

This is a cynical book relieve only by a smattering of Vidal wit and moments of sparkling dialogue; the book would have benefited from higher dosages of both wit and sparkle. Political junkies will like this book. For the rest of the reader nation out there I would suggest starting with Julian, Lincoln, or Burr.

One last quote that really sums up the theme of the whole book.

"'There is no virtue in any of us, Senator. We are savages and don't say it was better when he was alive.' Peter struck the painted face of Jefferson. 'He lied and cheated and wrote lovely prose and collected recipes and wanted to lord it over this foolish land and did and died and that was the end of him. And don't say that it matters what opinion the future holds of you, for the human race will stop one day, not a moment too soon, and then it will not have mattered one single damn who was an ape and who was a monkey in this filthy cage.'"

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

Until recently, the idea of historical fiction as a genre didn't hold much appeal for me. I can't say why exactly - the blend of historical figures with made-up peripheral people just didn't excite me that much. 

Last year that changed. I read Philip Roth's 'The Plot Against America' and found it to be so plausible (and frightening) that the worth of historical fiction became apparent. That is, if it's handled effectively. 

If I didn't love this Vidal work as much as 'TPAA', I certainly admired it, throughout. Since Vidal had political ties growing up (and even after he was grown), he certainly knew the territory and seems to have displayed its landscape about as well as an insider / outsider could. There are certain truths that reveal how little has changed in D.C. in the last hundred years or so - for example, this character quote:

"Washington is filled with elected officials who are devoted enemies of the people. Think how many members of Congress represent not people but oil! Great geysers of bubbling prehistoric oil, the property of hard-faced men who worship profit."

and:

Burden sighed, knowing the mood too well. "Well, if that is so, then let us say that there was a time in our history when a few men of influence wanted things to be better than they are, unlike today when all that matters is money..."

Vidal is especially good at zeroing in on character types, esp. those that are ambitious. 'Washington D.C.' is largely about ambition. From the days of FDR, through WWII, and into the Cold War, the novel follows the systematic process of one man's political ascent. 

Unlike the Roth novel, this is not exactly the stuff of emotional horror; still, the read is a swift one, bolstered by Vidal's elegant writing. Gore is more of a master than Roth when it comes to turning a phrase. 

If I can't exactly fault the novel, I think I might have liked it more had it been set closer to the nucleus of the U.S. Capitol. ~ but perhaps Vidal felt he had already covered that angle by way of his play 'The Best Man' (1960). What we get instead leans a little more towards melodrama a good deal of the time. It's interesting, of course; fact-filled and even largely compelling. But the effect is somewhat like the 'what if' presentation of either Harold Robbins or Jacqueline Susann as an intellectual. 

[Joseph Sciuto · Rating 5 out of 5]

Published in 1967, pre Watergate and Trump, Gore Vidal's "Washington, D.C." must of caused a great stir, but who better than this great writer to cause a stir and foresee the future. The American public has always had a mistrust of its politicians.... Mark Twain has more quotes on their corruption and stupidity that he could have easily come out with a sizable book on simply his political quotes.

But, before this novel was published the American public's mistrust was simply that, mistrust. The level of corruption and at the highest levels of our government might have been discussed within the Washington social circle and in New York, but the public as a whole had very little knowledge.

Mr. Vidal's novel takes place during the FDR, Truman, and the Eisenhower administrations, and the names of prominent politicians, Secretary of States, and Military Generals are mentioned quite abundantly throughout the novel. The fictional characters, Senators Day and Clay, and the publishing tycoon Mr. Blaise Sanford, are fictional in the sense that Mr. Vidal does not use their real names, but anyone with a passing knowledge of political history would have little trouble figuring out who he is talking about. It is these characters who make up a big part of the story, but it is the wives, the hookers, the media, the alcoholics, and the parties constantly being thrown that gives this novel so much energy and so much brilliance. In the hands of a less talented writer, this novel, might seem obsolete considering the circus currently going in Washington and the growth of the media, but in the hands of Mr. Vidal it is a classic without a shelf life. I loved this book and highly recommend it.

[Jonfaith · Rating 2 out of 5]

Consider me scorned. I thought Gore was sincere when he swept me away. Burr left me panting. It had balance, it was quick but solid. I nearly swooned.

