1. I loved Hitchens but it's worth noting that the entire trajectory of his career goes against the narrative Brooks is constructing here. The more of a reactionary crank Hitchens became, the bigger platforms he gained.https://twitter.com/nytdavidbrooks/status/1286619122835619845 …
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @HeerJeet
Hitchens started writing for VF in 1992, well ahead of his crankiness. He told me one reason they hired him was because they desperately wanted to be seen as not trivial.
2 replies 4 retweets 26 likes -
Replying to @DougHenwood
The Vanity Fair column was mostly cultural and while the Hitchens of 1992 was no crank he was closer to the center on foreign policy (thanks to Bosnia).
3 replies 1 retweet 31 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
There were some strange divisions on the left around Bosnia. There was a purge of the New left Review editorial board that, though not explicitly about attitudes around Yugoslavia, ended up that way.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @DougHenwood @HeerJeet
Where can I read about this intrigue at the NLR? I'm wondering who won...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @DougHenwood @HeerJeet
you must have a treasure-trove of these. So it wasn't solely about yuguslavia, but taking that as the wedge issue: which position won the day at the editorial board?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
The New Left Review has yet to experience even a bourgeois revolution.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.