Go Back   Jazzcorner's Speakeasy > THE ALLEY
Connect with Facebook

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old June-30th-2004, 04:30 PM   #1
stonemonkts
with a twist
 
stonemonkts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: 41.66 -76.2
Posts: 7,085
National Review Founder to Leave Stage

I grew up watching his show "Firing Line". I never agreed with his politics, but I always admired his speech, various writings (both fiction and non-), and just the sound of his voice. Interesting to read his honest opinions of Bush's economics, and of the war.



June 29, 2004
National Review Founder to Leave Stage
By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

n 1954, when Ronald Reagan was still a registered Democrat and host of "General Electric Theater," the 28-year-old William Frank Buckley Jr. decided to start a magazine as a standard-bearer for the fledgling conservative movement. In the 50-year ascent of the American right since then, his publication, National Review, has been its most influential journal and Mr. Buckley has been the magazine's guiding spirit and, until today, controlling shareholder.

Tonight, however, Mr. Buckley, 78, is giving up control. In an interview, he said he planned to relinquish his shares today to a board of trustees he had selected. Among them are his son, the humorist Christopher Buckley; the magazine's president, Thomas L. Rhodes; and Austin Bramwell, a 2000 graduate of Yale and one of the magazine's youngest current contributors.

Mr. Buckley's "divestiture," as he calls it, represents the exit of one of the forefathers of modern conservatism. It is also the latest step in the gradual quieting of one of the most distinctive voices in the business of cultural and political commentary, the writer and editor who founded his magazine on a promise to stand "athwart history, yelling 'Stop,' at a time when no one is inclined to do so, or to have much patience with those who urge it."

In explaining his decision, Mr. Buckley said he had taken some satisfaction in the triumph of conservatism since then, though he expressed some complaints about President Bush's unconservative spending and some retrospective doubts about the wisdom of invading Iraq. But his decision, Mr. Buckley said, had more to do with his own mortality.

"The question is choose some point to quit or die onstage, and there wouldn't be any point in that," Mr. Buckley said, recalling his retirement from his television program "Firing Line" a few years ago. "Thought was given and plans were made to proceed with divestiture."

With characteristic playfulness, Mr. Buckley said that he had not disclosed the timing of the hand-over. He plans to give the trustees his shares at a private party tonight at an Italian restaurant near the magazine's East 34th Street office. "It is kind of a big event in my life," he said, sipping a glass of wine over lunch at the same restaurant last week. "I thought I might as well put a little bit of theater in it. When I leave this building a week from now, I will probably feel a little bit different."

Mr. Buckley, whose syndicated column will continue to appear in the magazine, said he did not expect changes in the contents of the magazine. Richard Lowry, the editor, will continue in that job. Mr. Rhodes, president of National Review, will become chairman of the newly formed board of trustees. The trustees will include Evan Galbraith, an executive of Morgan Stanley who was ambassador to France under Mr. Reagan, and Daniel Oliver, who was chairman of the Federal Trade Commission under Mr. Reagan and whose son, Drew Oliver, was an assistant editor at the magazine.

By virtue of his relative youth, Mr. Bramwell is the most notable of the five trustees. "I wanted somebody who is very young and very talented," Mr. Buckley said. "One likes to think in the long term."

A former officer of the Conservative Party of the Yale Political Union, Mr. Bramwell began writing for National Review two years ago as a Harvard law student. At a recent ceremony at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, he presented Mr. Buckley an award for contributions to the conservative movement along with an admiring, perhaps even Buckleyesque, appraisal of Mr. Buckley's literary style.

"By ironic periphrasis, arch understatement and surprising deployment of familiar and of course unfamiliar words, Buckley convinced his opponents that he knew something they did not, and what's more, that he intended to keep the secret from them," Mr. Bramwell said as he presented the award. "Thus did he waken their minds to the possibility that liberalism is not the philosophia ultima but just another item in the baleful catalogue of modern ideologies."

Not everyone shares this assessment of Mr. Buckley's work. Leon Wieseltier, literary editor of The New Republic, called Mr. Buckley's sometimes baroque style "genially ridiculous."

Mr. Wieseltier added: "It is a kind of antimodern pretense, but of course he is in fact a completely modern man. His thinking and his writing have all the disadvantages of a happy man. The troubling thing about Bill Buckley's work is how singularly untroubled it is by things."

But Mr. Buckley's voice has always been singular. He was not much older than Mr. Bramwell when he founded National Review. The son of an oilman, Mr. Buckley was already famous for his first book, "God and Man at Yale" (1951). Conservatism in the United States was close to its 20th-century nadir, marked by Dwight D. Eisenhower's defeat of the conservative Robert Taft for the 1952 Republican nomination.