Now? Washington D.C reeked of hyperbole; a kiss and tell where Vidal begs with glee, look at me. The novel is a settling of scores poised between ludicrous coincidences. A moldy snapshot of cocktail parties and dirty deeds. It is a Jackie Collins for the Beltway. Now I'm not so sure. If Gore comes a knocking, I'll gird myself, stay dressed, but above all, remain polite.

There has been a lean towards a third star this evening. I don't think the addition would be fair.

[John Hatley · Rating 3 out of 5]

This historical novel covers the period of U.S. history that frames the Second World War. The events and characters could easily be alive and active today. It is part of Gore Vidal's "Empire" series of fiction based on American history.

[Robert McDonald · Rating 3 out of 5]

In preparation of my move to the District, I picked up Gore Vidal’s novel Washington, DC. It’s the most subtle and complete description I’ve ever read of our nation’s capitol. I think it captures perfectly the odd dual nature of the city, part southerners who live there permanently and part itinerant politicians floating in from (what DC views as) the hinterlands.

Despite the numerous entertaining romances and scandals that fill its pages, the book is fundamentally a meditation on the nature of power, both political and economic. The most significant conversation comes when a young, naïve, yet power-hungry senator’s aide talks to an old, wealthy newspaper publisher. The older man Blaise says bluntly “What matters is I have power and you want it,” to which the young Clay replies “Not your sort, no.” Blaise’s final retort sets the tone for the rest of the book: “All sorts are the same, as you’ll discover.” Every character in the book has some good traits, and honestly believes they are doing good for society in Washington- the author is even optimistic enough to acknowledge that some of the characters really have done some good during their careers. Yet at the same time every character makes ethical compromises to get more power, always with the rationalization that when that power arrives they will start doing good again. For most of the men in the novel, tragically the end of their career arrives before they get around to actually doing good.

Despite the utter pessimism of this worldview, the author gives us a somewhat happy ending. For at least one character love of another human being becomes a way to forget the
meaningless of the struggle of power. The love of fighting for or against a simple truth is worth the effort, if only because it makes your political life seem meaningful. It is an enigmatic ending of existential happiness, and one that I keep rereading hoping to understand it better.

[Aaron · Rating 4 out of 5]

If there is one thing that I take away from Gore Vidal's political treatises in the Narratives of Empire, it is that nothing ever changes. Despite being set during the period of the Second World War (the late 1930's through the early 1950's), and written/published in the mid 1960's, the scandals, intrigues, betrayals, and political maneuverings read as if they had been ripped from the modern day headlines. apparently politics has always been as corrupt and politicians as self serving as they are today. To quote the character Peter Sanford, "There was never a golden age. There will never be a golden age and it is sheer romance to think we can ever be other than what we are now."

I thoroughly enjoyed the story as it detailed the evolution of the political city's transition into the era of the television media and a more modern style of fund-raising and lobbying. While the party system stays strongly dominant, the old ways with party bosses and the "party machine" become a thing of the past. Washington, D.C.: A Novel is an engaging tale of a nation not yet entirely at ease with its role as a global power, transitioning from a nation with a frontier to one with what might be called an empire. The nation has grown both in size and in population to a point where, while it is rarely addressed directly, the separation between the citizens and the governing class is ever more clearly defined. Having finished this, the sixth book of the series (although the first to be published), I look forward with both dread and anticipation to reading the final (both in narrative order and chronology of publication) of the narratives. I am eager to devour more of the Sanford saga, and yet I fear the end of the series. I can only hope that The Golden Age: A Novel, despite being written 33 years later, lives up to the same standards.

[will · Rating 3 out of 5]

I've been reading all of the "Empire" series in chronological order of the plot, and I like this one the least so far. It seems to deal far less with real historical events, and is more of a melodrama between Vidal's characters than anything else.

That said, Vidal is still a superb writer, and still manages to provide great insight into a period of politics and American history. This is a good and relatively quick read.

[Ron · Rating 3 out of 5]

“Every century has disliked its own modernity; every age from the first onwards, has preferred the previous one to itself.”

Published in 1967, this novel starts the series even though it is sixth in the historical chronology. Resonates with current America. The others, from Burr to Hollywood, cash in on this book’s success, though Vidal planted seeds of those earlier stories in it. Vidal’s voice is less assured than the later (chronologically earlier) installments. Racial epithets common to that age will offend current sensitivities. More soap opera; less history.

