Remembering the Dead, from Selma
I confess this is the first time in my life I will break the old Hellenic rule: ton tethnvêkota mê kakologein (speak no ill of the dead). That Vidal was a cruel person is no excuse for not refraining from criticism after his recent death, but here I sin nonetheless.
I could never finish any of Gore Vidal’s fiction, even his best, Julian — although I grant that he was ironic, at times shocking, and could be a valuable corrective to unmerited reputations. But Robert Graves (even at his worst with Count Belisarius) and Peter Green were probably superior historical novelists. To compare similar contrarian essayists, the late Christopher Hitchens was a better writer. He was more widely informed and more honest about the public intellectual’s propensity for caricaturing the very ribbons and medals — and cash — that he so covets.
Many praised Vidal’s essays. Some were insightful, but more were self-indulgent, full of pathetic aristocratic references, and tinged with anti-Semitism and passive-aggressive gossip about those with better bloodlines and more money. Among the latter, Vidal eagerly sought opportunities to play the court jester. Somehow all of that was central, rather than incidental, to his arguments.
For all his claims of erudition, Vidal suffered the wages of the public autodidact. I noticed he quoted Latin ad nauseam — and nearly always with his nouns and adjectives not just in the wrong cases (especially the confusion of the accusative and ablative in preposition phrases), but predictably in the fashion of those who like to copy down Latin phrases but cannot read a complete Latin sentence. By his sixties, Vidal had degenerated into a conspiracy theorist, and his embarrassing late-life infatuation with Timothy McVeigh caught the eye of the goddess Nemesis.
Vidal said he was nauseated by American imperialism and gloated over our decline, but his real pique was that the mannered East Coast snobbishness that he loved to shock had given way to a socially mobile, no-holds-barred popular culture that did not so much ignore his world of blue-blood repartee, but had no clue that it had ever existed. He liked being hated; he hated being irrelevant.
Otherwise, it is hard to find any commonality in Vidal’s corpus of work other than a certain disdain for what he would term the “grasping”: the supposedly wannabe Jewish intellectual, the upper-middle class suburbanite who sends his kids to State U, or the American can-doism that sought to “improve” itself through intellectual and artistic awareness — about which brings me to my sole Gore Vidal story.
I met him once. Or rather my family did. In the early 1960s, my father, William F. Hanson, a former teacher, farmer, and then administrator at Reedley Junior College, proposed to the local JC school board “a lecture series.” The Central Valley farming community was innately conservative. But nonetheless, in the classically liberal spirit of those pre-Vietnam times, the farmers on the board not only funded my dad’s proposed lecture series, but encouraged him to invite controversial, and often liberal, voices — over the objection of the careerist president of the college at that time.
There was only a small ramshackle college motel in Reedley (population around 6,000 then). Consequently, often my father asked the speakers whether they wished instead to stay at our Selma farmhouse, 16 miles away, on the night before the lecture. A lot did.
So it followed that, from about age 9 to 15 (e.g., 1962-1968), I listened to every word, at dinner and the next morning’s breakfast, from the likes of Ansel Adams (I remember a short, bearded bald man in cowboy hat who railed all evening against James Watt), Pearl Buck (two strange aides who would not let her out of their sight), Louis Leakey (suffering from terrible dental pain and around the house wearing a blue jump suit), Bernard Lovell (stared out about two feet over our heads when speaking), Rod Serling (refused to answer our constant questions about the Twilight Zone, and instead went on a nonstop invective against Richard Nixon), Mark Van Doren (gracious, polite, and a beautiful speaker of the English language), and about 30 or so others in rural Selma.
My father ran the series himself. He did so as if he were back in the Army Air Force: systematically with checklists, and with minute attention to every detail of the visit. On a Thursday night, he would drive to the Fresno airport, pick up the speaker in his 1959 ladybug Volvo clunker (we had to buy all Swedish: Electrolux, hardtack crackers, etc.) — full of lecture posters, microphone wires, and box speakers — and drive them down to Selma, where my mother had dinner and one of our bedrooms ready for the celebrity guest.
At 6 a.m. the next morning, my father rushed over to Reedley, where he had students waiting to help him set up the gym with chairs, arrange the PA system, and put last-minute posters around town. Dad was a one-man production company and used 100% of his budget for the speakers’ honoraria — meals, transportation, and lodging all provided by himself, without charge to the district.
My mom (who was a Stanford law graduate and working as an attorney at the new 5th District Appellate Court) drew up the contracts, legal papers, etc., for my dad, again with no charge to the college. At about noon, she drove down in her 1955 Dodge station wagon from Fresno, picked up the guest at the house (my siblings and I usually got to stay home from school that morning to talk to him/her in the 4-hour interval), and chauffeured the guest over for the early-evening event. We joined my dad up in the bleachers after school. After all that work, Bill was never allowed to introduce the speaker: the college president always broke his promise and, at the last moment, hijacked the occasion to gave a five-minute harangue about his supposedly brilliant effort to “bring culture to Reedley.”
