Collected Miscellany

Image via Wikipedia

I have not posted in a while.  A variety of things contributed to that which I will not bore you with.  On the bright side, I really like the new look of the site and WP 2.8 is working well.

I have for the most part tried to keep partisan politics off this blog.  This is for a number of reasons.  I started this blog to get away from politics and feel that books can be a source of common ground for people who disagree politically.

I started The Right Reads as a place to review and discuss non-fiction dealing with right of center politics.  It seems better to keep that separate from a site that still mostly reviews fiction, history and creative non-fiction rather than political activism and philosophy. I will link to content here when it seems appropriate – and vice versa – that way readers are aware of it and can read it if they so choose but it doesn’t distract from the focus

With that in mind, here are some links from a couple of memoirs tied to William F. Buckley Jr.:

–> Right Time, Right Place by Richard Brookhiser

As the subtitle – Coming of Age with William F. Buckley Jr. and the Conservative Movement –indicates, RTRP is a blend of history, memoir, and political commentary.  I find this type of “creative non-fiction” can lack focus, often jumping between subjects and styles, but Brookhiser’s unique perspective, style and flair for language make this a remarkably focused and powerful read.

It is a very personal and honest look at the man and magazine at the heart of the conservative movement’s rise to power, and eventual return to earth, while at the same time a meditation on the dangers of hero worship and the nature of mature relationships.

–> Q&A with Richard Brookhiser on Right Time, Right Place

–> Losing Mum and Pup by Christopher Buckley

I was prepared to be angry about Christopher Buckley’s latest book Losing Mum and Pup.  I have been a fan – idealized is probably more accurate – of his father’s since a very young age and worried about any attempt at sullying that reputation.  I was so sure a tell-all book about losing both of his parents within a year would be offensive.  Throw in Christo’s (the name his parents used for him) less than astute political judgment of late and I had all but pronounced him beyond the pale.

But I decided to read the book first.  And, despite the difficult nature of the subject, I am glad I did.

I have to admit, I was shocked to find out that National Review editor Rich Lowry had co-written a novel.  I just didn’t picture him as the novel writing type.  Of course, he had the help of literary agent Keith Korman.  But still a surprising project. For thos unfamiliar with the book here is the PW set up:

Unlikely hero Peter Johnson, a mildly buffoonish writer working for the Crusader, a left-wing magazine, is recruited by CIA agent Stewart Banquo for the assassination of a top Iranian nuclear scientist. Banquo figures no one would ever suspect Johnson, known for his drunkenness and willingness to take a bribe, to be working for the CIA. Johnson, who accepts the job for a variety of reasons, heads off to Iran. A series of double crosses lands Johnson in the hands of the Iranians and sets up the rest of the plot involving a chillingly plausible terrorist attack.

And so my curiosity piqued, I decided to give it a read.   Banquo’s Ghosts turned out to be a entertaining thriller with a distinct political style to it.  This part is not surprising.  In many ways Lowry is following in the footsteps of the man he succeeded at NR: William F. Buckley; who wrote a number of espionage thrillers with strong contemporary political undercurrents.

For more see below.

Read the rest of this entry »

Those looking to study conservatism could do worse than ordering this collection from ISI.

John J. Miller talks with Gregory L. Schneider, author of The Conservative Century: From Reaction to Revolution, on the latest edition of Between the Covers.

Cover via Amazon

In The University Bookman Gerald J. Russello reviews two books I want to read: Rightward Bound: Making America Conservative in the 1970s by Bruce J. Schulman and Julian E. Zelizer, eds. and A Conservative History of the American Left by Daniel J. Flynn.

Russello argues that neither book quite captures the complexities involved.  Flynn first:

Flynn has done a significant amount of research, and the text is readable and lively, even if one would wish for more explicit connecting threads. The same ideas—common ownership of property, say, or free love, and odd juxtapositions of science and social criticism—occur throughout Western history. To merely lump them all on “the Left” is as helpful as a different farrago of ideas—monarchy, say, joined with capitalism, hierarchical social classes, and table manners—is when defining the Right. The problem is not that such dichotomies do not have explanatory power; it is that they do not explain enough. Even according to Flynn’s taxonomy, the connections among these various radicals are unclear. The Puritans may have opposed free enterprise, but no one could say they opposed religion or the family. Similarly, one can find in Washington or New York many Republican stalwarts defending free trade, but whose devotion to traditional values of the kind Flynn wants associated with the Right leave something to be desired.

But Rightward Bound even more so:

By and large, however, the contributors are not really up to the task of explaining the Right. They stick too closely to the academic formula, where conservatism is somehow not an authentic cultural position for people who wish to preserve their traditions, but an ideological construct forced upon a supine electorate that is otherwise liberal except when manipulated by well-financed corporate cadres. The collection ignores the bigger stories of those years: why conservatism could not stop the leftist onslaught of the 1970s and later. Despite ferocious conservative opposition in the years following the Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade in 1973, which legalized abortion, the decision still remains the law of the land. Where once mildly controversial television programs and movies would have spurred protest, young men and women from the South and Midwest (traditionally the most conservative parts of the nation) now compete on crass reality programs. What was it about the conservative strategies of the 1970s that, from the point of view of the cultural concerns that motivated conservatives to enter politics in the first place, have been largely failures?

Given Russello’s review, I think I will look to read A Conservative History of the American Left but avoid Rightward Bound for now.