People

Rain (AM and PM) 12° London Hi 13°C / Lo 7°C

Christopher Hitchens attacks Gore Vidal for being a 'crackpot'

Former protégé takes America's great man of letters to task for adopting 9/11 conspiracy theories

By Kate Youde

Gore Vidal (above) has yet to respond to the latest volley from Christopher Hitchens in their increasingly vitriolic feud

Getty Images

Gore Vidal (above) has yet to respond to the latest volley from Christopher Hitchens in their increasingly vitriolic feud

As literary feuds go it has the all the hallmarks of a classic. In one corner, the journalist and polemicist Christopher Hitchens. In the other, America's great man of letters, Gore Vidal.

The latest salvo is in this month's Vanity Fair where, in an article headlined "Vidal Loco", Hitchens launches a stinging attack on Vidal, claiming that the events of 9/11 "accentuated a crackpot strain" in the author. He claims that Vidal's work after the terrorist attacks consists of "a small anthology of half-argued and half-written shock pieces [which] either insinuated or asserted that the administration had known in advance of the attacks."

"He openly says that the Bush administration was 'probably' in on the 9/11 attacks, a criminal complicity that would 'certainly fit them to a T'; that Timothy McVeigh was 'a noble boy', no more murderous than generals Patton and Eisenhower; and that 'Roosevelt saw to it that we got that war' by inciting the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor," Hitchens writes.

Vidal's reaction to the Vanity Fair article is not yet known. But yesterday, a British academic, who was also criticised by Hitchens, leapt to the author's defence. Dr Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed, of Sussex University, described Hitchens' attack as "extraordinarily vitriolic". He claimed there was a "sense of jealousy he never did quite get to Gore's level of literary flair and his almost iconic status. It does seem like a kind of bizarre personal vendetta being carried out on the pages of Vanity Fair, replete with factual inaccuracies and not very much substance."

Dr Ahmed, director of the London-based think tank the Institute for Policy Research and Development, claimed Hitchens failed to contextualise Vidal's comments.

"Hitchens has taken them very literally and Gore is being much more playful and much more provocative," Dr Ahmed said.

Vidal was not trying to absolve the Oklahoma City bomber, McVeigh, he added, but to make people think critically.

Hitchens referred to Dr Ahmed, who wrote The War on Freedom, used by the 9/11 Commission, in the article as a "risible individual wedded to half-baked conspiracy-mongering". Dr Ahmed said he had not suggested there was a conspiracy, rather a "dereliction of duty", and that he used the word "complicity" in a legal sense.

Hitchens wrote that he did not mind Vidal rewriting their personal history, after the American publicly distanced himself from Hitchens, but he did object "to the crank-revisionist and denialist history he is now peddling about everything else".

Hitchens claims in the article that Vidal once wrote to him offering to nominate him as his "dauphin". Such was Hitchens' admiration for Vidal that he asked to use a letter from the 85-year-old author on the jacket of his books. But since the 9/11 attacks he has stopped the practice.

But last October, Vidal told a New York audience: "Hitchens identified himself for many years as the heir to me ... unfortunately, for him, I didn't die."

Hitchens was unavailable for comment.

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

Page 1 of 4
<<[1] [2] [3] [4] >>
[info]infangthief wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 01:50 am (UTC)

'Apparently, "conspiracy stuff" is now shorthand for unspeakable truth.'
Well said Mr VidaL

Sir Walter Raleigh has been here before:

