–A 1977 New York Times review (4/20/77) by Christopher Lehmann-Haupt of a collection of Vidal’s essays:
Button from Vidal's unsuccessful 1960 run for Congress.
So we are left to speculate over the psychological implications here, and to conclude that Mr. Vidal’s animus toward everything from West Point to the American Establishment–not to speak of academicians, who are, after all, instructors–boils down to an unresolved hostility toward his father, further evidence of which, some would argue, is Mr. Vidal’s cheerfully admitted homosexuality.
–A New York Times piece by Sam Tanenhaus (8/2/12):
Mr. Vidal, whose disdain for American vulgarity was tinged, some said, with antisemitism and dislike of the “lower orders.”
Gore Vidal isn’t here to respond to Tanenhaus’s attack. But he did write a letter to the Times responding to the 1977 review. It did not appear in the Newspaper of Record, but was published in the New York Review of Books (7/14/77).
That letter, in part:
This is quintessential New York Times reporting. First, it is ill-written, hence ill-edited. Second, it is inaccurate. Third, it is unintelligent in the vulgar Freudian way. There is no evidence of an “unresolved hostility” toward my father in the pages under review or elsewhere in my work. Quite the contrary. I quote from Two Sisters, a Novel in the Form of a Memoir: “My father was the only man I ever entirely liked….” Nowhere in my writing have I “admitted” (“cheerfully” or dolefully) to homosexuality, or to heterosexuality. Even the dullest of mental therapists no longer accepts the proposition that cold-father-plus-clinging-mother-equals-fag-offspring.
These demurs to one side, I am grateful to your employee for so beautifully demonstrating in a single sentence so many of the reasons why The New York Times is a perennially bad newspaper.
Some things don’t change.
The Role of the New York Times according to Noam Chomsky:
A lot of people are saying all sorts of things about Gore Vidal’s legacy and what a great man he was. I bet most leftists don’t realize what he said about Roman Polanski’s rape victim.
From the Atlantic, 2009.
Article here.
I hope Peter Hart and FAIR do not give Vidal a pass on this one. A comment like that is beyond the pale.
Lets put this into context:
In September, director Roman Polanski was arrested in Switzerland for leaving the U.S. in 1978 before being sentenced to prison for raping a 13-year-old girl at Jack Nicholson’s house in Hollywood. During the time of the original incident, you were working in the industry, and you and Polanski had a common friend in theater critic and producer Kenneth Tynan. So what’s your take on Polanski, this many years later? -Reporter
I really don’t give a fuck. Look, am I going to sit and weep every time a young hooker feels as though she’s been taken advantage of? – Gore
I’ve certainly never heard that take on the story before. – Reporter
First, I was in the middle of all that. Back then, we all were. Everybody knew everybody else. There was a totally different story at the time that doesn’t resemble anything that we’re now being told. – Gore
What do you mean? – Reporter
The media can’t get anything straight. Plus, there’s usually an anti-Semitic and anti-fag thing going on with the press – lots of crazy things. The idea that this girl was in her communion dress, a little angel all in white, being raped by this awful Jew, Polacko – that’s what people were calling him – well, the story is totally different now from what it was then. – Gore
————————
Wikipedia – Roman Polanski sexual abuse case
Describing the event in his autobiography, Polanski stated that he did not drug Geimer, that she “wasn’t unresponsive”, and that she did not respond negatively when he inquired as to whether or not she was enjoying what he was doing.[24] The probation report submitted to the court concluded by saying that there was evidence “that the victim was not only physically mature, but willing.”[25]
Hoping to protect Geimer from a trial, her attorney arranged a plea bargain.[4] Polanski accepted, and, under the terms of the agreement, five of the initial six charges were dismissed. Instead, Polanski pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of engaging in unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor.[26]
It doesn’t excuse the fact that he should have kept his member in his pants, but it also turns out that the Mother wasn’t exactly innocent either, and was hoping for something to happen with Polanski so they could get the daughter “into the industry”.
________________________________________________________
Have to give him credit on the letter, that was pointed, to the point, and pointing out the idiocy of the media even then.
*** The idea that this girl was in her communion dress, a little angel all in white, being raped by this awful Jew, Polacko – that’s what people were calling him – well, the story is totally different now from what it was then. ***
That statement by Vidal is rape apology. That’s even more obscene than his first remark IMO. Garland Grey at Tiger Beatdown tells it accurately about Vidal’s shameful remarks.
That’s how disgraceful Vidal’s comment was.
*** it also turns out that the Mother wasn’t exactly innocent either, and was hoping for something to happen with Polanski so they could get the daughter “into the industry”. ***
There’s no here or there with that statement. It’s not about the parents per se. This is about a man taking advantage of a young girl and was convicted … and Vidal chose to smear the rape victim.