The first issue of National Review appeared in 1955. As Mr. Buckley tells it, he became chief editor in part because deferring to a young man was unthreatening to many venerable contributors. "It was easier to allow them to accept a 29-year-old than to select among themselves who will be boss," he said.

William J. Casey, who later became director of central intelligence under Mr. Reagan, incorporated the magazine. Mr. Buckley retained ownership of all the voting stock. National Review has never made a profit, Mr. Buckley said. It makes up any shortfalls each year with contributions from about 1,000 to 1,500 donors, and every other year it sends a solicitation to its subscribers in an effort to add names to the "A list" of regular donors. Mr. Buckley will continue to write the fund-raising letters, he said.

As for conservatism today, Mr. Buckley said there was a growing debate on the right about how the war in Iraq squared with the traditional conservative conviction that American foreign policy should seek only to protect its vital interests.

"With the benefit of minute hindsight, Saddam Hussein wasn't the kind of extra-territorial menace that was assumed by the administration one year ago," Mr. Buckley said. "If I knew then what I know now about what kind of situation we would be in, I would have opposed the war."

Asked whether the growth of the federal government over the last four years diminished his enthusiasm for Mr. Bush, he reluctantly acknowledged that it did. "It bothers me enormously," he said. "Should I growl?"

Still, he professed more than a little pride at the country's rightward drift during his years in control of National Review. "We thought to influence conservative thought, which we succeeded in doing," he said.
stonemonkts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June-30th-2004, 04:46 PM   #2
Monte Smith
************
 
Monte Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Manchester United States of America
Posts: 15,521
The man's a national treasurer, a founding figure of American conservatism. If you haven't read it, try God and Man at Yale. It's a bit dated, but that was his first book which started a huge ball rolling. I listened to the audio book during my Northwest commute and enjoyed it immensely.

Yeah, stone, I agree: watching Buckley in debate was always like watching a champeen prizefighter. Remarkable.

Though he is ceding control of the magazine, he will continue to write a column.
Monte Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June-30th-2004, 05:45 PM   #3
Dr Dave
User
 
Dr Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Below the line
Posts: 9,884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monte Smith
The man's a national treasurer.
You betcha! (Sorry, Monte, after the "John Paul" bit I'd say you owe me one.)
Dr Dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June-30th-2004, 05:53 PM   #4
Sergio Zamora
Registered Loser
 
Sergio Zamora's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Altered State Of Drugafornia
Posts: 7,663
I disagree with practically everything this man stands for politically, but I always enjoyed watching his show, and (I must admit) reading the occasional piece by him.

(I really hate it when leftist laud a right-wing figure just be seen as 'balanced' or 'cosmopolitan' or whatever the fuck. But in this case, what I'm saying is true. And, fwiw, this is probably the only right-wing journalist I would laud)

Last edited by Sergio Zamora; June-30th-2004 at 05:54 PM.
Sergio Zamora is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June-30th-2004, 06:31 PM   #5
stonemonkts
with a twist
 
stonemonkts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: 41.66 -76.2
Posts: 7,085
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monte Smith
watching Buckley in debate was always like watching a champeen prizefighter. Remarkable.
Yes indeed.

It was amazing to hear such cogent points and counterpoints flow out of him so mellifluously. I had a hard time resisting him, although I never subscribed to his brand of conservatism, it hardly mattered.

If you've never read his "journal" which the NYKR published in the early 80's, it is worth hunting down.
stonemonkts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June-30th-2004, 07:47 PM   #6
Gordon B
Registered User
 
Gordon B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 11,368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergio Zamora
I disagree with practically everything this man stands for politically, but I always enjoyed watching his show, and (I must admit) reading the occasional piece by him.
I bet you agreed with him when he debated Ronald Reagan on giving control of the Panama Canal back to Panama. I took Buckley's side on that issue.
Gordon B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June-30th-2004, 07:49 PM   #7
Sergio Zamora
Registered Loser
 
Sergio Zamora's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Altered State Of Drugafornia
Posts: 7,663
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordon B
I bet you agreed with him when he debated Ronald Reagan on giving control of the Panama Canal back to Panama. I took Buckley's side on that issue.
That's before my time, old man.
Sergio Zamora is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June-30th-2004, 08:01 PM   #8
jesus marion joseph
holier than thou
 
jesus marion joseph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Cape Cod
Posts: 8,708
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergio Zamora
That's before my time, old man.
How old are you, like twelve??
jesus marion joseph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June-30th-2004, 08:13 PM   #9
Sergio Zamora
Registered Loser
 
Sergio Zamora's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Altered State Of Drugafornia
Posts: 7,663
Quote:
Originally Posted by jesus marion joseph
How old are you, like twelve??
Like 32.
Sergio Zamora is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June-30th-2004, 08:15 PM   #10
Uli
poor folk's child
 