Remember, this was right before the era of the blockbuster advance or lucrative film deal. For a bit longer, American and British public figures would often tour the country, in yeomen fashion, doing 30 back-to-back talks per month. I remember that my father always preferred to host only 3-4 talks per season, rather than the suggested 6-7, in order to pay a top-dollar $1,000 fee, an astronomical sum in those days. He figured that with such financial clout he could lure a big name to detour to the out-of-the-way Reedley, between his scheduled lectures in San Francisco and Los Angeles. And he was often right.
Among those guests in 1964 was Gore Vidal, who was not yet 40. I was about eleven and remember him as a stylishly dressed non-stop hair-toucher. He was also vain and condescending — and a big hit at his lecture with the conservative rural crowd. In those days he acted what was known as “witty.” I recall asking my dad whether he was “English,” given that his nose was angled upward and his accent did not sound American (and that he did not seem to like the U.S.). My dad, in the Swedish fashion of honoring work for work’s sake, answered that I should respect any man who could crisscross the country, giving 30 lectures in 30 days.
Vidal certainly had an instinct for saying outrageous things with such erudite authority that we yokels found him fascinating rather than repulsive. As I remember (it has been 48 years since that evening), Vidal spoke for about 30 minutes, but then he wowed the crowd to a standing ovation in the question-and-answer period (his forte), as he advocated the legalization of drugs and prostitution and went on rants about “small town” values.
The night before the lecture (in an unusual fashion for this lecture) we had driven with Vidal three miles into Selma to my aunt’s house (she taught English at Reedley College) for dinner. After the desert, he “shocked” us by declaring that masturbation was the sex act of choice, and then referred nonchalantly to his male friends. I noted one other thing about the evening. Vidal kept trying to namedrop literary tidbits; but my aunt, the JC English teacher, was of the old school (English literature BA, MA Stanford, where she had mastered the canon of Anglo-American classics) and had memorized verbatim many of Shakespeare’s plays and much of Chaucer and could quote by memory pages of Milton.
Each time Vidal would say something like “I think it was so-and-so who once said of so-and-so,” my aunt would smile and say something polite like “yes, it was” or “perhaps it was not.” By the end of dinner, he grew more and more sullen with us rubes who were not playing our unenlightened parts. I remember that my mother, the more pragmatic lawyer, sister of the JC teacher, and worshiper of my dad’s efforts, scolded her afterwards with something like “Lucy, he could have gotten mad and given a poor performance.” Sometime in the evening, before slipping away, Vidal showed one flash of sincerity, and remarked to my mother, “Do you mean to say that your old father mortgaged his farm to send his girls to Stanford? Hmmm.” He also said that he had preferred going to war to going to college. (That got my dad’s attention, who had done both, and went over Japan 40 times on bombing runs.)
A far better man — in both the ethical and literary sense — died this last week, Sir. John Keegan. The Face of Battle is the most beautifully written and imaginative military history of the last 50 years. For a period in the 1980s and 1990s, about every two years a new military history followed from Keegan — Six Armies in Normandy, The Price of Admiralty, The Mask of Command, A History of War, etc., as well as general histories of World War I and World War II, and dozens of other titles too numerous for instant recall.
It is true that some of these books were written quickly, but they were written with engaging prose, were full of ideas, and were usually right in their main assessments. Keegan was a British public figure in the best sense of the word, writing newspaper columns, editing volumes, offering pocket biographies, at service to a larger society he loved. As a classics graduate student, who preferred sneaking around military history to the required fare of the manuscript tradition of Aeschylus’s Suppliants, non-literary Hellenistic Papyri, and moods and tenses in Xenophon’s Hellenica, I came across Keegan’s name in the late 1970s in a number of his original, now-obscure academic studies of the Waffen SS and German generals on the Russian front — before the breakthrough of The Face of Battle.
He was a master of the personal voice, but in such a way that was never chatty or self-indulgent. It never seemed to bother him that his unapologetic pro-Americanism, support for the idea of the Vietnam and Iraqi wars, and general British conservatism might imperil his literary career — perhaps because he judged rightly that his historical acumen, innate humanity, fairness toward historical figures, and above-the-fray temperament made him exempt from ideological vendettas. Keegan’s success, fame, and productivity at times earned scorn from academic historians who could spot occasional errors of fact, but usually their nitpicking was not so much over matters of substance, and so their criticism often, in boomerang style, becomes self-reflective.
Here I confess a bias toward Keegan, because I knew him somewhat and owed him much. To know him was to like him. In 1983 a small Italian academic press published my doctoral thesis Warfare and Agriculture in Classical Greece (in elegant but cumbersome folios with the pages uncut) — to zero readership. By that time I had finished graduate school and abandoned a stillborn academic career. I liked farming full-time and had no plans to reenter academia or write again. But when the publisher wrote from Pisa and said I could send 10 free copies to journals, I instead sort of randomly picked the names of ten well-known military historians.
None ever wrote back — except one John Keegan, at the pinnacle of his post-Face of Battle success. A postcard in elegant ink arrived to the farm, with something like “Dear Dr. Hanson. Accept my gratitude for the publisher’s copy of your engaging thesis. Are there plans for more of the same?”