'Tell men of high condition
That manage the estate,
Their purpose is ambition,
Their practice only hate:
And if they make reply,
Then give them all the lie.'
[info]vhawk1951 wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 11:35 am (UTC)
Agreed, well said,one of the few living genuinely wise men, Mr.Vidal-never one to mince his words

thank you f the quote, I'm he richer for it
Strange motive - [info]rocket111 - Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 11:49 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Strange motive - [info]vhawk1951 - Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 01:15 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]americanvet1 - Monday, 8 February 2010 at 02:31 am (UTC) Expand
ummm - [info]americanvet1 - Monday, 8 February 2010 at 02:34 am (UTC) Expand
Re: ummm - [info]patriotone - Monday, 8 February 2010 at 02:36 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]vhawk1951 - Monday, 8 February 2010 at 02:50 am (UTC) Expand
vaporized - [info]americanvet1 - Monday, 8 February 2010 at 03:13 am (UTC) Expand
Re: vaporized - [info]vhawk1951 - Monday, 8 February 2010 at 03:09 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]earlybird42765 - Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 02:46 pm (UTC) Expand
Vidal - the conspiracy theorist - [info]ghassem - Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 08:57 pm (UTC) Expand
HITCHENS VS GALLOWAY - KO for Galloway - [info]psmith42 - Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 09:03 pm (UTC) Expand
The b*tchy little girls are fighting again
[info]1citizenspeaks wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 02:32 am (UTC)
It is amazing that the so-called "elites" and "intellectuals" are able to generate significant media attention with their petty little squabbles which are interpreted by the pseudo-intellectuals as reasoned discourse. The real truth is that we are seeing two b*tchy little girls squabbling for attention to keep them relevant in a day where there are more significant problems facing America and Americans.
Re: The b*tchy little girls are fighting again
[info]boeticia wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 04:37 pm (UTC)
Even your pompous pseudonym "Icitizenspeaks" says much about you in your unqualified criticsm of
the two protagonists, Gore Vidal, who I find a most knowleageable, wise American...there aren]t too many, I]m afraid, and polemicist, Christopher Hitchens.
And have you ever asked yourself why America and Americans are facing more significant problems?
Self-inflicted, perhaps???
Re: The b*tchy little girls are fighting again - [info]imacryin - Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 08:46 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: The b*tchy little girls are fighting again - [info]boeticia - Monday, 8 February 2010 at 06:29 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: The b*tchy little girls are fighting again - [info]snotcricket - Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 08:56 pm (UTC) Expand
Hmm..
[info]anamericanmom wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 02:59 am (UTC)
The question is Do Vidal and all the Truth(seek)ers really just hold forth and subscribe to.. --

It's all about the oil..oh my.. really

Gore’s take on 9/11 itself, in which he ‘insinuated or asserted that the administration had known in advance of the attacks on New York and Washington and was seeking a pretext to build a long-desired pipeline across Afghanistan.’

--seeking a pretext to build a long-desired pipeline across Afghanistan.’--

I have seen that line just about everywhere shrill is repeated..

So do tell me.. With what is being described in most truthers sites pronouncements and shrilling posts..
the elaborte details ..on and on..
Conspiracy after .. all the complex and detailed conditions..

Do you think ? Would it not have been easier to ..I do not know , maybe convince the American people that we are subject to OPEC price fixing and need stop buying from terrorists. We should be drilling off shore
before the next oil crisis..

Wouldn't that be more sensible and easier to pull off..
For the OIL after all..

Then placing socio paths on planes.. Rigging demolitions, hiding, covering this, and that.
Sheesh you people see what you want, when you want ..

EXCEPT not a darn thing wrong with OBAMA..

Idiots all..
Re: Hmm..
[info]southerncannuck wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 01:52 pm (UTC)
Don't try to reason with the tin foil hat folks. They live in a dream world.
Re: Hmm.. - [info]hollowmoonband - Monday, 8 February 2010 at 12:30 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Hmm.. - [info]southerncannuck - Monday, 8 February 2010 at 02:13 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Hmm.. - [info]imacryin - Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 09:00 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: Hmm.. - [info]andyod - Monday, 8 February 2010 at 02:09 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Hmm.. - [info]sanguineone - Monday, 8 February 2010 at 08:03 am (UTC) Expand
[info]thomasth wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 03:09 am (UTC)
Since Vidal has 4 times the intelligence, learning and culture of Hitchens; I'll go with him!
Vida, the historian and literary genius
[info]boeticia wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 04:41 pm (UTC)
Only FOUR times???? This man comes in once in a century!!!
Re: Vida, the historian and literary genius - [info]iratebob - Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 07:29 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: Vida, the historian and literary genius - [info]iratebob - Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 07:33 pm (UTC) Expand
Vidal illiterate on Economics - [info]ghassem - Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 08:48 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: Vidal illiterate on Economics - [info]boeticia - Tuesday, 9 February 2010 at 07:40 pm (UTC) Expand
vidal
[info]panic2009 wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 03:22 am (UTC)
why when someone gets near the truth or at least goes against a blatantly flawed official line, is it classed as a conspiracy theory?????????

