R.I.P. Christopher Hitchens

Posted on December 16, 2011 by sheila

I have no words.

I knew this day was coming. I’m so sad. He has been so much a part of my life for so long. I will miss him so much.

No words except to say, “They don’t make ’em like that anymore.”

Rest in peace.

This entry was posted in RIP, writers and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

45 Responses to R.I.P. Christopher Hitchens

  1. Paul H. says:
    December 16, 2011 at 9:16 am

    It’s truly awful, and no less sad for being expected. My mind keeps going to some words I noted from a profile of Christopher Hitchens in Esquire a few years ago:

    “A writer touched by greatness, following his own broken compass all over the map, servile to no one, insulter of many, drinker and smoker nonpareil. A man of consequence. A writer.”

    And what a writer. RIP.

    • sheila says:
      December 16, 2011 at 10:09 am

      Such a writer. I have so much to thank him for – one of them being his insistence that I read Evelyn Waugh, something I had somehow missed somehow. His review of Scoop made me laugh out loud – and the book? Forget about it. I couldn’t read it in public because I made scenes.

      Servile to no one. Yes.

      Prolific. Well-read. A worthy opponent. Funny. In a class of his own.

  2. Jake Cole says:
    December 16, 2011 at 9:24 am

    I tried to etch out a post about this but I got nowhere before breaking down. There’s still so much of his I haven’t read, so many essays to pore over (I only just bought that gargantuan new collection of his), that I wouldn’t get anywhere. He was absolutely fearless, and he’d almost gleefully take on a whole crowd if they dared him. In person he was electric, and I almost pitied those who had to square off with him, be they the side I agreed with or even the one I hated. And of course his writing is perhaps the most elegant journalism ever written.

    He was just so far ahead of everyone. People still think he went all neocon (hell, even Christopher Buckley continues to at least suggest this label), but anyone who follows his lines of thought over the years can clearly see the consistency of his “conversion” over Iraq. That’s not to say he didn’t have some head-scratching arguments over the years, but he never did anything on a whim. I’ll be thumbing through essays all day, I’m sure.

  3. sheila says:
    December 16, 2011 at 10:16 am

    Jake – I shared many of his “head-scratching” opinions – they weren’t head-scratching to me!! – although I never agreed with every single thing he said. I am in a similar position of being posed between two political sides in a polarized atmosphere. Like him, I am not a party-line person. I am hated and despised for this. Hahahaha. But I will not be bullied. He was an example of that. The conservatives who refer to him as “liberal” clearly haven’t been paying attention to him all along, and the liberals who refer to him as “neocon” also haven’t been paying attention.

    Like most great writers and thinkers, you had to try to take him whole.

    His book reviews are magnificent, but I got to him through his war pieces and political pieces. That was my way in. He was a kindred spirit. He helped me stiffen the space between my shoulder-blades when liberals who prided themselves on being “tolerant” gave me shit and he also helped me stay strong when the conservatives filled up my comments section on my site with their family values culture-war stuff. This was years ago. I’d write about the Oscars, they’d rail about the “libtards” in Hollywood. My battle to get control of my own site went on for about a year, until finally I ran them out of town. You know. Metaphorically. The gladiatorial combat on my site wasn’t nearly at the level at what he faced (and what he loved and thrived on, obviously), but it was a small slice of it. He was an iconoclast, an independent thinker, a critical thinker.

    The ability to change one’s mind about a deeply held position is something looked upon with suspicion by True Believers on either side. I think those True Believers are the ones to be feared. It’s not “waffling” to weigh the evidence and look at your own views, and come to another decision. It’s called being a critical thinker.

    I value that in him so much.

    More than anything, I find him to be a compulsively entertaining writer.

    I miss him already.

    Thank God he left us with so much.

    Glad to hear your thoughts, Jake – look forward to reading anything you write about him.

  4. sheila says:
    December 16, 2011 at 10:16 am

    His essay on Kipling is a must-read. Sorry, just had to get that in there.

  5. sheila says:
    December 16, 2011 at 10:21 am

    Many of his best book reviews are in his huge collection Love Poverty and War.

  6. sheila says:
    December 16, 2011 at 10:22 am

    Also his book on Orwell. A must-read.

    Again, there’s so much. Did the man sleep???

  7. Cla says:
    December 16, 2011 at 12:21 pm

    I was shocked this morning too.
    I love his views on the chain prayer offered by his opponents (pastors, etc.), wondering if they wanted him: a) to get better, b) to have a last minute conversion; and c) his burning in hell.
    His writings were so alive, so full of multiple views, and yet, flowing towards one direction. I re-read his obituary for Pinochet today. Very clever and passionate. I re-read several of his articles and I’m going to find any books by him now.
    Not least, his picture at 20 years old makes me say mmmmnn.

