Skip to main content

QUALITY OF INTELLECTUAL DEBATE

I just watched, for the second time, a documentary called Best of Enemies, the debates in 1968 between William F. Buckley Jr. on the right and Gore Vidal on the left. The debates were part of a new truncated coverage of the 1968 primaries by ABC which did not have the budget to compete with the gavel to gavel coverage the other two major stations, CBS and NBC, could manage.

The familiar lines were drawn, the right was the party of the greedy and heartless, and the left represented the lazy and the decadent. But this was the first time the coverage drew upon drama created between two iconic advocates from the respective sides.

Buckley was the darling of the conservative movement; in fact, he founded it and the magazine, the National Review. Later, in coming out for Reagan, he was regarded as a kingmaker.

Vidal was the popular author of many historical fictions beginning in 1948 but is most famously remembered for the novel Myra Breckinridge. Vidal’s social commentary was wrapped in sexuality and made the point that homosexuality was as natural in nature as heterosexuality, a position that ruffled the feathers of Mr. Buckley and certainly pushed the envelope in the literary world though the book was made into a movie starring Raquel Welch.

Stepping back to that time and viewing the coverage and the controversy was enlightening. Much the same issues were being discussed then as they are today, race, income inequality and war. But the format, while commonplace now, was innovative back then. What struck me as singular was that both men were intellectuals possessing great command of language.

Of the many quips, I most enjoyed William Buckley’s response to Arte Johnson’s question on what looked like a segment of Rowan and Martin’s Laugh-In. Arte observed that audiences only ever saw Mr. Buckley seated during interviews and debates and wondered was that because he had difficulty thinking on his feet. Mr. Buckley’s response was that he did have difficulty standing because of the immense weight he carried on his shoulders from all that he knew.

Of course, Gore Vidal made dazzling points and was himself, well prepared with one liners like don’t point your tongue at me keep it in your cheek, and Mr. Buckley is on the right but often wrong.

The real fireworks came near the end of the debate regarding the brutality of the Chicago PD toward members of the press and the thousands of demonstrators and the rights to freedom of assembly and of speech. Buckley defended the police and Vidal the protestors. Vidal, being interrupted by Buckley, quipped the only crypto-Nazi here is yourself, to which Buckley infamously retorted, “Listen, you queer, stop calling me a crypto-Nazi or I’ll sock you in the goddamned face and you’ll stay plastered!”

Regardless of political affiliation, I think it worth noting the objectivity with which moderator Howard K. Smith conducted himself and the decorum with which he performed his task.
The use of language by both William Buckley Jr. and Gore Vidal was dazzling, elevating, and educational. The deftness with which William Buckley Jr. could dissect an argument was a treat to watch even without agreeing with him. And Gore Vidal could mount an attacking argument and push forth with vim and verve. It is this, I miss about the media and for that matter, though I would rail against conformity and oppression, it is something I miss in society.

Unfortunately, Mr. Buckley’s momentary lapse of decorum caused by Gore Vidal’s trap to unmask the true feelings hidden beneath his opponent’s veneer of gentility has combined with the network’s then novel format and produced over the years, the low level of intellectual carnival barking punditry we are now subjected to nightly.




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

21st CENTURY QUIXOTIC MAN

Maybe I'm old, but I find it increasingly more difficult to gather legitimate informative news articles. Sources are questionable, I fact check, but then the integrity of the fact checkers is called into question. I have a job, a family, and other interests. I am busy trying to live my life. When I'm on the net, especially Facebook, it is in between tasks and I'm on the move. I am not writing a doctoral dissertation, merely commenting on something that catches my eye. Yes, I get caught up in defending my opinion. And it is hard to admit that it is only opinion; I have no access to state information, I have no poli-sci degree, I'm just commenting about what I read. If I had expertise or knowledge no one else had I would get myself into a position where I could employ my specific set of skills and knowledge to effect change. I wouldn't spend hours on Facebook telling everyone they were being duped. I'm just a blue collar worker close to retirement, tir...

My Mother

My mother has died. That somber fact has me processing thoughts of guilt, love, and my own mortality. I am officially an orphan. My mother was one of the “Railway Children,” those Liverpool kids sent to the countryside to escape the bombing during World War II. She and her sister were sent to Wales and were bounced from household to household, relative to relative, and finally to an orphanage. Dad moved to Canada in 1960 to forge a better a life for us. Before my mum took my sister and I to join him, the family held an “American wake,” a mournful goodbye, as if a loved one had died. Mum left everything and everybody she ever knew to join her husband in the new world. My mother and father worked hard to give us a good life. There were tough times, money was scarce, and there was tension between my parents. Hell, let me be honest, my father hit my mother, I saw it. My mum was sixty when she left my dad. She just walked out with the clothes on her back. That was my mum. Tough. W...

On Being Heard

Is it me or does anyone else think they are not being heard? Doesn't it seem that these days folks don't  listen to what you are saying and instead they prepare a response even while you are still speaking?  I don't know about you but I find this frustrating. This behaviour is sometimes accompanied by the person you are talking with editorializing every few sentences you make which causes you to lose your train of thought. And of course, with the ubiquitous mobile phone, it is hard to tell if the person you are talking with is even listening, they are too busy checking something on FaceBook. But that is not so much an issue of a difference in linguistic styles as it is more about plain bad manners. My linguistic style can be passionate and animated especially if I am talking about something important to me. I don't know if it's my age or if I am not as mentally strong as I should be, but constant editorializing greatly distracts me. I also think that when I am i...