is the world still flat by the way?

Vidal a BS artist
[info]ghassem wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 09:02 pm (UTC)
Vidal may be a literary genius, so what who cares about literature anyways - so he should stick to poetry and leave facts and philosophy alone - obviously having no aptitude in economics. Vidal says Afghanistan was about a pipeline. To take oil from areas north of China to ... the Arabian gulf !!!

Just like taking coal to Newcastle -- is this the mark of a genius? Maybe as a lowly poet and BS literary artist -- but certainly not as an inttelectual with a good grasp of economics.

Hitchens is obviously correct to take this ignorant conspiracy theorist Truther to task.
Re: Vidal a BS artist - [info]dilapidus - Monday, 8 February 2010 at 05:40 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Vidal a BS artist - [info]ghassem - Monday, 8 February 2010 at 07:47 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Vidal a BS artist - [info]jdev100 - Monday, 8 February 2010 at 11:47 am (UTC) Expand
Heir apparent to William F. Buckley
[info]remy_germain wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 03:33 am (UTC)
Heir apparent to William F. Buckley, Hitchens envies Gore in pitch perfect imitation of Buckley. Bravo for raising the dead.
Gore Vidal and Hitchens
[info]vincentvercelli wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 04:09 am (UTC)
Hitchens at one time was an interesting and thoughtful writer. Unfortunately 9-11 has shown he is nothing more then a warmongering soldier wannabe. Too many Rambo movies for him perhaps. He is simply no longer relevant. Gore Vidal continues to understand the truth and relates it to the reader in an interesting and elegant manner.
Crash Cargo
[info]crashcargo wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 04:12 am (UTC)
As much as I loved Vidal's books and admired him, he has entered a stage of life that so many old men enter. He is treasuring and making love to a small purse of resentments and perceived wrongs that consume him. Those with daughters and grand children are swept up in the loves and learning of the next and even following generation. Vidal and other aging cranks at the end of their lives grasp some manic bouquet of wrongs/causes/issues and bore the rest of us with them. The man who wrote "Burr" no longer exists in that wonderful cranium. He is withering like a miser in a Dickens novel... a Miss Havasham nursing her rage and twisting the minds of the young to carry on his resentments... I wish I could save him. I wish I could get him to watch children playing. Vidal's declining years are a lesson for all of us who are too committed and too political. We cannot carry this forever. I hope Vidal feels love and optimism in his last moments and, I hope someone like me and stars like Hitchens turn away in our last years and connect to life and let go the reins when we become foolish. I don't want to become a foolish and bitter old man like Gore Vidal has become.
Most Think They Know More Than They Do
[info]madsircool wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 04:41 am (UTC)
A wise man once said something to the effect that 'The more I learn, the less I find I know'. Gore, Hitchens and most commentators above have forgotten these wise words. Intellectual discourse should also be more than a vanity contest. No one has a monopoly on the truth. Lets grow up, people.
Re: Most Think They Know More Than They Do
[info]dapperdann wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 11:40 am (UTC)
if we're talking about reality in the literal sense, then yes, you can very easily have a monopoly on it if opposing views are able to be discredited by citing physical certainties. every 9/11 conspiracy i have read and researched has been discredited by numerous experts in numerous fields that have no connection to the government or any governmental agency. In the days and months following 9/11 i looked tirelessly for info that might lead to a vast conspiracy. Just wasnt there. If anything, there's more government negligence involved than any well orchestrated plot. I think that would be more typical of government than anything else. Vidal has turned into the Helen Thomas of his realm and its a shame. Im not religious, but I also find it to be a shame that the only thing Hitchens can find faith in is his own perception.....discuss
Vidal baffoon ..
[info]mike2015 wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 06:23 am (UTC)
Nice summary of the Hitchens-Vidal spat.