"On principle they detested the President, and despite that magnate’s power to loose and to bind, The Club ruled the Senate in its own way and for its own ends, usually contrary to those of the President."

Focuses on Franklin Delano Roosevelt and his manipulations to get the country into World War Two. Again the death of a powerful president passes the scepter to a political unknown. Unlike other volumes of this series, Vidal backs away from interactions between his fiction characters and the movers of mid-century American politics. Perhaps because it was too soon. (And too many actual actors still lived.)

“I suppose it’s warnings women give to one another.” “Warnings about what?” “Men. What else? The common enemy.”

New fictional characters appear as a new generation pushes the older off stage. As usual most of Vidal’s inventions are on the wrong side of the times. Notably absent is fictional Caroline Sanford, half-sister of prominent publisher Blaise Sanford. She was a moving force of Vidal’s Hollywood, published 22 years after Washington. Vidal’s prescience of twenty-first century America enthralls. Vidal’s The Golden Age published in 2000, overlaps with this volume, takes the reader deeper into Washington than he dared thirty three years earlier.

“Perhaps one should abandon the whole system.” “We have abandoned it. We now live under a Presidential dictatorship, with periodic referendums which allow us to change the dictator but not the dictatorship.” “Perhaps that is the only way this sort of society can be governed.”

[Larry Bassett · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am becoming quite enamored of Mr. Vidal as I go bit by bit through his collection of historic novels. I am not going through them in order which may or may not be a mistake. I am listening to them in the audible format as I follow along to some extent with the e-book. I think his books are part historic and part political and part philosophical. This particular book covers the. of FDR and Truman. It is about familial relationships immersed in the politics of that time starring People high up in the political establishment. While the characters are fictional, the political maneuvering and struggles seem well-founded in reality. Are the characters based on real people? I don’t know the answer to that. Oh but I found the book fascinating and the people intriguing.

[Piper · Rating 4 out of 5]

Probably my least favourite gore Vidal so far, but still pretty enjoyable.

[Holly McCall · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not a big fan of Vidal's - this may be the only book of his I got through - but this one I like.

[James Askari · Rating 3 out of 5]

The last in the series of Vidal's novels of American political history, dealing with the U. S.'s entry into World War II, FDR's New Deal, the House Un-American Affairs Committee and Eisenhower's Korean War. The main two families from the previous books still feature: the Days, the Senator James Burden, now leonine in his sixties, but ebbing; and the Sanfords, the marriage of the half-French bisexual Blaise, publisher of the Washington Tribune, to the sharp-tongued Frederika. Both marriages have children. Day has a self-effacing daughter, Diana, and the Sanfords a reckless, self-destructive daughter, Enid, and her younger brother, Peter, the only person who loves her. Peter surprisingly emulates his father in soliciting the wealth of Burden Day's Jewish mistress to publish The American Idea, a more socialist version of The New Republic.

Enid is the novel's most interesting figure. But the narrative centre is Day's ambitious young secretary, Clay Overbury. Though poorer than Day, Overbury, polite, good-looking, studiedly neutral, an orphan born in a house with no plumbing, initially lacks the Senator's common touch, and is tutored in electability and affability by the older man. He ultimately rises against Day, holding against him his one lapse of probity. Diana loves Clay, but it is the more fascinating Enid he marries. Both have affairs, but only Enid is punished.

[Kevin Elliott · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was fortunate enough to read this right after I finished the book that preceded it in Vidal’s American Chronicle Series, “Empire.” That alone made it a refreshing and quick read. “Washington D.C.” was written 20 years BEFORE “Empire” and the time difference, in terms of Vidal’s writing style, is very telling. Missing are Vidal’s complex characters that emerge and reemerge along with their convoluted conversations and thought processes. What we have here is the youngish Vidal of the ’60’s: he gives us a straight story with characters that are easy to grasp. It’s a tale of an aging senator and the creation of a new politician (the senator’s protegee), with newspapers, writers and lots of politicians moving the story along at a very readable pace. Added to the mix are a couple of very strong female characters, a Vidal element that I particularly like, and one that he manages to add to all of his historical novels. All in all, a very worthwhile read.

