[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 38 KB, 640x434, thatcherscunt.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17648591 No.17648591 [Reply] [Original]

I just finished reading Letters to a Young Contrarian and Hitch 22 and I am confused as to wether or not this man is based or cringe. All of his arguments march in lock step with the status quo of journalistic tripe/ liberal media elites, but his wit and fire never fail to please and surprise and I feel like I always have something to learn from his rhetorical flourishes. What is /lit/'s verdict?

>> No.17648604

Extremely cringe Brit who hid behind a screen of sarcasm, irony and London accent in order to deflect from the fact he has nothing to say. Hitchens was a terrible “intellectual” of the William Buckley variety. In other words: what happens when a modern, western conservative person reads a book.

>> No.17648652

>>17648604
his politics were based his cheap fedoratheism was cringe

>> No.17648694

>>17648591
he was sometimes based sometimes cringe, always interesting

>All of his arguments march in lock step with the status quo of journalistic tripe/ liberal media elites

he was pro afghanistan/iraq amongst other things

>> No.17648940
File: 29 KB, 399x385, laughingpepe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17648940

>>17648591
>thatcherscunt.jpg

>> No.17648951

>>17648591
Letters to a Young Contrarian is based. Hitch-22 is mostly cringe.
He was a great essayist, literary critic, and historical and political commentator with a wealth of detailed knowledge. His C-span interviews in the 80s and 90s are pure intellectual kino and so are many of his books from that period. Ignore the religious stuff, it's a waste of time.

>> No.17648954

https://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2007/01/hitchens200701

He is cringe. He was a redditor before it was popular.

>> No.17649012

lol
I am a young contrarian

>> No.17649740

>>17648951
>ignore the religious stuff

This is what a lit hipster sounds like, take a shower hit the library and get a clue kid.

>> No.17649748

>>17648591
Oh god, I remember that Mensa essay of his, lemme find it, it's funny.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/1996/09/hitchens-199609

>It comes back to me that the first Mensa type I met was a boy at school with the name of Coffin. He was forever tearing open his wallet and accidentally displaying his membership card.

/lit/ in a nutshell

>> No.17650313

>>17649740
Listen. It's a very simple and indisputable observation: NO ONE who trashes Hitch on this board trashes him for his literary criticism, or for his historical or political commentary.
They only trash him for TWO (2) reasons: his beliefs about God, and his beliefs about the 2003 war in Iraq. No exceptions.
I've read the vast majority of his essays, articles, and books and, removing the religious stuff and his early-twentieth-century anti-radical-Islamic justification for removing Saddam, he is a based /lit/ figure.

>> No.17650647

bump

>> No.17651747

>>17648591
bump. This board is either too approving or dismissive of the Hitchens siblings Christopher was pretty based

>> No.17651881

>>17648591
he based fuck iraq

>> No.17651965

Childhood is enjoying Christopher Hitchens

Early adulthood is enjoying Peter Hitchens

Old age wisdom is thinking Peter Hitchens is too optimistic.

>> No.17652017

>>17648951
It does amaze me how otherwise intelligent and insightful people like Hitchens and Dawkins get so damn filtered by religion and philosophy. I dont even hold William Lane Craig in high regard, but even he was able to wipe the floor with Hitchens in religious debate

>> No.17652081

>>17648694
Which is in lock-step with the elite. Perhaps not with the libs on TV at the time, but still not a great position. The American people didn't get shit out of those wars

>> No.17652106

>>17648591
He is based and cringe.