But I have to agree with Hitch that Vidal seems to have lost a few marbles with advancing age. Anyone who can publicly make the sorts of claims he has in recent years - about 9/11, about McVeigh, about Roosevelt - without a shred of evidence has lost touch with reality (and indeed may be happier for it).
Bin Laden
[info]scousekraut wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 06:48 am (UTC)
Are there still people who believe Bin Laden did it?
Re: Bin Laden
[info]corporeal_v002 wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 01:40 pm (UTC)

Is Osama still claiming his CIA pension?
Is Osama still claiming his CIA pension? - [info]snotcricket - Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 08:25 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: Bin Laden - [info]boeticia - Tuesday, 9 February 2010 at 07:43 pm (UTC) Expand
vanity unfair
[info]claphamomnibus wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 08:13 am (UTC)
Mr Hitchens' article tells us far more of Mr Hitchens than of Mr Vidal. Mr Hitchens' literary ability has limits which he himself cannot accept and his envy of the greater Vidal is palpable. It is a shame that so many writers have such fragile egos coupled with such insightlessness.
Crackpot
[info]brinksman wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 09:01 am (UTC)
Talk about the kettle calling the pot? Hitchens - as usual - takes the little pieces of the eggshell which suit his 'argument' and squeezes them in with a sledgehammer.
www.millarcrime.com
Re: Crackpot
[info]samculotte wrote:
Tuesday, 9 February 2010 at 12:02 am (UTC)
When calling another person a "crackpot" or "loco", it is well to bear in mind Ambrose Bierce's definition of the word "mad":

MAD, adj. Affected with a high degree of intellectual independence...; at odds with the majority; in short, unusual. It is noteworthy that persons are pronounced mad by officials destitute of evidence that they themselves are sane.
Re: Crackpot - [info]patriotone - Tuesday, 9 February 2010 at 12:13 am (UTC) Expand
[info]infangthief wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 09:51 am (UTC)

Not even that honourable man Cheney...

"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming."

Hmm.
Infangliar
[info]infangliar wrote:
Monday, 8 February 2010 at 01:39 am (UTC)
Infangthief, you may not know the context of that quote, in which Cheney clarified later that he meant to say Saddam Hussein, not Osama bin Laden. Maybe you don't know this, or don't care about the truth. Either way, you've shown your bias, and your stupidity.
I know which I prefer ...
[info]ankh156 wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 09:54 am (UTC)
In terms of coherence, measured argument and lack od personal slur, that is.

Dr Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed's reply :

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/features/hitchens-has-no-clothes-a-response-to-lsquovidal-locorsquo-1891507.html

covers the ground carefully enough and echoes Vidal in asking the pertinent questions, which is the first recourse if we hope to have any pertinent answers, isn't it ?