[Caroline Zapert]

Absolutely nothing for me in this book. Unremarkable writing, forgettable characters, and a plot that drags. Anxiously awaiting a snide comment from my husband on this review. DNF.

[Inese Okonova · Rating 4 out of 5]

Esmu uzkāpusi uz Vidala adatas un mēneša laikā iesākusi nu jau trešo viņa romānu. "Vašingtona" diemžēl ir vienīgais latviski tulkotais, ko turklāt "Liesma" izdeva jau pavisam drīz pēc pirmpublicējuma ASV. Un nav jau arī nekāds brīnums, jo Vašingtonas politikas darboņu paradumi tēloti visai indīgi. Tiem, kam patīk "Kāršu nams", noteikti patiktu arī šis romāns. Vienīgi slepkavības izpaliek. Pārējās negācijas - intrigas, korupcija, pērkami mediji, mediju radīti kara varoņi - atrodamas visai krāšņā buķetē. Tiesa gan, nojaušams, ka prezidents (F.D. Rūzvelts), ko sparīgi ienīst visi romāna varoņi, varētu būt citādāks. Tāpat ir vēl pāris citu personāžu, kam piemīt sirdsapziņa un vēlme dzīvot citādi.

[Hongru Chen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Topical!

[Marley · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm reading Narratives of Empire in chronological order, and I'd forgotten than Washington DC was published in 1967, way before the others. So, it was a little strange reading forward, yet backward at the same time, without the rich background of the rest of the series. Knowing the relationship between Blaise Santord and Burden Day, and their families for instance, made Washington DC seem rather empty--but then it hasn't happened yet. Since, I know so much more about the characters written after 1967, it was--shall I say, like reading separate "biographies" about them. I almost had the feeling that the characters were wearing masks or this was (in my head) some kind of Kabuki. Yes, Blaise is an SOB now, but there's the rest of him waiting to be created.

That said, Washington, DC is truly Burden Day's book. We have a deeper understanding of him here than we do in subsequent books that go back in time, which simply expand on this. Blaise, however, though fully realized in Washington DC is not the complex nuanced character that he becomes in later books. Well, I'll take that back a bit. He's definitely complex here ,but we don't know his backstory. There's no Caroline or Hearst no reporter. No...hmm... tryst with Burden. or Burden's with Frederika. He is an inhumane power broker now, not the nuanced Blaise from the later novels. If Caroline had been around she'd surely have something to say about his behavior. (On to The Golden Age to see!)

Clay Overbook is clearly based in part on GV's sorta in-law, JFK as Elizabeth is Jackie. The betrayal of Enid is drawn from Joe Kennedy's treatment of his daughter Rosemary. I can't help but see GV himself in Peter Sanford.

Washington, DC marks the end of the last vestiges of the Old Republic that managed to hang on in Hollywood. (Burden Day and Caroline ,though forward thinking-- Caroline especially modern.) Now, all memory is gone, and we have the full blown American Empire of media-created overblown politicians. The ordinary has won.


Although Washington ,DC is certainly a stand alone, and a good one, it's my least favorite of Narratives of Empire mainly due to the disjoint of time context. It is, however, timely. If you think Clay Overbrook is bad, just wait for Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum. The reader has no trouble identifying today's malaise in the post-war America of Washington, DC.

[Spencer · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this for our Family Book Group. Don't know who selected it, but I'll have to thank them. This is the first book written (1967) in Gore Vidal's heptalogy "Narratives of Empire", though chronologically it is the 6th. It covers the years 1937 through 1956, and fits into the genre of Historical Fiction. We are aware of the "real" people involved in the events—FDR, Truman, Eisenhower, McCarthy, Dulles, Hull, etc.—though they never appear as "on stage". Instead the narrative of the years is told through the appearances of a large cast of fictional characters. Vidal has done his research well, and many of the characters are a composite of real people, so he is able to give the reader a taste of what life in Washington was like during these years. I was surprised to find that it was much like it is today, without the tremendous infusion of money into the electoral process. Congressional campaigns were done on a $20-30,000 budget, but there were warnings of bigger budgets to come. I was surprised to find out that FDR was a President under siege, almost from day one of his years in office, and much of the opposition was coming from his own party. Vidal does an excellent job of capturing the "Red Menace" hysteria of the McCarthy era, whose influence was underestimated by many, but was finally thwarted by his un-photogenic demeanor in the new technology of television. There is a subplot involving the personal lives of two families, The Sanfords and the Days, and the people who enter and exit their world. I thoroughly enjoyed this book, and have moved on to read the 2nd book in the Collection—"Lincoln"...another president who served his term in office under siege.