In those dark days (raisins had just crashed from $1400 to $400 a ton, and we were trying to figure out how to repay a $150,000 crop loan shortfall accruing at 15% interest), that brief note seemed to make all the difference in the world. At night after tractor driving, I suddenly started to write what would become The Western Way of War, coming in about 6 p.m. from hours on the tractor and littering the floor with Greek texts. In my newfound confidence (remember, authors, what a single act of kindness can do for others), I began applying for jobs at local JCs and California State University, Fresno.
The next year I was hired at nearby Fresno State as a part-time Latin teacher (one class, $375 a month), which was a godsend, after peaches and plums hit $4 a lug and our income dipped to about 30% of what it had been in the early inflation-roaring late seventies and early 1980s.
Those were busy years. I would get up in the morning to do farm chores and help with the kids. Then I would drive 30 miles to CSUF, teach, rush home, spray, irrigate, or fix things, and run inside to work on the book until 1 a.m., drinking a six-pack of Pepsi to stay awake. By 1985, I was a full-time lecturer (with a soon-to-be family of five now comfortably living on $22,000 a year) and the book then-titled The Experience of Battle in Classical Greece was finished.
Then what? I wrote to a few publishers, but a farmer who taught as a temporary lecturer at Fresno State and who had one Italian monograph published was not in high demand by academic presses. So I wrote the following note to John Keegan: “Dear Mr. Keegan, You kindly once wrote me a note and asked what was next. I did write a second book. Would you ever be interested in reading it?”
Three weeks later, the following postcard in the same fountain-pen script arrived: “Send it to….. Regards, JK.”
I did. Six months later, another postcard came: “I like it. Would you like me to write the forward? If so resend the ms. to E. Sifton at Alfred Knopf, my editor. Regards, JK.”
I did. Three months later, Ms. Sifton wrote and agreed to publish it for an advance of $5,000, with a forward from John Keegan. The book did very well and everything after it was not so difficult. I had a falling out with Ms. Sifton over the next book, The Other Greeks, and then went to the Free Press and Adam Bellow for The Other Greeks, Fields Without Dreams, The Land Was Everything, Who Killed Homer? The Soul of Battle, Carnage and Culture, and Ripples of Battle. But looking back, a quarter-century later, I realize now that John Keegan was right: she was a wonderful editor, to whom I owe a great deal of gratitude for what became The Western Way of War. And I have been remiss for not thanking her in print for all she did on that book.
As small thanks, I dedicated an academic, edited book of essays (Hoplites: The Ancient Greek Battle Experience) to Keegan, and we kept in touch over the years. When I later met him in Washington, he was not in good health, but he was alert with a photographic memory of our correspondence over the last twenty years.
The sum of Keegan’s work was a writ against war, although he never editorialized so. The empathy for the wretched suffering of combat soldiers was made all the more poignant by his majestic style. Although I never read so, I always wondered whether he was a student of Greek and Latin, given that he had a certain Asiatic style, predicated on variation in sentence structure, length, and grammar, with a vocabulary that could juxtapose the Latinate polysyllabic term next to a two-syllable Anglo-Saxon slang.
Gore Vidal may not have been as poor a writer as I allege, or John Keegan as gifted an historian as I have argued. I met the former at ten, the latter as an adult. One did nothing for me, the other everything. So be it: I will miss not reading another new sentence from Keegan as much as I am unconcerned about the absence of another 500-page book from Vidal.







RIP John Keegan. I’ve got five or six of his books on my shelf – all are engaging and informative.
Thank you, Dr. Hanson, for a fine eulogy.
Yes, it is a nicely done article; and, for most of the day, I’ve been looking up and reading things related to it, just so’s I could get a whole picture. In all, the only possible fault which I might allege would be, as I think, than the word “Vidal”, the article would better putting some other word in position of final emphasis, . . .
I read voraciously, especially military history and historical, especially military, fiction, so I’ve read most of John Keegan’s work (especially the later, more significant stuff) and back in the day I read Burr, 1876, and Lincoln, I think. I more or less liked Vidal, until the cynicism of 1876 overwhelmed me. When I heard he had died, I was more or less indifferent; I’d stopped reading his stuff or paying any attention to him years ago.
John Keegan was more or less my favorite historian of the last 25 years or so (no offense VDH). This weekend I had a conversation with a friend who’s a more qualified historian that I am (I’m one of those autodidacts Dr. Hanson talks about in his article, while my friend Jim has a Master’s in history) and we argued, mildly, about JK’s influence in terms of the historical community. I quoted a now-forgotten (to me anyway) detective novelist speaking on the occasion of Robert B. Parker’s death last year, that there were two sorts of detective novelists: those who would tell you that Parker had a great influence on their work, and those who would lie about it. Jim disagreed with me, noting that much of Keegan’s work was regarded with skepticism by a lot of people, and some of the later stuff was burdened by errors. Those are just criticisms, but my point still stands: Keegan managed to get historians discussing issues, looking at them in new ways, thinking through things in a different vein, etc. That’s always the most critical thing, whether you agree with the author or not: getting people thinking is crucial, and someone who could do it with such elegant prose deserved all the acclaim he got.