  8. sheila says:
    December 16, 2011 at 12:23 pm

    Cla: // wondering if they wanted him: a) to get better, b) to have a last minute conversion; and c) his burning in hell. //

    hahahaha

    His intelligence is daunting – but even more than that, the SPEED of his writing. He clearly was a Tasmanian devil, in terms of output. That alone is intimidating.

    And yes. I find him quite “mmmmmm” myself.

  9. tracey says:
    December 16, 2011 at 12:39 pm

    I am desperately sad. I can’t say anything else. RIP, Christopher Hitchens.

  10. Tom McPhillips says:
    December 16, 2011 at 4:45 pm

    Actually “RIP” or “rest in peace” is ENTIRELY the wrong response to his passing – last thing he would have wanted, and the last thing we should wish for him, he’s dead – he’s not gone to any “better place” – the world was his place and it’s a lot poorer for his absence.

    • sheila says:
      December 17, 2011 at 8:06 am

      I never said he “went to a better place”. You’re projecting. Besides: I’ll say whatever the hell I want to say. Hitchens taught me that.

      Who are you to tell someone how to respond to the death of another person?

      In your first comment on my site you tell me I am entirely “wrong” in my response to the death of someone I love? Are you racing around the Web today, scolding everyone who dares to talk about him in a way that doesn’t pass muster with you?

      We’re actually having an interesting conversation here about him. What the hell are YOU doing.

    • roo says:
      December 17, 2011 at 9:54 pm

      I gotta tell you, Mr. McPhillips, I’m passionately atheist, and I hope Christopher Hitchens will rest in peace. And most of my acquaintances within the atheist community feel the same.

      Though he never was a peaceful man. Maybe he would have preferred to rest in controversy.

      Actually, that sounds about right.

      R.I.C., Hitchens! May your memory live long!

  11. Jake Cole says:
    December 16, 2011 at 4:58 pm

    Sheila, did you see the recent “Hitchfry” event where Stephen Fry intended to speak with Hitch but quickly arranged for some of his closest friends (and Sean Penn, for some weird reason) to appear and talk about him? It’s up on YouTube, though I suspect it’s an edited version because it seems like everyone only has about four minutes to speak. Except for Christopher Buckley, though, who sort of clung on there. I thought it was lovely, and I was glad Fry (naturally) honed in on Hitchens’ language and humor, which so routinely get thrown out of the equation, as if all he did was belligerently shout rhetoric at trees. Reading Hitch-22, you get a real feel for how dear a friend Hitch was, and in some cases how even the personal informs his political views, and the reciprocated love was truly touching.

  12. sheila says:
    December 16, 2011 at 5:04 pm

    Jake – Yes, I did see that! Want to watch again this evening – a lot of people have been linking to it today but I’m out and about on the iPhone, not ideal watching space.

    I’m thinking of all of his friends/family today – quite a well-loved man. I love how all of his friends talk about him – or – in other words, how they all talk about each other. Hitchens’ essays on his own writer friends are just hilarious sometimes, but also poignant magnificent stuff.

    Sometimes I’d force myself NOT to read his book reviews in The Atlantic because dammit, I only had so many hours in the day, and I was constantly going, “Huh. I guess I really need to re-visit Kipling then” (or whoever). He had that enthusiasm of the passionately convinced, and just (to quote Dear Sugar) “wrote like a motherfucker”.

    • Jake Cole says:
      December 16, 2011 at 5:22 pm

      I loved Fry’s almost boyish awe at Hitch’s circle of friends, the humble admiration for all of them and their prodigious talents. And I have always loved to hear Salman Rushdie speak to or about Christopher. The gratitude he has for Hitch goes beyond words, even in the midst of some argument they occasionally had.

  13. sheila says:
    December 16, 2011 at 5:41 pm

    Ryzsard Kapuscinski is another hero of mine (and he ran in this same crowd – he and Rushdie were good pals) – and when Kapuscinski died I went to a memorial gathering at the New York Public Library – with Philip Gourevitch moderating, and there were a couple of other people on the panel, but I mainly remember Rushdie. He had a huge presence, and was HILARIOUS. He and Kapuscinski had the same publisher originally in London and he told some very funny stories about their competition. I have a post about it somewhere. One of those days when I felt like Hitchens should be there. He wrote about Kapuscinski from time to time, his name comes up often. It’s all the same crowd. And Robert Conquest. GIANTS of intellectual fortitude! Who also loved to write dirty limericks and get drunk together.

  14. Catherine says:
    December 16, 2011 at 6:13 pm

    I disagreed virulently with a lot of his opinion (Iraq / religion / the comedic potential of women ) but when I woke up this morning and read that he’d died, my hand flew up to my mouth and I breathed “Oh no” out loud. I always appreciated his voice, his tenacity, his wit, his scruffiness and his bravery, and I’ll miss him enormously. Raising a glass in his honour.