[Nigel · Rating 5 out of 5]

A novel of pre-war politics and the dawn of the American Empire. Three men, the son of a newspaper tycoon, an aging but hale senator and the senator's poor but ambitious aide cross from the corridors of power on Capitol Hill to the drawing rooms of power in the surrounding city. Titanic events in the world at large dwarf them, but they are at the heart of the political and cultural elite and the poison and futility of politics is matched by their squalid family dealings.

It won't come as a surprise to a modern reader, wheeling and dealing, the back-biting and back-stabbing, the scandalous private behaviour of public moral stalwarts, the cynical manufacturing of an imaginary politician for an unscrupulous and hollow man to inhabit. If anything, we expect worse in this day and age. We expect, nay demand greater depths of depravity plumbed by our corrupt overlords. Nonetheless, this is an accomplished, poised and insightful novel. What surprised me was the reserve of the prose. I expected wit and venom in every word, but Vidal confines the verbals to dialogue or reported speech or the thoughts of our protagonists, and this certainly gives the novel a literary gravity without sacrificing the odd scathing phrase.

[Penner · Rating 2 out of 5]

The books that comprise the "Narratives of Empire" series were not written in order, and if you're reading them in order the cracks show up here in the sixth and final volume. In each volume, Vidal includes a preface telling you the story of the book you're about to read, and proudly reminding you that the entire series is the chronicle of a single family, direct in descent from Aaron Burr to himself. Yet when we get to "Washington DC" we learn that it was Blaise Sanford who purchased the Washington Tribune all those years ago and launched his publishing career, not his half-sister Caroline. In fact, Caroline Sanford has utterly ceased to exist, despite having been our main character during the previous two novels, during which she, yes, purchased the Washington Tribune and launched HER publishing career, only allowing Blaise to buy a 48% share years later when he was desperate. What's more, it was Caroline's mother who was descended from Burr, not Blaise's, as readers of volume three know perfectly well, which means that there are no more descendants of Burr left by volume six. Hmph.

[John Bruni · Rating 5 out of 5]

The penultimate book in the series was actually written first, and you can tell. This is definitely the work of a much younger writer, especially when it comes to descriptions of Peter Sanford's thoughts. I love how he finds interest in the most sexual and gory things, just like any pubescent boy does. He gets very interesting as we watch him grow up. And then it's weird to see Blaise again as an aging blowhard. I tried to remember him as the young man of Empire, but that was a bit difficult. However, James Burden Day is probably at his best here, especially as he haunts the battle field of Bull Run. There are so many wonderful and excellent things that happen in this book, but I think it's the most distracted from the rest of the series as most of the characters here are fictional. There are real life characters, but they're definitely in the background. An excellent read. I have one more to go: The Golden Age.

[Gatlin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Washington, D.C. chronicles the changing of national politics and political life after WWII, and Washington D.C. society on the eve of war. The U.S.A. transforms into an Empire after WWII. Gloria Steinem called it a "gossipy, underrated novel." Gore was raised in D.C. so I suspect much of what he details in the novel happened in real life; he had an insider's seat to Washington, D.C. and national politics. Vidal ran for Congress in New York State in 1960. His grandfather was a Senator; his dad worked for FDR. One could label this novel a roman-a-clef: Clay Overbury is JFK, and his second wife, Elizabeth Wattress, is obviously Jackie Kennedy Onassis; Clay's first wife, Enid, might have been modeled on Gore's own mother and possibly Alice Roosevelt Longworth; Senator Burden, is his grandfather Thomas Gore.

