Rating: 
Summary: Saint Orwell, or Eric is always right
Review: ...or almost always right. Welcome to Christopher Hitchens' paean to his hero. Let's look at the virtues of this polemic in praise of everybody's favorite Socialist. Hitchens is his usual sharp and amusing self, and he covers a wide number of areas in his defense of Orwell. He claims for Orwell a special prescience in three areas, in opposing imperialism, fascism and communism. He challenges Orwell's leftist critics, such as Edward Said, Salman Rushdie, Isaac Deutscher, while reserving special animus against Raymond Williams. At the same time he criticizes those who would claim Orwell for the COMMENTARY right, most especially the egregious Norman Podheretz, but also noting Orwell's difficulties with T.S. Eliot in the publication of "Animal Farm", and the way he criticized James Burnham for power worship. Then we're off to looking at Orwell's views on America and the UK, where Hitchens seeks to show that Orwell was not a simple minded British patriot. Then we get a chapter of Orwell's views on women, the controversial list of fellow travellers he gave to the British government, and the quality of his novels. Finally Hitchens praises Orwell for the clarity of his writing, in contrast to Adorno and Claude Simon, and ends with a coda about Auden.Hitchens provides much in defense of his hero. He quotes a pompously obtuse attack by John Major that must be read to be believed. He quotes the best passage from "Keep the Aspidistra Flying" where the protagonist bookseller gushes insincerely about the "Englishness" of Galsworthy and Priestly. Hitchens does admit his hero a few flaws. Orwell did have a prejudice against homosexuals, and he was willfully obtuse about Auden's "Spain", where it is obvious that Auden is using "necessary murder" in irony. The early novels all have serious flaws, and Orwell was not entirely comfortable in his attitude towards women. However, Hitchens points out that Orwell was so fair minded that he sought to change a passage in "Animal Farm" that he thought was unfair to Stalin. Reservations? Oh yes. At one point Hitchens says that while he is defending Orwell from his critics he also seeks to save Orwell from his saccharine admirers. He objects to calling Orwell a saint for two reasons. First, Hitchens is a very vehement atheist. Second, and more important, Orwell, in his essay on Gandhi, famously said that saints should be considered guilty until proven innocent, and Hitchens would prefer a more lenient standard of judgement. For a start, Hitchens is extremely unfair to Claude Simon, who appears as a deceitful fellow traveller, on the basis of a few uncomplimentary passages of one chapter of one novel, The Georgics, an extremely complex and difficult novel that should not be judged this way. He sneers at Simon's style (based on Faulkner's) and makes the witless comment that Simon is trying to describe the thought processes of a man he never met (someone call the National Guard! Tolstoy and Joyce and practicing telepathy without a licence!) He describes Simon's admirers as "pseudo-intellectuals" which does not seem to me a fair way of describing Roger Shattuck or Martin Seymour-Smith. Another problem. At one point Hitchens notes Orwell occasionally made callous and insensitive comments about Jews, but he doesn't quote any. Compare this in contrast to the insinuations he made against Richard Crossman in "For the Sake of Argument." It is hard to believe that if Crossman had made the obtusely misogynist comment Orwell made in his essay on George Gissing, Hitchens would let it go unmentioned. Nor does it appear to me that if Crossman had made the list Orwell did, Hitchens would assume it was done out of the highest of motives. About Orwell's prescience, Hitchens himself admits that Orwell himself was so disgusted with the Popular Front, that he opposed fighting Hitler up to the Nazi-Soviet pact. And in praising Orwell as a brave anti-communist of the left, in the tradition of Serge and Souvarine, Hitchens emphasises his marginality and unpopularity. But what about the anti-communism of Ebert and Noske, Faure and Bevin? This would not make Orwell look so brave, or so heroic. And one wonders whether the mainstream press will give Helen Graham's upcoming book on the Spanish Republic the same attention that they give this book. Hitchens praises Orwell for his support of European Union, but would he have been so enthusiastic about the EEC in the fifties when the three main countries, France, Italy and Germany were dominated by political Catholicism? I can't help adding that the essay Hitchens mentions about Mark Twain was not as long, or as complimentary, or as insightful as Hitchens suggests. Nor do I believe that Orwell's statement that he could never hate Hitler was as perceptive as Hitchens claims. Among the admirers of Orwell one often encounters a double standard: your (feminist, ethnic) objections are petty and sectarian and should be ignored for the good of the common struggle; while my objections (against vegetarians and sandal wearers) reflect my high moral tone and the strength and purity of my convictions. They are not subject to compromise. Against those who criticize Orwell for encouraging apathy, Hitchens portrays him a matchless figure of unquestionable independence. Yet in Hitchens' writing one finds little discussion of strategic and tactical questions. What one does find is a tendency to fixate on certain figures: Paine, Marx, Trotsky, Luxembourg, Debs, Serge, Mandela, Orwell himself. This is not a politics: it is an atheist's martyrology. And it is not enough, especially in praise of someone who was most things to most people.
