I haven’t read any of his books, only his occasional articles, but I like Christopher Hitchens because, on one hand, he’s liberal in thought, and throws around adjectives like Promethean and Sophoclean, which sound better in his plum British accent, and he’s so intelligent that he made me feel slightly stupid by merely sharing a room with me, even though he was the one wearing bright red socks.
On the other hand, he’s conservative in thought (on record for supporting the war in Iraq, for instance) and occasionally strives to lose his female constituency. So he’s an intellectual, surpassing labels of convenience and unwilling to leave any serious thought or position unconsidered. The man loves an argument. That’s cool, but it makes for a rambling-ass lecture. I stopped by the New York Historical Society tonight to hear him talk about Thomas Paine, counselor to Jefferson and Founding Father footnote of Common Sense (which pressured and inspired the Declaration of Independence), “These are the times that try men’s souls” and little else.
Hitchens recommended additional points for Paine’s legacy. He wrote the first real secular manifestos, establishing himself as a speaker for a newly literate working class that was interested in science and technology. He was also the first person to use the word “democratic” as a compliment. He argued the American Revolution would be stronger without slavery.
Paine wasn’t a racist, opposed the death penalty, and held that “religion is a trick” and “the Bible, manmade,” even though he wasn’t an atheist, which Hitchens admitted prevented him from claiming Paine as his own. Paradoxically, Paine was also held dear by classic conservatives like Ronald Regan, who quoted the politician.
Perhaps this was because Paine was more a voice of a social force than a guy you could sew a label on; Hitchens confirmed Paine wasn’t after establishing a legacy, as were many of the Founding Fathers, merely a guy with a certain school of thought in the right place at the right time.
The Q&A session went on and on with Hitchens deeply engaged. I awaited the requisite idiot question but it took time because the average age of the audience was 50 and the average profession was “collegiate political science professor with tenure.” These guys could not ask their questions under a minute if you held a gun to their head and demanded it and Hitchens’ erudite answers, during which he would often start debating himself, were usually too complicated for me to fathom. At last, a chirpy woman mentioned that a town in New Jersey is erecting a statue to Paine (“excellent,” deadpanned Hitchens as he fiddled with his glasses) and what would Paine blog about today if he were a blogger? Hitchens waved away the question by dismissing blogs and the ’net in general as “a thief of time.”
Oh so true.
Things got exciting again when a question arose about Paine’s attitudes toward women. “He just didn’t have a light touch with the ladies at all,” said Hitchens, carefully and charitably, adding that Paine didn’t treat women seriously, like many early politicians. A couple in the audience shouted, “What about Aaron Burr?” and a bunch of people nearby were all like, “Yeah! What about Aaron Burr?” But by this point the crowd had already worn out its welcome and probably the old guy who locks up the society at night was tired because it was past his bedtime, so they wrapped it up and Hitchens attempted to continue answering questions even though the audience had been directed to applaud at him.