All these cries of 'crackpot' and 'conspiracy' look increasingly like a smokescreen, even after 9 years of reflection. The trail to the real perpetrators of the New York attack in 2001 is run through with official denials, personal attacks, repression of professional opinions and 'red herrings', but what cannot be effaced is the overarching reek of fishiness. Some time in the future it will behove us to open the windows and shed some clear light on the facts of the affair. In the meantime we can observe and take note of those who are fighting to keep the curtains shut.
I like Gore Vidal's last word
[info]larkspur_14 wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 10:33 am (UTC)
which trounces Hitchens soundly, and pithily (unlike Hitchens' ranting). As for Hitchens - it's Vanity, Vanity, that's all.
(no subject) - [info] - Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 11:20 am (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info] - Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 06:39 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: 1938maqazi - [info]obeseshady - Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 06:57 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: 1938maqazi - [info]obeseshady - Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 06:40 pm (UTC) Expand
pdvrt
[info]pdvrt wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 11:54 am (UTC)
I care for neither of them, both consumed by their vanity and and over rated verbosity.
HITCHENS
[info]mwax69 wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 12:21 pm (UTC)
is this a perfect example of the pot calling the kettle black or what!!
Mr. Vidal is essentially correct to assume 9/11 was a false flag operation
[info]patriot194 wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 12:31 pm (UTC)
There is no doubt whatsoever in the minds of a goodly portion of truly patriotic Americans, not to mention probably as many or more Europeans et al, who are thoroughly convinced that this 'so-called' Conspiracy Theory is in no wise a theory at all, but a well researched and exceptionally well documented fact.
Mr. Vidal, who like everyone else, is not perfect, but he none the less, does have a God given literary gift, in this case to not only tell it like it is, but has used this gift to say whatever he has to say very well. Some might call him a word-smith. They, of course, would be correct. It's sad to think that such as 'Mr.' Hitchens shall likely/possibly or probably replace Mr. Vidal as a typical representative in the long history of media puppets whose strings are pulled by Washington.
It is widely known that 'The Media' in America is managed by the government today no less than it was in the former Soviet Union. This fact , if nothing else, (and there a lots of something "elses" which cause concern) should alarm the American people to the current state of affairs which presents itself in typical tyrannical governments. Wake up! The America of our fathers died when Barack" Obama was 'installed' as president of the U.S.
Vidal was right about ONE thing
[info]dredu wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 12:42 pm (UTC)
He said Obama is a FAILURE
In that he was 100% right!
Re: Vidal was right about ONE thing
[info]doug_piranha wrote:
Monday, 8 February 2010 at 01:31 pm (UTC)
WOW - JUST ONE YEAR ?
Re: Vidal was right about ONE thing - [info]juab - Monday, 8 February 2010 at 03:54 pm (UTC) Expand
Conspiracy?
[info]mcorioles wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 01:09 pm (UTC)
I'll go along with gore as long as Clinton is culpable in this "conspiracy" regarding 9/11 because it was planned for approx 3 years most of that being on Clinton's watch and executed 9 months into Bush's term.Everything was all ready in place when Bush was in office.
Hitchens?
[info]niallster wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 01:14 pm (UTC)
'In one corner, the drink sodden ex-Trotskyite hack Christopher Hitchens. In the other, America's great man of letters, Gore Vidal.'

There fixed that for you.
Re: Hitchens?
[info]samculotte wrote:
Monday, 8 February 2010 at 11:26 pm (UTC)
Yes, Vidal appears to be getting cranky these days. But he is 84, in poor health, and has spent a good many of his years warning Americans of the very dangers their republic faces today. All to no avail, all seemingly wasted. I'd be a little out-of sorts myself.

It seems Hitchens is suffering from another kind of crankiness: that of excessive alcohol consumption. A few years ago his wife called him a "high-functioning alcoholic". But one can drink heavily for only so many years, and then the "functioning" declines and the temper sours. Maybe this is the reason for Hitchens' nasty attack on an old, ailing man who spent his life looking for the truth.
Thersites
[info]thersites0101 wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 01:20 pm (UTC)
Well now, this does sound like it has the makings of a most interesting feud between two (or is it three) imaginative men. I hate to state the obvious, though, perhaps Ahmed should not have been the one to defend the very able Vidal with respect to 9/11 conspiracy theories....
Hitchens is right
[info]reba5 wrote:
Sunday, 7 February 2010 at 02:20 pm (UTC)
It's about time someone pointed out that the literary emperor has no clothes! Gore Vidal is out of his mind.
Page 1 of 4
<<[1] [2] [3] [4] >>

Most popular

Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date