[vulturesrow]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">En respuesta a:</font><hr />
That was a truly bad piece of writing by Hitchens. His (more and more desperate) political stance regarding Iraq makes him go overboard.

As usual, politics get in the way of art.

Harold Pinter is a great writer, no matter whether he is a fanatic supporter of the war in Iraq or a fanatical opponent. Ezra Pound was a great poet, despite his overt sympathy for fascism. Louis-Ferdinand Céline was a collaborator of the German occupiers of France but he nonetheless wrote "Voyage au bout de la nuit". T. S. Elliot wrote some odious anti-semitic tracts but he is still magnificent. Mario Vargas Llosa has been denounced by every lefty in South Americe yet he is among the solid writers of the continent. A heapload of "leftist" writers are crap, despite being consistently, honorably against the war in Iraq.

The liver of Hitchens is long gone, by most accounts. His brain cells cannot be far behind.

[/ QUOTE ]


Cryus obviously doesnt like Hitchens, which I suspect may be due to Hitchen's 'abandoning' the Socialist cause. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] The more interesting point to me is how besotted some of my fellow conservatives have become with this man, strictly because of his support of the war in Iraq. Nothing else about this man suggests that he should be embraced by conservatives. In many respects, I guess you could he is the epitome of neoconservative thought. I think he is fine writer and definitely has a flair for invective, but I also find him to be very self important and somewhat arrogant in his writing. As to his drinking habits, I cannot say, although I have seen the charges of being quite the imbiber. Not particular point here, other than trying to generate some discussion.