Rating: 
Summary: a brilliant book
Review: a brilliant book by one of the few writers capable of writing in the Orwell tradition.
Rating: 
Summary: Very interesting book
Review: Although not as well-read as other reviewers here, I do have some comments that I hope are interesting. First you should check out the online discussions with Hitchens which are archived at andrewsullivan.com. Second, one thing that just struck me while reading some of the reviews was that Hitchens made it clear (without being very explicit) that Orwell didn't let his rejection of imperialism descend into rejection of his own country or the Western tradition. I think a lot of today's left could ponder this to their benefit. To me Orwell shows that one may be totally committed to the truth (something else today's left should ponder) while having a quite definite political philosophy and fighting against racism, etc. Telling the truth is not incompatible with fighting for what you believe in. Not being able to tell the truth is why any non-white totalitarian is immediately accepted and defended by the left. One can make the same charge against the right, but I think the case is a bit different here.
Rating:
Summary: Thought provoking and not what you expect.....
Review: Christopher Hitchens is one of my favorite authors, albeit from a misunderstood "liberal" bent whose books and past writings in The Nation and newer pieces in Vanity Fair I relish. So when I saw him on C-SPAN and other shows discussing his new book Why Orwell Matters I was made more more curious and curious as the hours went on and vowed that the book would be moved to the top of my "must order this week" list. And true to form Mr Hitchens does not disappoint. He gives the reader meat to chew on, which means I would read a chapter and then think upon what I had read, then the next chapter, and found that Orwell came alive to me. He became a man unlike the images liberals as well as conservatives had painted over the years. I especially was intrigued with his views on feminists which I realize are much the same as mine. And I realized that the often paraphrased sayings about the young being liberal and the older we become the more conservative, seem to mirror Orwells life in many ways. Many of us were taught that he was anti-business and anti-American and neither seems to be true. And I loved reading that Orwell admitted in many ways that he wrote based upon his place in life be it poor or better off financially. And as noted on page 174" that Orwell treasured certain 'bourgeois' values because he thought they might come in handy as revolutionary ones". Guess visions of Hollywood liberals came to mind, where one lives well and has money yet denounces non-liberals who have the same benefits. If you are the least bit interested in authors lives and times this is a book you probably would enjoy and hopefully come away from, feeling better educated or informed.
Rating:
Summary: Thought provoking and not what you expect.....
Review: Christopher Hitchens is one of my favorite authors, albeit from a misunderstood "liberal" bent whose books and past writings in The Nation and newer pieces in Vanity Fair I relish. So when I saw him on C-SPAN and other shows discussing his new book Why Orwell Matters I was made more more curious and curious as the hours went on and vowed that the book would be moved to the top of my "must order this week" list. And true to form Mr Hitchens does not disappoint. He gives the reader meat to chew on, which means I would read a chapter and then think upon what I had read, then the next chapter, and found that Orwell came alive to me. He became a man unlike the images liberals as well as conservatives had painted over the years. I especially was intrigued with his views on feminists which I realize are much the same as mine. And I realized that the often paraphrased sayings about the young being liberal and the older we become the more conservative, seem to mirror Orwells life in many ways. Many of us were taught that he was anti-business and anti-American and neither seems to be true. And I loved reading that Orwell admitted in many ways that he wrote based upon his place in life be it poor or better off financially. And as noted on page 174" that Orwell treasured certain 'bourgeois' values because he thought they might come in handy as revolutionary ones". Guess visions of Hollywood liberals came to mind, where one lives well and has money yet denounces non-liberals who have the same benefits. If you are the least bit interested in authors lives and times this is a book you probably would enjoy and hopefully come away from, feeling better educated or informed.
Rating:
Summary: Thought provoking and not what you expect.....
