Been
busy, but I did want to post a little something about Vidal. I
had noticed that his most recent thing, which, if I remember
correctly was many months ago was not up to his old stuff. I'd
seen him on TV and he wasn't looking great, so I cannot say that I
was particularly surprised when I read that he'd died.
As
usual I drifted around seeing what others had to say. The New York Times was kind of snotty, which I am sure that he would have expected
and probably welcomed. There was also the usual right wing suspects
who hated on him, but given what Vidal had said about Buckley after
he died one would have expected nothing less.
Going
to the “left” wing blogs was interesting, but not particularly
surprising to me particularly Lawyers, Guns and Money. The second
post by a member of their club was as nasty as I expected, although
the fact that he linked to this Slate article was somewhat amusing.
It was a particularly weak contrarian piece that claimed Vidal was
anti-Semitic because of what he said about the Podhoretzes being
“unassemilated Jews.” The crack was of course, about their
determination to place the interests of Israel above those of the
United States. I thought that point was obvious to anyone who
followed their politics even a little.
Some commentators claimed that
he defended McVeigh and justified his actions and those comments
caused me to go the the Vanity Fair article to see that in fact he
had done no such thing. Although, his conspiracy theories were a
little more then I could accept, he seemed to be trying to understand
and explain what McVeigh thought and why McVeigh did what he did, not
justify it.
Several
people argued that Vidal had placed himself beyond they pale with his
comments about the Roman Polanski rape charges. I'm not sure I don't
more or less agree with him although not precisely the way he phrased it. But I attempted to make the point that
people still read Faulkner even after he talked about shooting people in the streets when asked about civil rights matters of the
time. Got me banned from at least one blog to which I choose not to
link, thank you very much.
Several
people commented that Vidal was well you know simply not that good
anyway so that we can safely ignore what he had to say, and any way
people no longer read him or pay any attention to him (even though
there is a revival of The Best Man currently running on Broadway,
very successfully).
His
statement that J. Edger Hoover and Clyde Tolson were the only two
men who could live together in Washington, D.C. after a discussion of homosexuality in general was a shocker to my
little middle class and mid western male mind. Do you think that
people who are homosexual can act like just “normal” people? My
my was I naive.
I do think that he was as pure, clear and elegant a writer of the English language as there has been this side of the Atlantic (ocean not magazine). I found his essays when I was in my late teens and early 20s and I was amazed at how well and clearly he wrote and the positions he took. Growing up where I did I had no idea you could take those positions and get away with it in the nation with which I was familiar. I remember watching him or TV just a month after I returned from Southeast Asia, when he called Buckley at crypto-Nazi (although he did later apologize, he meant crypto-fascist he said, but misspoke in the heat of the moment). I thought this guy is right and those people in the streets are right and they are going to carry the day. I want to be there and help. Little did I realize that this was the high water mark of the left in this country.
Whenever I write anything about Vidal, my own stuff looks and reads clunky to me because I'm always comparing my writing to his, and lets face it I am just not one of the half dozen most elegant prose stylists in the English language.
Well
anyway I feel like I can certainly think or curse him for a great
deal of my political beliefs and my open mindedness (or at least I
hope I'm open minded.
No comments:
Post a Comment