    • sheila says:
      December 16, 2011 at 7:57 pm

      Catherine – yeah, that women-aren’t-funny piece was not his finest hour.

      But boy could he dominate a conversation – a worldwide conversation. I appreciated him so much for that. I always wanted to know what he thought. Even if my response was, “Oh come now, Hitch, relax.”

      A clear thinker. A magnificent writer.

      UGH.

      • Jake Cole says:
        December 16, 2011 at 8:33 pm

        Yeah, the women aren’t funny column was one of the “head-scratchers” I had in mind. But totally agree on his ability to dominate a conversation. I love that even his memoir has a combative tone to it, a “try me” attitude that speaks for what he believes. He was such a forceful personality, so ready to share what he was thinking and unconcerned with all those silly rules that say it’s impolite to talk about politics, religion, or such. Those standards of “politeness” were put in place by those who hated having their opinions disproven, typically by people like Hitchens. Part of the reason I love Hitchens so much is that he understood the invigorating properties of a good, spirited argument. It actually increases sociality instead of breaking it up.

        So many of the people Hitchens argued with, even at debates, clearly were unused to having to truly defend themselves, to truly put forward a carefully considered view. There’s a bewilderment in a lot of their faces on all those choice video clips, smugness rapidly replaced by almost open-mouthed shock. That’s why I loved him on TV shows the best, because cable news punditry is one big circle jerk of established wisdom, and in came Hitchens to say he wished there was a Hell for Jerry Falwell to go to or that Christianity is a fraud. The rest of the 5-8 minute segments would be people—often including the hosts—stammering to come up with something. Regardless of whether I agreed with what was said, the fact that he was unafraid to shake up our increasing complacency was invaluable, and I don’t know who can fill that void in his absence.

        Sorry, I keep coming back to this post all day. It’s just such a personal loss for me, as absurd as that is.

        • sheila says:
          December 16, 2011 at 8:36 pm

          His televised debate with Al Sharpton was one of the most entertaining things I have ever seen. Sharpton was awesome, too – I got the feeling that both of them were having an absolute BLAST.

          • sheila says:
            December 16, 2011 at 8:40 pm

            I wonder, too, if – you know, the man has deadlines, and he comes up dry, and some woman told a shitty joke the night before so he thinks, “Oh fuck it, women aren’t funny, let me crank this thing out by noon and be done with it.”

      • PaulH says:
        December 17, 2011 at 12:05 am

        Apparently, the conditions of Hitchens writing for Vanity Fair were that he would go anywhere in the world he was sent, he would do anything asked of him (hence the whole bikini wax incident) and would write about anything Graydon Carter required. The women-aren’t-funny piece was a request from Carter, and it’s not clear if Hitchens agreed with the argument he made in the article. But being Christoper Hitchens he happily took the flak and argued the point with all comers. It’s what he lived for.

  15. John Vail says:
    December 16, 2011 at 6:18 pm

    Dear Sheila,

    Thanks for the heartfelt tribute. Hitchens is one (I find it very difficult to write in the past tense already) of the touchstones in my life and has been for over 30 years since I started reading his column in the Nation. I always considered myself to be a progressive, a person on the left, but could never tolerate the delusional vanguardists or the contradictory choices of the true believers as you call them, and with Hitchens you could identify a touchstone -of decency, commitment to the underdog, a visceral hatred of totalitarianisms of all stripes, of the kind of politics that denied people’s fundamental dignity- that made you realize what it meant to be a progressive even though it might require you to be on opposite sides of the common wisdom. So he defended Walesa and Solidarity; the Kurds; Rushhdie; new Yorkers after 9/11 -all exemplary fights that got him into trouble with the professional left. Then there was his awe-inspiring writing skills (his ability to always find the perfect poem, literary reference) -I am constantly showing his essays to my undergrads to demonstrate how to write (colons, semi-colons, dashes are your friends), his seemingly limitless capacity for friendship, his fundamental decency. He had an interview last year on the BBC where he spoke about how moved he had been by letters from complete strangers who had written him upon hearing about his illness to tell him what an impact his words had on their lives and he himself regretted not writing similar letters to his own heroes. I wish now that I had taken the time to do so myself because I am feeling totally bereft at his loss.

  16. sheila says:
    December 16, 2011 at 7:55 pm

    John – your comment brought tears to my eyes. Thank you.