[The Final Chapter · Rating 3 out of 5]

High 3. Vidal presents a vivid portrait of American politics from the lead-up to the Second World War to the advent of the Cold War. He contrasts the political principles of the old school, embodied in the figure of Senator Burden day, with that of the new in the political machinations of the media-savvy senatorial aide, Clay Overbury. The latter is presented as a JFK-esque figure with a polished war record, and whose presentabel image and high society marriage play a major part in determining ascent through the political ranks. Vidal not only expertly interweaves his characters with real historical figures but provides us with a political landscape with which we are familiar so that Washington appears as a conveyor-belt of one group of unscrupulous power-brokers after the next.

[Diana Skelton · Rating 3 out of 5]

"He got along well with the Texans, if only because working politicians tend to be tolerant of one another, realizing that one man's conviction is another man's heresy, which was why it was helpful not to have too many convictions. In any case, the fiercely doctrinaire were seldom elected to Congress."
"But then the old hands knew that to rise, the ambitious politician must be careful not to do anything that might in any way cause distress or alarm. So far none realized that Clay's dim record was the result not so much of an unzealous temperament as of a conviction that at this moment in the Republic's history the people wanted only to be let alone to watch television and forget the exhausting trials of the recent war. To offer them adventure in their current mood would be disastrous."

[Joe Kraus · Rating 3 out of 5]

In many ways, this is a better novel than most of the others in what Gore Vidal eventually came to call his Narratives of Empire series. From what I understand, he wrote this one first, then later went back to write the “start” of the series to work from Burr forward.

One of the blurbs describes this as “Jamesian,” and that hardly seems fair. There’s nowhere near Jamesian subtlety here. I’ve come to believe that Vidal was actually just a modest talent (as least as a novelist) with a gift for terrific one-liners. This may be him at his best (I still haven’t read Myra Breckenridge, and I may never get to it), but it’s still a fairly low ceiling.

That aside, though, this is a novel that does turn on a variety of interactions. I imagine some of its contemporary effect had to do with its unapologetic glimpses of sexuality – with homosexuality included in a side-eye kind of way – but that hardly seems memorable. Instead (and why do I keep hedging every time I set out to say what’s effective in this?) we get a troubling family situation. Newspaper titan Blaise Sanford has a son and a daughter. Peter is disaffected enough by his father’s position that he starts a vaguely socialist magazine. Enid, happy to make a scene, marries a heartlessly ambitious young war hero (or is he?), Clay Overbury who angles to depose his political mentor James Burden Day so he can take the Senate seat for himself.

When Enid and Clay divorce, Blaise prefers to align himself with his former son-in-law, and – to me at least – the most compelling part of this comes when they scheme to get her committed to a sanitarium to flee Clay up for his political rise.

At that level, this is a clever novel of intrigue and family dynamics. It’s never subtle enough to be fully engaging, but it’s interesting, and you can glimpse real characters in the stereotypes from which they’re born.

As such, I say, it’s a better book than most of the others in the series, but it’s still less effective.

The pleasure in the full series is the sense that Vidal is telling a shadow history of the United States. This doesn’t at all rise to the ambition of Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States, nor does it have the hopeful tint of the revisionist history that repositions African-Americans nor even the sinister edge of white supremacist imaginings.

Instead, the series imagines an almost literal bastard history – literal in the sense that it’s the bastard son of Aaron Burr who founds the dynasty that the novel traces. Its protagonists are all privileged (and white) and always on the periphery of power. They rarely get things all their way, though.

The sum of it, then, is a sense of another way that we might have told the story of the United States, one that doesn’t undermine any of our cherished myths but that does smudge them a little. There’s plenty of sex and ambition, enough to rock the boat but never to threaten submerging it.

As each novel moves forward, often somewhat clumsily, it serves that greater purpose. This one, though, better-designed as it is, doesn’t yet have the awareness of the ambition of the series as a whole. It hints at the Burr connection, but it’s more a curiosity than the inciting fact. These people have lives of their own to live (in perhaps two-and-a-half dimensions), so the history they’re part of isn’t as upfront.

So, that’s my bottom line. This is, I imagine, Vidal at his most talented, but it’s not Vidal’s talent that ultimately interests me. It’s the ambition he developed in his full series of novels, an ambition to show us this country in a slightly darker light than we’re used to seeing it. There’s that dark light here, but the ambition is missing. If you’re going to read Vidal – and I’ll neither urge nor discourage on that front – I’d say to start with Burr and see if you have the stamina to get this far.