I still think Six Armies in Normandy one of the best books on the battle, and his memoir about studying American military history for 40 years is eloquent, funny, poignant, and very intelligent. His passing is a great loss.
I think more or less that I used the phrase more or less too much in the above, but you get the idea…more or less…
“A far better man — in both the ethical and literary sense — died this last week, Sir. John Keegan.”
I didn’t know Keegan passed. Sad news.
As for Vidal, I honestly thought he was quite dead some time now.
“Remember, authors, what a single act of kindness can do for others…”
’nuff said.
Why are so many autodidacts also such committed autostimulators?
amour-propre?
The second paragraph just about says it all. Vidal never wrote anything to compare with I, Claudius (or — more his level — Ancient Evenings), and he doesn’t belong in the same company as Christopher Hitchens.
he quoted Latin ad nauseam — and nearly always with his nouns and adjectives not just in the wrong cases (especially the confusion of the accusative and ablative in preposition phrases), but predictably in the fashion of those who like to copy down Latin phrases but cannot read a complete Latin sentence.
Now, now, now. But he no doubt deserves it. Er…ahem…don’t you mean dative not ablative, unless it’s an ablative absolute construction? Am I bluffing? No, it’s just long, long ago.
ECCE!
(….how do ya like that?)
Those thousands (…and counting..) of subtle (to me) Latin verb tenses with their terrible, long names containing such mysterious words will ever remain one of the deeper, darker mysteries of this student’s life, …..mine….now so hoary and ancient of days. Sigh.
Oh, woe, woe….a parent’s tears on the telephone with Miss Quick at Calvin Coolidge High school…..
Miss Quick, yes, that was actually her name, used to look, squinting, down her long nose at me in her tenth grade Latin Class (circa 1948) wondering how I ever made it that far, then I had to take it a second time in Summer School. Did slightly better with a less intimidating Teacher.
“Omnium Gallium(-ia?)in tres partes divisa est.”
…..sigh.
Ecce homo! Eek!
A, ab, absque….
corum, de…
sine, hunc, ex and e…
Two or three tries and it’s a real foot-tapper if pronounced with…uhm… a Ciceronian cadence, ‘buoyed along by a powerful sprung rhythm’ (Think I once said that in an ancient exam about Ovid when it should have been about Gerard Manley Hopkins, which is no way to get an A, and I didn’t).
Heaven help me, I do cling to the dative idea still…
“nearly always with his nouns and adjectives not just in the wrong cases (especially the confusion of the accusative and ablative in preposition phrases), but predictably in the fashion of those who like to copy down Latin phrases but cannot read a complete Latin” paragraph.
That’s very irregular. Does “ablative” have something to do with heat-shielding designed to be shed from space capsules on re-entry? :B-)
I am also guilty as charged, after 2 years and a smidgeon more of struggling with Latin classes in 9th and 10th (dropped out at the U because I couldn’t make the mile plus run from the science/math corner to the humanities corner or back in the time allowed after the class location was moved). I had signed up for Latin in rebellion after the mandatory year of Spanish (most of which I quickly flushed from memory).
Miss Hazard (yes, she had won the county contest as a teen in Eastern Kentucky) and Mrs. Balsley (who also kept the high school running, though she was not the official principal) were task-mistresses, criticizing our every error to the point most of us were terrorized (including the medieval Catholic – “fish-eater” – faction in the class). (The Peace Corpse returnee was more easy-giong, but would threaten us with lessons in Swahili on especially bad days, or we would try to act out portions of Caesar’s wars. They had trouble keeping teachers with just the right niche combinations for our small school district, and gave up on offering Latin a year later.) At the least we quickly learned not to rely on the inter-line translations and Cliff’s Notes that were widely available.
Each night it would take me several hours to translate, and translate back, and translate back again (round-trip plus), our 10-12 exercise sentences in an effort to catch all of my mistakes… But I never trusted myself, and second-guessed to the last second as I wrote the sentence the teacher randomly assigned, on the board… only to be humiliated again by some glitch that was obvious once she’d mentioned it. (It would help learners a great deal if the dictionaries and conjugated verb books would give up trying to abbreviate and list out all the forms of all the verbs and nouns and adjectives and adverbs clearly, but the habit disappointingly seems to be carrying over to the on-line materials.)
It helped me greatly with Italian and German, though, and, with a custom glossary for the subject-area (e.g. Ludwig von Mises _Human Action_ is certainly much easier with his grad students’ specialized multi-language glossary), I can manage to get the gist of a few words of Greek and Hebrew. (French was a total loss. Was the language cobbled together by aliens from outer space? All those unpronounced letters, and subtle shades of pronunciation from strings of vowels all sounded the same to me are worse than the seemingly infinite irregular forms.) But I do still enjoy finding the occasional apt phrase from any language and put those gems that I scrounge into my quote collection, so that I can subject others to them when the occasion arises. In Hebrew, “netzach” means both persistance and victory. Dum spiro, spero.
“Er…ahem…don’t you mean dative not ablative, unless it’s an ablative absolute construction?”