  17. Sharon Ferguson says:
    December 16, 2011 at 10:06 pm

    Phooey on that commenter. I hope he DOES rest in peace. His fate is our fate. What I wish for myself is what I wish for him. He was a man with a chest. Thats another way we are poorer for his death now. Not anyone with a chest anymore, it seems…

  18. april says:
    December 16, 2011 at 11:57 pm

    This is a sad day, indeed. I didn’t agree with all of his conclusions, but I have always had the utmost respect for Hitchens’ courage, wit, and clarity of thought. My favorite of quote of his, which I think epitomizes his gift, is this: “What matters is not *what* you think, but *how* you think.” Like all great thinkers, he understood that ideas are only improved when they are challenged and defended in meaningful debate. And for all his withering one-liners, the most disparaging thing I ever heard him say to another person was that it was beginning to seem as though that person might never have given serious thought to any position other than his own. Hitchens was incredulous; to him, such arrogance was unthinkable.

    Today, I have gone back and forth between his writing and the outpouring of affection from so many who knew and loved him. I am overwhelmed by the knowledge of what a wonderful friend he was, and to how many. His was one of the great minds of our age, and he will be missed. He already is.

  19. Nondisposable Johnny says:
    December 17, 2011 at 12:16 am

    A sad day. He was the only professional intellectual (journalist, academic, critic, etc.) of my lifetime who could afford to live outside the cocoon of professional “consistency.” He could do that because of nonpareil writing skills, which are the only sure path to being able–and allowed–to think for yourself in print in major publications….I feel like ten libraries just burned.

  20. devtob says:
    December 17, 2011 at 12:29 am

    Slate has a dozen or so Hitchens remembrances, the best IMHO is by Jacob Weisberg:

    “Amazing about Hitchens: his generosity to young people. He sought them out and befriended them. He responded when they called with requests to speak at their college, contribute to a symposium, or stand with any oppressed minority. He hated to say no to anything worthwhile, and cared less about getting paid than anyone I’ve ever known. After doing unaccountable favors for unimportant people, he named them comrades, which meant welcoming them into his circle of solidarity and acting as if they belonged in his home, with cocktails.”

    Hitchens was, like Elvis, a nice guy to the little people.

    Most know Hitchens from his writings and his TV appearances.

    The few who were lucky enough to know him in person, like Weisberg, got more than the readers/viewers — serious life lessons.

    ” Here’s what I learned from Christopher Hitchens in the 25 years I knew him. Don’t let anyone else do your thinking for you. Follow your principles to the end. Don’t flinch from the truth. Repeat until the last ounce of strength drains from your body.”

  21. Bybee says:
    December 17, 2011 at 9:12 am

    I had the exact same thought as Nondisposable Johnny — that it was like a library burned down when Christopher Hitchens died. I felt misty yesterday watching his speech from last spring in which he says, in essence, that we shouldn’t settle for a pat easy answer like faith, that we should keep striving to think and learn for as long as we can. Brave, intelligent and thoughtful. RIP.

  22. sheila says:
    December 17, 2011 at 9:32 am

    His insistence on not submitting to rank-and-file thought was, for me, the greatest inspiration.

  23. ted says:
    December 17, 2011 at 12:37 pm

    I plan to read his book on Orwell to celebrate his appreciation of of iconoclastic thinking. We are poorer for the loss of this maverick.

  24. John Vail says:
    December 18, 2011 at 6:00 am

    I got up very early this morning to go get the Sunday papers and to scour them for pieces on Hitchens (it says something about the impact he had on me that I cant ever recall being so obsessed with reading every last tribute and obit that I could get my hands on for anyone else) and the Observer had two lovely columns by Nick Cohen and Henry Porter that you and your readers will enjoy reading:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/dec/18/henry-porter-my-friend-christopher-hitchens

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/dec/18/christopher-hitchens-nick-cohen-tribute

    Its been very moving reading the comments on the thread-thanks again.

  25. Jim Rockwood says:
    December 18, 2011 at 8:53 am

    Hitchen’s comment on the Rushdie fatwa was also an apt summation of his own life:

    “It was, if I can phrase it like this, a matter of everything I hated versus everything I loved. In the hate column: dictatorship, religion, stupidity, demagogy, censorship, bullying and intimidation. In the love column: literature, irony, humor, the individual and the defense of free expression.”

    I can’t remember the last time I was this upset over the death of someone I didn’t know. Probably when John Lennon was killed.

  26. Jim Rockwood says:
    December 18, 2011 at 12:56 pm

    Mr. Vail. Pretty comprehensive list here: http://www.aldaily.com/

  27. sheila says:
    December 18, 2011 at 6:32 pm

    Jim – I’m not really a fan of Ana Marie Cox, I remember her from when Wonkette first started! – but I really, and I mean really, loved her piece. Haven’t read them all yet but that one stood out.

  28. sheila says:
    December 18, 2011 at 6:33 pm

    And I really feel you, Jim, about being bereft about this loss.

    Hitchens was a giant. It’s incomprehensible to imagine the political conversation going on without him. Like I said, I, for one, will miss his book reviews – probably mostly – but a presidential campaign/a war without Hitchens commenting on it? I don’t even know what that will be like.

Comments are closed.