[James · Rating 3 out of 5]

This novel is the first of Gore Vidal's novels about American politics. It's begins during a period when Franklin Delano Roosevelt was in his second term and then extends into the post-war period when Eisenhower was President. In this novel, we don't get too many direct glimpses of FDR or his successors, but the lead characters devote a great deal of time and energy to the matter of what it would take to become President.

We join a lead character, James Burden Day, at a moment when his status as a long time Senator from an unnamed South Western state seems to be at its apogee. Senator Day is opposed to Roosevelt and is one of a few senators who teamed up to stop President Roosevelt from a scheme to pack the Supreme Court. We also hear that another lead character, Blaise Stanford, as publisher of the Washington Tribune also contributed to stopping the court packing approach.

We soon meet the families of both men and it's clear that these families are part of a social and political fabric centered around matters of who has power in Washington DC. Senator Day aspires to be President but is troubled when he's approached by a wealthy man who is willing to back his efforts to be President, but wants some help in return. We also meet Senator Day's aide, a young man named Clay Overbury, who has allied himself with the Senator, but is much more inclined to take ruthless approaches if needed to get ahead.

Vidal is very good at creating large ensembles of characters and showing their interactions, while showing how the draw of power and sex pushes people in some surprising directions. This novel was published in 1967, but has a more contemporary feel in the way that the characters act on their attractions to both men and women and sometimes threaten to cross moral boundaries.

This book does offer a sense of how politics work in city such as Washington where it seems like most actions have some element of the political that comes into play. Vidal's later political novels follow some of these themes, but also often show us how life is much different for the elites of the times as compared to the people who the politicians aim to turn into supporters.

Vidal does draw up well nuanced characters. Most of the primary players in this novel are fictional and we see how the web of Washington lures them to reach for power, but others are just trying to live a life and they are sometimes casualties as the rich and powerful pursue their dreams.

I liked the novel and the way the next generation of these powerful families each had to find their own way of coping with the expectations of their parents. We get to know Enid and Peter, the daughter and son of Blaise Sanford, and Diana, the daughter of Senator Day, and their various trials as they attempt to make sense of Washington and it's fishbowl atmosphere. We also see the challenges as Senator Day and Clay Overbury both aspire to power and cross swords as the younger Overbury seeks to gain his own platform.

I'd recommend this book to those who want to get a sense of how politics were being played during this era and at the same time, enjoy stories where the characters are forced to evolve by the challenges in their lives. This is a reasonable starting point as well for readers who would like to go on to the later political novels and see how Vidal handled the politics and elite lifestyles of other eras, which emerged in the stories of Burr, Lincoln, 1876 and Empire.

[Chad · Rating 4 out of 5]

Reading Washington, D.C. in its proper chronological sequence in Vidal's "Narratives of Empire" series is kind of like watching the pilot episode of a prestige TV series, but only after you've watched the show to completion.

I'm reminded of a rewatch I did of "The West Wing" a few years ago. Watching the first episode again was odd. After years of subtle character development on the part of the actors and the fine-tuned tone that the writers arrived at over multiple seasons, the pilot seemed...off. Characters seemed to be prototypes of themselves. Sam's weird trist with a call-girl seemed out of character. Mandy's presence as a romantic foil was ill-fated and quietly forgotten about before season 2. Donna and Abby weren't around yet. Sorkin hadn't yet transcended the 'work-place drama' tropes.

Such was Washington, D.C. Having previously followed the Schuyler, Day, and Sanford families since the 1800s (as they were written in 1973), meeting up with them in 1937 (as they were written in 1967) was disorienting. The thousands of pages that Vidal had written about them between the start of Burr and the end of Hollywood had granted me a subtle insight into the nuances of their personalities and motivations. It created an expectation of some kind of emotional resonance that just didn't exist in this version of the characters, since Washington, D.C. is essentially the series's pilot episode. Like "The West Wing", characters like Senator Day and Blaise Sanford just felt a bit off-model. And the ostensible lead character from the previous few books in the series, Caroline, was present not at all. In 1967, Vidal just hadn't thought her up yet.

