Cultural Capital

Reflections on books and the arts from the New Statesman culture desk

Words in Pictures: Christopher Hitchens

The polemicist tries to explain why women aren’t funny.

By Mike Sweeney Published 28 May 2010 17:43

This week's magazine features an acerbic review of Christopher Hitchens's memoirs by his one-time comrade Terry Eagleton.

Readers unfamiliar with the iconoclastic journalist might find the piece a little harsh -- so this week's Words in Pictures clip features the "Oedipal child of the establishment" himself, as Eagleton puts it, in typically provocative mode:

The video relates to a piece that Hitchens wrote for Vanity Fair magazine in January 2007, entitled "Why women aren't funny". If the title is not a clear enough clue to his argument, here is an excerpt:

My argument doesn't say that there are no decent women comedians. There are more terrible female comedians than there are terrible male comedians, but there are some impressive ladies out there.

Most of them, though, when you come to review the situation, are hefty or dykey or Jewish, or some combo of the three.

In April 2008, some of America's top female comedians, including Tina Fey, Sarah Silverman and Amy Poehler, hit back with an article of their own.

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

Tags: Christopher Hitchens

More from Mike Sweeney

2 comments

Sat, 2010-05-29 11:50 — Daniel Castor (not verified)

Is this video meant to make people understand Eagleton's bile? Is it assumed we'll all see Hitchens' argument as somehow horrid?

I don't get it - he makes an arguable but understandable point well if with a cockiness which is to his credit. Some will like it, some won't. How does it explain anything?

The main question is what was the point in the NS getting a guy who hates Hitchens to review his book? Eagleton didn't like it?! Shock horror! We know what he'll say already and as a review it's near pointless.

Maybe you could do two together in future, have the one pointless but high-profile piece (where someone who hates the author has a hissy fit), then have the one which will tell us about the book? Or are we to expect this diametric views reviews approach for eva...

Wed, 2010-06-23 00:05 — Andrew Williams (not verified)

There is surely only reason why those at the New Statesman chose to provide a link to this video clip. It is because they knew that the negative review went too far. Indeed the above text appears to admit it.

Hitchens is easy to dislike. Personally I doubt that I'd enjoy a pint in his company. His Memoirs also suffer from the same defect as his debating style by labelling so many contrary views in outrageously negative terms - evil, deplorable etc. But his world outlook is based on a moral code whixh many would do well to heed. Further, as this book shows, his outspoken views are based on a combination of intelligence, a detailed knowledge of history and more first hand experience of most places on earth than almost any of us can boast.