Quick grammar for non-Latin speakers:
Latin has “cases”, which are, more or less, bolt-on endings to nouns to show if they’re a subject, direct object, indirect object, whatever (we usually use word order instead, except Yoda).
Prepositions in Latin are like jigsaw pieces that can only connect to nouns in one case or another. Ante, “before”, can only bond to nouns in the accusative:
CORRECT: “ante bellum” (ante + bellum, “war”, in the accusative)
INCORRECT: “ante bello” (ante + bello, “war” in the dative)
So what I think VDH is referring to here is that one way you can tell that someone is a poser wanting to look clever by using Latin if he uses prepositions with nouns they shouldn’t “stick” to because they’re in the wrong case.
Very, very, very, very common example from law: There is the old proverb “de minimis lex non curat”, “the law does not care about little things”. (Which means that, say, a lawsuit will not be thrown out because you got somebody’s middle initial wrong somewhere in a brief.)
“Minimis” is the dative form of minimus, “little thing”, because de, “concerning”, won’t bond to it otherwise. However, it is extremely commonly miswritten as “de minimus” by lawyers and judges, probably because Latin words are just supposed to end with “us”.
Hey, Tarquin, you done us proud. I can push the boat out a tad further, maybe:
VDH gives an example: ad nauseam is (possibly, though don’t bet the ranch) a prepositional adverbial phrase ‘taking’ the accusative not the ablative. ‘Ad’ in the context means ‘in the direction of’. An ablative usage would be ‘by, with or from’ nausea — which may be where Mr. Sassoon, I mean, Mr. Vidal stuck in the mud. The normal dative would translate as ‘to or for’, hence my confusion. Ditto with ad hominem (vaguely recall the word is 3rd declension but the dative/ablative forms are elusive — homini, homine? Hominy? – no, that’s grits). So it goes, or as we say in at our most porcissimus, sic ita. Phew, need a drink …better… Hitchens would know, damn him.
As for the judges and lawyers and the ‘they all look alike to me’ minimus problem….
There was a lawyer named Rex
Ill-versed in matters of sex,
When arraigned for exposure,
He said with composure
De minimis non curat lex.
A real knee-slapper, eh? My, those jurisprudes.
We can safely guess WiseLatina would be a bit scratchy, don’t you think?
Noooooobody has mentioned “veni,vedi,vici…”
……..sigh, “You’re welcome, Miss Quick!”
<;-D
“Veni, Vader, Vinci”
“I came, I choked everyone I saw, I conquered”
Well, you kind of asked for it …
.
>>>> Noooooobody has mentioned “veni,vedi,vici…”
I always presumed they just got the ordering on that wrong…
“Veni, Vici, Vedi”…
You mean there’s something else wrong with it?
8^D
.
.
Dangit, I hate when I mess up a joke and can’t cover it up with an edit or even just “delete” it…
:-S
—————–
>>>> Noooooobody has mentioned “veni,vedi,vici…”
I always presumed they just got the ordering on that wrong…
“Vedi, Vici, Veni”…
—————–
Now, it should make some sense.
DOH!
:^D
.
Dangit, I hate when I mess up a joke and can’t cover it up with an edit or even just “delete” it…
:-S
—————–
>>>> Noooooobody has mentioned “veni,vedi,vici…”
I always presumed they just got the ordering on that wrong…
“Vedi, Vici, Veni”…
—————–
Now, it should make some sense.
DOH!
:^D
Can’t help pointing out that “minimis” when it’s following the preposition “de” is definitely ablative.
All datives and ablatives plural are identical (i.e., ending in -is or -ibus or -ebus, depending on their declension).
Hansen’s point was that a preposition governs either the accusative or the ablative case form of the noun, and so if you actually understand the language, you’ll know which ending belongs there. (There aren’t any prepositions that take the dative, in Latin.)
What a fantastically evocative essay from VDH! How I would love to read a memoir from him! What an enviable milieu he grew up in–what he mentioned of his parents and his mother’s sister indicates that they were people to learn a lot from, as he obviously did.
So the key word is ‘preposition’. Awesome, Suzanne, majestic even! You sound like you may teach it still, which is wonderful. As for myself, can’t decide whether to be glad or appalled at having remembered some of it down the decades. Glad, I think.
With that thought having been thunk, may it be the last time any of us fret about ablative constructions…
Writing came to me late in my life, and quite accidentally. I am 53-years-old, and I published my first article last year.
In August of 2008, a 48’ tractor-trailer crushed me against a wall at a printing company where I worked as the General Manager. Banging my head against the brick did something to the intricacies of my brain. For one thing, my allergies went away. I also found I could remember many things long forgotten, which is truly a most precious gift.
My recovery was lengthy — for many months, my life consisted of going to work, doing as much as I could, vomiting and going home. With nothing else to do, I started to read everything available. I discovered authors like James Taranto and Mr. Hanson. I now read everything they publish, at least everything in the public domain.
Eventually, I was fired from my position — the owner of the company wasn’t happy watching me suffer so. Afterward, by giving me poor references, he made sure that any job offer I received was rescinded.
Thereafter, my health deteriorated significantly, and slowly losing the battle with pain, many days I didn’t leave my home.