The tone of the story is also a bit off. Whereas in the series other entries, the lives of the Sanfords and Days seemed to be the backdrop against which epic story of American played out, Washington, D.C. reverses this conceit. The family melodrama is in the spotlight, and the events of American history are in the background. As such, in an effort to weave the families into the American narrative, there are significantly more fictitious political goings-on. Previously, the families' lives were threaded through the weave of actual historical events, whereas here, events are bent to the demands of the families' narratives.

All that being said, this is certainly not a bad book. Vidal had a lot on his mind in the 60s, and this novel was a nice vehicle for his examination of tradition, corruption, the media, and ethics in politics. Taken on its own terms, it is a success, and highly recommended. It is only in the context of the broader "Narratives of Empire" series that it seems a bit off.

And for what it's worth, the final book in the series (The Golden Age, which I have yet to read), apparently covers very similar chronological space as Washington, D.C.. From what I understand, it's practically a retelling of the same story, but from the author who had already written thousands of pages (and includes Caroline this time!). I'm quite fascinated to read Vidal's wrapping-up of the series by essentially re-writing the original some 30 years later.

[Remy Smith · Rating 1 out of 5]

A weak effort.

There's little to redeem this book from its paltry and hyperbolic characters, boring and utterly predictable plot, and disjointed narration punctured by the occasional disgusting salacious scene that likely so tickled a lusting white man.

The characters, of course, are unsympathetic - they're supposed to be for Vidal to drive home his tedious point about how power corrupts the soul and principles of good people and attracts the least morally scrupulous among us. Blah blah blah. You've heard the same tired refrains a million times, and usually without the sheer indifference with which these characters and their themes have been penned. No person comes at all close to reflecting actual humans. But mirroring reality would necessarily detract from *the point*.

Nothing in the plot entertains, wows, or holds a reader's attention. It's entirely predictable: Old senator wants to be president and violates his morals for a snowball's chance in early winter; circumstance hinders old senator and torch gets passed to young sidekick; another old man who always wanted power but can't have it tries to control its assumption through the power of the purse (oh, and he might have romantic feelings for young sidekick, no one actually knows, though, but Vidal makes sure we don't forget this unnecessary complication through continued implication); people who get in the way are sidelined; media can create caricatures; honest press work ignored because it's not titillating. One great big yawn.

Vidal likes to randomly jump between years because actual detail is boring and pedantic. Better to spend pages on trivial conversations or happenings (old senator goes to Manassas because _symbolism_ of a reactionary out of his time) and gross sexual content. Two people doing it in a pool house? Check. Husband finding his wife "douchbagging herself" in their bathtub? Check. Random and irrelevant pubescent homosexual experimentation that blurred the line between consent and sexual assault? Check. Substituting food for a voracious sexual appetite a brother feels for his sister? Check. A *big reveal* of young incest? Check.

Yeah, this is a bad book. You're better off spending your time elsewhere.

[Ben · Rating 4 out of 5]

I thoroughly enjoyed this romp through post-Depression American political life. Washington DC is chronologically the 6th in Vidal's Empire series of historical novels covering US political history virtually from independence, although the first published, and also the first that I've read.
Following the intertwined and varying fortunes of the Sanford family, headed up by media mogul and political influencer Blaise Sanford (think William Randolph Hearst), and long-standing Senator James Burden Day, Vidal captures with ease the feel of the Washington village in an era before the diversification of American political life.
Washington DC lays bare the venality and hypocrisy of the political class in a way that will be all to familiar to the modern reader, and which suggests that it was ever thus. The eventual stage-managed electorol success of the politically savvy, but ideologically hollow Korean war 'hero' and general philanderer Clay Overbury in superseding his previous mentor Day, all the while conspiring with Blaise Sanford to ensure their respective wife and daughter, the ennui-ridden alcoholic beauty Enid is condemned to the asylum is a fitting end to a tale of amoral aspirationalism. In this world, success lies in obtaining power, not in optimising the operation of it. Just out of sight, FDR is contributing decisively to the end of WWII, and regenerating the US with the New Deal, achievements slighted contemporaneously by Day and Sanford, but which ultimately stand as a testament to the true power of democratic politics nearly a century later.
Overall, Washington DC was a joy to read - effortless prose slick but not superficial, supremely evocative of the period, and with the historical events providing a fascinating scaffolding on which Vidal hangs his tales of political and familial intrigue and drama. I look forward to working through the rest of the series.