Uli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 12,179
I don't know Buckley. You guys sure make it sound like he is one of the only decent Republicans left.
Uli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June-30th-2004, 08:38 PM   #11
Chris A
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
He had a knack for making his twaddle sound sensible, but it rarely stood up to scrutiny, IMO. I found his queenly, upper crust delivery a bit much, it was almost like an overacting Shakespearean ham.
  Reply With Quote
Old June-30th-2004, 09:16 PM   #12
Gordon B
Registered User
 
Gordon B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 11,368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris A
IMO. I found his queenly, upper crust delivery a bit much, it was almost like an overacting Shakespearean ham.
I agree with you about his delivery. Is your choice of the word queenly, suggesting that he's a closeted gay person?
Gordon B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June-30th-2004, 09:20 PM   #13
Gordon B
Registered User
 
Gordon B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 11,368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sergio Zamora
Like 32.
You're off the hook. I don't think many six year olds watched the Firing Line Debate between Reagan and Buckley on Jan. 13, 1978.
Gordon B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June-30th-2004, 09:29 PM   #14
Monte Smith
************
 
Monte Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Manchester United States of America
Posts: 15,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordon B
You're off the hook. I don't think many six year olds watched the Firing Line Debate between Reagan and Buckley on Jan. 13, 1978.
Off the hook my ass. I was six on Jan. 13, 1978, but somehow in the interim I caught the reruns.

Chris A. and "queenly." Fantastic.
Monte Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June-30th-2004, 09:39 PM   #15
Dr Dave
User
 
Dr Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Below the line
Posts: 9,884
Buckley is clever with words; he's a very entertaining fellow. But the idea that he somehow is an opinion leader of the Right? Naaahhhh.
Dr Dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June-30th-2004, 09:48 PM   #16
Monte Smith
************
 
Monte Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Manchester United States of America
Posts: 15,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Dave
Buckley is clever with words; he's a very entertaining fellow. But the idea that he somehow is an opinion leader of the Right? Naaahhhh.
He certainly has been. Probably until Ronald Reagan emerged as a star during the Goldwater campaign, Buckley was the most consistent and successful voice on the Right.

He wrote a good book last year, by the way. It's an interesting book called Getting It Right. What it is is a novel of ideas, a kind of history of the early conservative movement where Buckley is concerned to defend "his" conservatism from two wingnut heretical sects, namely the Ayn Rand cultists and the paranoid John Birchers. As Buckley does this, he encapsulates the chief arguments of Left v. Right in the 50s, 60s and on. If you have an open mind and are curious about American politics, its a rewarding if not breathlessly page-turning read.

Buckley is not a Washington insider, though. In that you are correct.
Monte Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June-30th-2004, 10:05 PM   #17
Dr Dave
User
 
Dr Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Below the line
Posts: 9,884
You are absolutely correct about Buckley's influence in the '60s. Alas, that was FORTY YEARS AGO.

I'm about as likely to pick up a Buckley novel as I am a Gore Vidal novel. Which is to say such an event is very, very, very unlikely. On that score, I am one closed minded mofo, and doggone proud of it.
Dr Dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June-30th-2004, 10:18 PM   #18
Monte Smith
************
 
Monte Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Manchester United States of America
Posts: 15,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Dave
You are absolutely correct about Buckley's influence in the '60s. Alas, that was FORTY YEARS AGO.

I'm about as likely to pick up a Buckley novel as I am a Gore Vidal novel. Which is to say such an event is very, very, very unlikely. On that score, I am one closed minded mofo, and doggone proud of it.
I think Buckley has maintained good influence, but inevitably more attuned, creative, and influential voices are going to come into being--yet they come to a political movement that Buckley practically created.

Gore Vidal's novels are very good. It's his political essays that are silly. I mean, just vapid. I once saw Gore Vidal try to score a a rhetorical point by demonstrating that his opponent's clothes were inferior and without style. He seemed incredibly pleased with himself.
Monte Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June-30th-2004, 10:19 PM   #19
Chris A
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordon B
I agree with you about his delivery. Is your choice of the word queenly, suggesting that he's a closeted gay person?
No, I didn't mean it in that sense, but that is certainly a possibility. In the mid-60s, when I spoke to him on the phone a few times, he did sound like a friend of Dorothy's, but that was not an issue; I offered him a weekly time slot, but he considered WBAI to be too far to the left. I always found it interesting that conservatives criticized us for being unbalanced, yet refused to contribute their opposite views. Ayn Rand told me that we were better off without "those people." She did not agree with much of what we broadcast, but that did not deter her from doing a weekly commentary.
  Reply With Quote
Old June-30th-2004, 10:32 PM   #20
Monte Smith
************
 
Monte Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Manchester United States of America
Posts: 15,521
Rand and Buckley were not allies.
Monte Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   Jazzcorner's Speakeasy > THE ALLEY

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All material copyright 2009 jazzcorner.com