One dark day, I read one of Mr. Hanson’s articles and decided to try to write one myself. I now use writing as therapy, even though I can only do it sporadically, when I am not self-consumed. I have published a couple of dozen articles since June of 2011.
I have never met or spoken to Mr. Hanson. Yet, he has done me and “act of kindness” by being there to read. I credit him with whatever I write — his stories about his life, as well as his sanity about politics and America today, gave me the focus I needed to redirect the path of my life.
I had acquired a desire to say something — and I think I do, uniquely, if not always well.
You write well.
It occurred to me that VDH has the talent and the insight to write the quintessential Grapes of Wrath on the changes to and decline of California’s Central Valley.
He paints vivid pictures in the reader’s mind which, I would assume, partly stems from his humanity. And his humility.
I was thinking the same thing. He does paint vivid pictures, but for some reason I was imagining his depictions of the Volvo, the farmhouse and his cast of famous lodgers-and even more interesting family members- in black and white, not color. There is the skeleton of several books in this brief essay-a memoir, a novel, perhaps several short stories. VDH writes with passion-and compassion.
I think that many of us owe Dr. Hanson gratitude for his (print) examples of triumph of reason of fashion; his skewering of Leftist causes by showing the same foibles through history…and their ugly demise. I found his writings about ten years ago and have avidly followed him since.
I’m struck by his humility and genuine curiosity. I recall lamenting to my wife that we should go attend his lecture-cruise to Greece–but we could never afford it. And though the cost has likely declined, the danger has gone up.
You sir, are a good writer and, if you publish in the same venues as Dr. Hanson, I’ve likely read your work. I’m sure that one day you’ll prove as encouraging to a new writer as Dr. Hanson was to you. And so on…
That’s a great story!
The many times I witnessed Buckley dismantle Vidol with, as the old adage goes, both hands tied behind his back, I realized the vast difference between intelligence used wisely and intelligence wasted. Both were prima donas but at least with Buckley you were given the opportunity to witness an honest intellecual discuss an issue with facts and accuracy vs. a dishonest intellectual who found delight in denigrating everyone around him so he could justify his self-indulging sense of superiority.
Couldn’t stand the uber-smug “attitude”, that acquired stuffy English accent, and those ever-arched eyebrows…soooo archly…. of that Buckley-self-icon.
He and that social climbing, acerbic Gore Vidal deserved each other.
Both with good, very sharp minds…sharpness personified, that’s not a compliment….but it’s a shame their brains couldn’t have been channeled into something actually worthwhile, as opposed to merely playing with words, and name dropping.
Thank you.
Watching Buckley on PBS in Pittsburgh as a young kid, Vidal would make that face, as if a very sour prune had been eaten, when Mr Buckley skewered him. At that young age I could determine who the facile twit was in that conversation.
I couldn’t read Gore Vidal either, the few times I tried
After Lily Tomlin’s pretend conversation with him (snorting into her headset on Laugh-In), I could never hear his name again without thinking of what Ernestine called him, Gorey Veetle.
Mr. Davis, What a wonderful childhood you had.
I see now why the Hansons were so smart, what company they had! I would love to read the story of Rod Serling, whom I think is America’s finest creator of television.
There is nothing more insufferable than an effete phony intellectual snob; however, the gifted people of Stanford and the Silicon Valley are trying desperately to take the lead. If you by chance work in the area or spend time there and you are not caught up in the endemic admiration of self, you will recognize the attitude.
How fortunate Dr Hanson was to grow up in a family of accomplished and honorable people with rural values; herein is the primary reason his family and later Dr. Hanson clashed with Vidal, and why, years later, Dr Hanson appreciated the humility and wit of Mr. Keegan.
This essay was a heart-warming story with deeper messages for all those who choose to look for them.
Yes, it does sound like a wonderful childhood, but where has that family gone that might hold out against the barbarian hordes? We all have our personal ups and downs, but right now, VDH seems to be fighting a one-man battle.
Back in the day, I was much more of a Mailer fan (Armies of the Night” and “On the Steps of the Pentagon,”) than Buckley or Vidal, but Mailer turned out to be a disappointment, both literarily and personally. Vidal hung in there somewhat better. I enjoyed “Lincoln,”"Burr,” and “Palimpsest,” but have yet to tackle “1876.” A relatively recent Keegan on WWI sits on a shelf somewhere. So many books, so little time.
“Vidal hung in there somewhat better.”
Really now D-White. What’s next, more Wasilla remembrances with “Flesh For Fantasy”, and a Romney vote?
Hope and Change.
Well, if you really need to go down that road, read Mailer’s “A Prisoner of Sex.”
What, that “prison” Hope and Change?
How about some of that really nasty Rand stuff?
Professor Hanson, thanks for lightening up this Monday morning.
How could Ansell Adams have “railed all evening” against James Watt in the 1960s? He was working for the US Chamber of Commerce then — would Adams have even known who he was? He did not become Secretary of the Interior until 1980.
Perhaps the James Watt who Ansel Adams deplored was the one who invented the steam engine in the middle of the 18th century? Although why that James Watt should be deplored by a photographer is not obvious to me…..