Review: Christopher Hitchens is one of my favorite authors, albeit from a misunderstood "liberal" bent whose books and past writings in The Nation and newer pieces in Vanity Fair I relish. So when I saw him on C-SPAN and other shows discussing his new book Why Orwell Matters I was made more more curious and curious as the hours went on and vowed that the book would be moved to the top of my "must order this week" list. And true to form Mr Hitchens does not disappoint. He gives the reader meat to chew on, which means I would read a chapter and then think upon what I had read, then the next chapter, and found that Orwell came alive to me. He became a man unlike the images liberals as well as conservatives had painted over the years. I especially was intrigued with his views on feminists which I realize are much the same as mine. And I realized that the often paraphrased sayings about the young being liberal and the older we become the more conservative, seem to mirror Orwells life in many ways. Many of us were taught that he was anti-business and anti-American and neither seems to be true. And I loved reading that Orwell admitted in many ways that he wrote based upon his place in life be it poor or better off financially. And as noted on page 174" that Orwell treasured certain 'bourgeois' values because he thought they might come in handy as revolutionary ones". Guess visions of Hollywood liberals came to mind, where one lives well and has money yet denounces non-liberals who have the same benefits. If you are the least bit interested in authors lives and times this is a book you probably would enjoy and hopefully come away from, feeling better educated or informed.
Rating:
Summary: Great Subject by the Wrong Author
Review: George Orwell is a worthy topic. This is an era that begs for reminders of his ethics and values. However, it's also typical of this era of decadent and deceitful journalism that the book on Why Orwell Matters is written by Christopher Hitchens, a purported journalist whose McCarthyite abuse of slander and biased and misleading language to malign his opponents would be soundly condemned by Orwell. Of course, Hitchens may be indulging in the same error that lead Orwell to spy on and inform on his friends and colleagues -- turning them in to military intelligence. That is the one and only place where Hitchens and Orwell overlap in values, ethics and behavior. Of course, Orwell recanted and regretted his sins -- but Hitchens revels in them. That's the problem with this book. It's impossible to separate what is a relatively well-written book from the knowledge that the author is a liar, a propagandist and a practicioner of the worst sort of commentary -- calling it journalism is ignoring its utter lack of truth and balance.
Rating:
Summary: Easty and pleasant to read
Review: George Orwell is now remembered for his brilliant portrayals of the evils of Stalinism a system which has pretty much ceased to exist except in North Korea. It is ironic that Orwell who became one of communism's most effective critics was in fact a person who was a committed socialist for all his life. This book is really a collection of essays by Hitchen's looking at different aspects of Orwell and his legacy. With the collapse of communism one wonders how long 1984 and Animal Farm will continue to be put on school syllabuses and for how long Orwell's books will be read. Never the less Hitchen's essays are readable and they catch the basic decency of Orwell and the man and his one or two rather minor character flaws. The best essay is the discussion of the empire and Orwell's loathing for it. Even now the dreams of past majesty can blind us to what a squalid little affair the empire on the whole was. Its racism and how much the degradation of millions of subject peoples was bound up in its very nature was so clearly illustrated in Burmese days. Other parts of the book deal with Orwell and his attitude to women, his preparation of a black list of fellow travellers and a number of those issues which have been used to attack his memory in recent years. All in all an entertaining book about an important figure in his time but one wonders for how much longer that will be so.
Rating:
Summary: Why Hitchens Writes
Review: Having been encouraged from about the age of twelve to read the essays of George Orwell I read Christopher Hitchens' recent meditation on him with a sense of gratitude. I haven't read any other work on Orwell which so perfectly conveys his inexhaustibility.
Hitchens' real achievement here is a mastery of Orwell's tone. Orwell's essays keep a reader up until dawn and WHY ORWELL MATTERS did the same to this reader.
I can't say I agree with everything in the book, and have to say that sometimes I didn't grasp Hitchens' arguments. But, the book is brief, and we know what Shakespeare said about brevity. The chief pleasure of this book is its style; learned from one of the greatest defenders of expressed thought.
Rating:
Summary: Short but abstruse
Review: Hitchens can make most things interesting and readable, which is why I chose to read this book at all. However, I found this book to be a bit more esoteric than I would have wanted. It seems to have been written more for the true disciples of Orwell (or Hitchens), whom Hitchens clearly regards highly.
| 
