Christopher Hitchens dies

[Kromovaracun]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16212418

I've never agreed with everything Hitchens said/wrote, but love or hate him, it's surely pretty hard to deny his formidable intellect and remarkable eloquence made him one of the most interesting commentators around. And 'interesting' is doubtless how he would have liked to be remembered.

RIP Hitch.

[Apologies - I realise I have an annoying habit of posting questions that aren't really questions. Sorry...]

[jackthehat]

I agree, Kromo.

I certainly didn't agree with everything he wrote, but there was no denying the force of intellect he brought to his arguments.

The world is a slightly less 'interesting' place, this morning.

[Davethedog]

From Twitter - Can't put it better myself:

How rare to find somebody you never met in person whose death you feel is a genuine loss to our collective intelligence

[albaqwerty]

I think Vanity Fair described him as having a 'ferocious intellect', whether it was or 'formidable', it's still a loss.

I echo JTH's sentiments.

[naomi24]

A remarkable man with a remarkable intellect. A great loss.

[Brenden]

One of the greatest literary critics of our times - a remarkable man.

[NOX]

Whilst I'm sorry he's dead, I actually I felt he was largely a self serving attention seeker who changed direction with the tide so he was always swimming upstream to attract the most attention to himself. He was certainly clever and eloquent but I don't feel a shining beacon has gone out in genuine intellectual terms. Nonetheless, very sorry he's died, especially from such an unpleasant disease.

[naomi24]

Brendan, he was much more than a literary critic - his books are forceful and forthright.

[Ankou]

i agree with nox.

he's probably up there now trying to tell god how do things.

[jno]

I agree with Nox. A professional controversialist. The newspapers are full of them. Given that there are two sides to any question, it's usually pretty easy to find something to say for or against anything (Lawyers do it all the time).

As for eloquence, Churchill had it - but so did Hitler.

[Quizmonster]

If he is, Ankou, I hope God is listening!

[237SJ]

I only saw him on TV once when he was on (I think) Question Time. I took an instant dislike to him which surpassed my dislike of his brother. He seemed aggressive and really quite objectionable (especially if anybody dared to disagree with him).

[jno]

Quizmonster, I suspect God has already made up his mind between Clinton (whom Hitchens loathed) and Bush Jr (whom Hitchens backed) without any help from media columnists.

If not I shall be happy to add my tuppence-worth when I see him face to face.

[RATTER15]

I thought he was great, a very sad loss!

[Quizmonster]

Actually, J, I have as much belief in a god as Hitchens did...ie none. However, I suppose SOME believe he will find himself today before the Great Seat of Judgement and find god asking, "Why did you not believe in me?" I hope he is as brave as Bertrand Russell said HE'D be in these circumstances and reply, "Not enough evidence, god, not enough evidence."

[elgreco]

I can honestly say that I have never heard of him. Was he a novelist or a philosopher or what? I realise that I am showing my ignorance. Will someone enlighten me please.

[sp1814]

'I'm a member of a cancer elite. I rather look down on people with lesser cancers,' he said in an interview with CBS on March 6, 2011

[Davethedog]

God?? You spit on his memory.

He was a great contrarian, he stood up for what he believed and didn't conform to the social political guidelines as such he stood on his own merits objectionable yes supportable emminantly.

But talk of God and he would have laughed at you.

[Ankou]

pah! as if god would care.

[jno]

"He was a great contrarian, he stood up for what he believed and didn't conform to the social political guidelines as such he stood on his own merits objectionable yes supportable emminantly."

As did Pol Pot and many lesser lights. Being interesting, eloquent, confident in your own beliefs, not conforming - these aren't enough to make you good, unusual, or worth remembering.

[Kromovaracun]

"I can honestly say that I have never heard of him. Was he a novelist or a philosopher or what? I realise that I am showing my ignorance. Will someone enlighten me please. "

He was a journalist/writer and political commentator for about 30+ years I think. There's dozens of debates he's taken part in on youtube, if you'd like to learn more about him. He's probably best known (and will probably be best remembered) for being one of the New Atheism's 'Four Horsemen', with aggressive attacks and criticism of all religion, but particularly the three Abrahamic faiths. That's what he spent most of his later years doing, but he's also written on a vast number of other subjects.

There's an interesting interview with him by the University of Berkeley that's worth watching as it's before he wrote 'God Is Not Great' and got really famous:



Plus dozens of debates. There's one in which despite arguing a hugely unpopular position (support for the Iraq war), he completely skewers George Galloway so is worth watching for that.

As for the 'contrarian' criticisms, I can see why people would see him that way. But I think a lot of the examples that are normally drawn on when people refer to this (e.g. his criticism of Mother Theresa), Hitchens actually always made a pretty good case for even if you disagreed with it. If he were just cynically swimming against the tide constantly I'm not sure he'd actually care about making a good point as much as he did. Plus I think there's something refreshing about political commentators actually being willing to -argue- and be disagreed with rather than just shout it from the hills. Not enough people do it.