Ansel Adams, nature photographer, might have had an obvious bone to pick with James Watt, father of the Industrial Revolution.
These are beautiful remembrances.
Oh yyaa!!!!!!!!!!!
Wonderful essay and obituaries. (Should it not be “foreword” in “Would you like me to write the forward? “)
The story of forming a connection with Keegan makes me think of another struggling author with an unpublished story about war. His name is Wolfgang Samuel and his first story was his own childhood experiences in the final months of WWII and the subsequent occupation of Germany. He likes to tell how Stephen Ambrose read his manuscript and get it published by the University of Mississippi Press.
“16. Chas Clifton
How could Ansell Adams have “railed all evening” against James Watt in the 1960s? He was working for the US Chamber of Commerce then — would Adams have even known who he was? He did not become Secretary of the Interior until 1980.”
It was probably the 18th century Scottish James Watt (q.v.).
Both Vidal and Buckley were polemicists. I believe that Vidal was the better writer and that both his essays and his novels will outlast Buckley’s. They were both television entertainers with similarly bitchy manners, but Vidal was less circumscribed by the week’s ephemeral journalism and he had a more consistent world-view than Buckley. John Keegan, on the other hand, was a historian, which is a totally different beast from a journalist. His works will be used and relied on for as long as people have an interest in war, especially in the wars of the 20th century.
Thank you for commemorating John Keegan, professor. I have all of his popular books, like so many of the readers here. I agree that his style was majestic (rather than magisterial). He will be greatly missed. I’m also in accord with you regarding not missing any more of Vidal. I admit to finding his writing precious and self-conscious, and I don’t recall ever finding anything he wrote illuminating. Elaborate snark is still snark (what an ugly but necessary word). With Vidal, you never glimpsed poignant truths about the human condition, as you do with novelists of enduring power or great plkaywrights. You saw only Vidal.
Incidentally, I did like Count Belisarius. Sorry about that.
Vidal was a mean tinker.
He liked being hated; he hated being irrelevant.
Well, sign me up for hating Vidal. While hate is understandably discouraged, it should be reserved for the deserving. I remember him raising funds, writing essays and making personal appearances on behalf of NAMBLA – the North American Man-Boy Love Association. So, he not only loved being hated, he richly deserved it. The unfortunate part is that he was also irrelevant. Well, maybe not so much now, with the forthcoming arrival of homosexual marriage as a new national norm. What a guy.
Sorry to read that, I have read Keegan’s works, Face of Battle and The History of Warfare, and some of your works, The Western Way…and Culture and Carnage, and learned much. Read Vidal’s Burr a long time ago, can’t say I remember anything about the experience, but thanks for putting him, Vidal, in his social context.
Vidal was truly an odious fellow. I spent a day with him when he ran for the Senate in California, a flight into delusion remarkable even for him. After losing to Jerry Brown, he went off to live in Italy with a man that he always denied was his lover. He seems to have felt shame about being homosexual despite all the bluster. He claimed to be bisexual, like everyone else, he insisted, if they were only honest about it. He assumed a majesterial silence on his way to and from campaign events, speaking only to answer questions. The picture of lofty conceit and arch arrogance lacked only the monocle on a string to be complete. His only spontaneous moment was when the driver turned the wrong way down a one-way street in San Jose. “As Queen Victoria said,” he cried, “close your eyes and think of England.” He was briefly exhilarated, the only time he seemed honest. He thought of himself as a modern Oscar Wilde and some of his work compares favorably. I read one or two of his historical novels and thought them good until thinking about them later. They were clever rather than good. He was right about Pearl Harbor and FDR, however. “The world,” as someone put it, “is a grayer place without his sneer.”
I will give Vidal one thing: during his primary campaign against Jerry Brown (the incumbent) Vidal called Jerry a very clever thing. Brown at the time was beset with a scandal involving fruit flies. Brown and his allies couldn’t bring themselves to spray, so they instead imported millions of infertile flies from some supplier in Asia someplace (if memory serves correctly) and released them, with the intent of rendering the flies that were already here extinct, because the existing flies would mate with the infertile ones, of course, and then all the flies would die out.
Except of course the infertile flies turned out to be fertile, and so they had many more flies than they otherwise would have had. The agricultural community (normally Democrats but way to conservative to be very friendly with Jerry anyway) erupted in anger and vituperation towards Brown, and he had to institute helicopter-mounted spraying pretty much everywhere in the state that things could grow, just to stop the flies and the protests. I still remember the helicopters buzzing my house at 3 am.
Vidal’s nickname for Brown, in the aftermath of this? “The Lord of the Flies”
I think the voters weren’t sophisticated enough to get it. Brown won the primary, then lost the Senate Race to Pete Wilson.
VDH describes a family whose members were being trained to be free, virtuous Americans fit for our republican form of government. They worked very hard, supported themselves, were moral, and had a strong sense of the common good.
How many of us are raising children fit for freedom today?
Those of us, like Prof. Hanson and myself, who admire John Keegan and dislike Gore Vidal, should nevertheless acknowledge that Vidal went to war in the US Navy for three years in the Pacific, and Keegan never served (he was
very ill as a child and was unfit for service). It doesn’t change much but I do salute everyone who served in WWII.
I also honor everyone who served in WWII, and every other war, but as you point out, Keegan was too sick to serve in the military. And not to take anything away from Vidal or anyone else who was in harm’s way , but WWII was the last war that EVERYONE from all classes served. Few dodged that conflict, far fewer publicly. Movie stars and Major League baseball players signed up and encouraged others to as well. Howard Zinn served, so did George McGovern. Gore Vidal went, and should be honored along with all the others. But he was a still a terrible person and an over-rated writer.
In a joint tribute to Vidal and Buckley, Sam Tanenhaus observed in the New York Times that they both came out of the Taft Republican isolationist tradition, which is not without precedent. (In “The Colonel,” his life of the Chicago Tribune’s Robert McCormick, Richard Norton Smith reprinted an attack on NATO and the Marshall Plan that could have been made by George McGovern.)
But Tanenhaus left out something important.
Say what you like about the rest of Buckley’s politics (asked by R. Emmett Tyrell Jr. why, if he called himself a conservative now, he didn’t back in the 60s or 70s, Joseph Epstein said to look at National Review for those years. Works for me). But Buckley evidently did a lot to marginalize anti-Semitism on the mainstream American right, and Vidal did his little bit to legitimize it on the left.
What a fascinating portrait of two very different individuals. Thank you for your insights, Dr. Hanson–though I have to say I’m sitting here somewhat green with envy over your opportunity to meet so many famous (or infamous) personalities.
I was never able to read Vidal, I’m afraid. He could be witty, I think, but he wasn’t nearly as witty as he thought he was, and he always seemed off-puttingly smug. Rest in peace, Mr. Vidal, but I’m afraid my mourning will be perfunctory at best . . .
I agree about his smugness, but “Lincoln” and “Burr” are good historical novels, and probably easier to get through than “A Team of Rivals.” It surprised me, given his superciliousness, how relatively straightforward the books were as history, both real and imagined.
Wow. Fascinating anecdotes from Dr. Hanson.
I thought that Gore Vidal died a long time ago. Whatevs.
John Keegan- I confess I wasn’t a fan but since Dr. Hanson says nice things about him I feel I should reconsider. Peter Green- nice to see reference of him if only for his fiction which I have not read.
VDH says: “A far better man — in both the ethical and literary sense — died this last week, Sir. John Keegan.”
Historian David Irving sued historian Deborah Lipstadt for calling him a Holocaust denier. A trial ensued in which Keegan, under protest, was called. Keegan testified that he admired Irving’s work, except for the issue of whether Hitler knew about the Holocaust. A small thing like that.
Keegan wrote of his Irving infatuation in the Daily Telegraph (Daily Telegraph (UK) ISSUE 1783 Wednesday 12 April 2000):
He is a large, strong, handsome man, excellently dressed, with the appearance of a leading QC. He performs as well as a QC also, asking, in a firm but courteous voice, precise questions which demonstrate his detailed knowledge of an enormous body of material.
Keegan compared the two:
Prof Lipstadt, by contrast, seems as dull as only the self-righteously politically correct can be. Few other historians had ever heard of her before this case. Most will not want to hear from her again. Mr Irving, if he will only learn from this case, still has much that is interesting to tell us.
Keegan was a snob, a moral midget, and a fool. Too bad VDH doesn’t know, in this case, his history.
Many, many works of both Keegan and Hanson proudly grace my shelves. Not a single work of Vidal is here although I vaguely recall discarding 1 or 2 of his paperbacks years ago. Closest to my heart are Hanson’s books on the agricultural world and the moral education that comes from being a son of the soil. When a youngster, I helped with our 40 head of registered angus back in Oklahoma. Pigs and chickens rounded out the ‘ranch’ that was operated for purposes of my father’s taxes. It’s wasn’t ‘real agriculture’ but I submit that the moral education for a youngster was identical – especially as Dad subcontracted much work to real local farmers and I saw the respect that he gave these men whose clothes were stained with transmission fluid and so forth. I am proud of that education. Sorry I missed your hike last Sat, Victor – I was going to be there but had to teach a seminar for a political party. Next year, I am hoping!
“I confess this is the first time in my life I will break the old Hellenic rule: ton tethnvêkota mê kakologein (speak no ill of the dead). That Vidal was a cruel person is no excuse for not refraining from criticism after his recent death, but here I sin nonetheless.”
This evokes something I ran across recently, possibly on this site, from “JPL17,” who posted:
“Sorry, but when it comes to Gore Vidal, my mother taught me only to speak good of the dead. He’s dead. Good.”
I was unaware of John Keegan’s passing until reading this column. Wonderful commentary. His books are of a few that remain on my shelf. An engaging speaker as well. Might have been a Brian Lamb interview with him about his book “Intelligence In War” that served as my introduction to him. Never really paid much attention to anyone named Gore.
163390 263231This article gives the light in which we can observe the reality. This is very nice one and gives in-depth information. Thanks for this nice article. 46444