I’m amazed at how Vidal fans go to such absurd lengths to defend their hero. It reminds me of how progressives reacted to Julian Assange’s alleged rape victims. If there’s anything I’ve learned, it’s that leftists/progressives are just as culpable of bashing alleged rape victims after they approach police about the alleged crimes. Look at Naomi Wolf and how she went out of her way to invalidate the alleged rape victims stories. Look at Glenn Greenwald, Michael Moore, Daniel Ellsberg, John Pilger, Keith Olbermann, and others. Vidal’s comments are right up there with theirs. It’s no different than how sports figures are treated when sex assault allegations come up: bash the victims, stand up for the accused because he’s one of us.
It reminds of Jerry Seinfeld’s joke about how it all comes down to what team the guy’s wearing the uniform for.
Nohting “beyond the pale” about it. The girl’s wildly ambitious mother had been offering her all over time like a plate of canpes. That’s why she never wanted the case to go to tral as the documentary “Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired” reveals (as the girl gives the show away re Mom.) Polanski’s mistake was falling for this ‘honey trap.”
Add to that the roling anti-semitism of the LAPD and the DA’s office and you’ve got it all.
This isnt about the mom, David. This is about whether Polanski commited a crime and e did. It’s amazing the absurd lengths people will go to defend their heroes. They can’t separate the facts from their ideologies.
Vidal didn’t suffer fools. His point here was about the media, and as usual was correct. Gore Vidal: Rape Apologist? This is why the left is on the ropes.
Dang Ctrenta, your choosing to ignore the facts to support some moral indignation.
I dont know GoreVidal or Polanski well, but I do know how to read.
The Mother was setting a honey trap, and the girl was in on it, and had sex with others. This wasnt a girl that ever wore a communion dress.
She even did not want charges pressed against Polanski in time. She was hurt more by the media and court case than by Polanski, but then you dont care about the girl do you, only your moral indignation.
Read the probation report, its quoted in comment section here.
The probation report submitted to the court concluded by saying that there was evidence “that the victim was not only physically mature, but willing.”[25]
If you really care about the girl, you will listen to her.
Sure, he had sex with a 13yo, in america that is terrible, I get it, he committed a crime, but that doesnt mean that he actually harmed anybody as the girl herself tells you, or that Vidals dismissal makes him horrible, as he knows more about the case than you surely do and has a different feeling based on so much more than moral indignation will allow for you.
He lives in that time and you cant imagine where he is coming from, apparently.
Maybe some of us can.
Let me be clear: I strayed away from the main point which is that Vidal made an distasteful remark and doubled-down with a rape apology on Polanski’s behalf. It was classic victim-blaming. Do you need me to explain it? Vidal called a 13-year-old a hooker and characterized being drugged and raped as if she were a sex worker of legal age who had been shorted a few bucks. He could have said things in support of Polanski that didn’t throw the victim under the bus.
I am a Gore Vidal fan but I have to admit his comment WAS dismissive and distasteful especially for a defender of human rights who himself had endured sexual oppression as a gay man in that era. What the girl’s parents did and her complacency in it is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that she was only 13 albeit with a “mature body”. It can be argued that what the parents did to her was far more enduringly abusive than what Roman Polanski et al did to her. However we should stop calling this rape. Rape is an act of violence often committed by force or the threat of it. Calling “consensual sex with a minor” rape minimizes the violent act of rape and insults its victims.
Having said all this, I get annoyed with the puritanical attitude toward sex in this country.
Free spirit, it was rape: Statutory rape. According to Kate Harding, a progressive women’s rights advocate and Salon.com contributor, Polanski gave a 13-year-old girl a Quaalude and champagne, then raped her. According to the victim’s grand jury testimony, Roman Polanski instructed her to get into a jacuzzi naked, refused to take her home when she begged to go, began kissing her even though she said no and asked him to stop; performed cunnilingus on her as she said no and asked him to stop; put his penis in her vagina as she said no and asked him to stop; asked if he could penetrate her anally, to which she replied, “No,” then went ahead and did it anyway, until he had an orgasm.
Harding continues:
Link here.
But like I said. I’m not here to debate Polanski, one way or the other. This is about Vidal’s distasteful remarks about a 13-year-old rape survivor and how progressives and FAIR are giving him a free pass. It should be more than just freespirit and I.
Shifting gears, let’s not forget how Vidal smeared southern culture in the same interview. I have a friend born and raised in Alabama who is involved in civil and human rights work. She was shocked by Vidal’s inaccurate and shallow characterization of southern people, even if it was someone Vidal didn’t like.
From the 2009 Atlantic interview:
So are progressives going to defend Vidal’s comment as well?
Stay classy, Gore.
I thought the article was about the media attacking Vidal unfairly, but reading the comments, one would think it was about Vidal’s remarks that are being debated, which have no relevance to the NY Times reports. Is there a public figure one can not find some remark to debate?
ctrenta
I checked the link where you claimed that I was “bashing [the] alleged rape victims” of Julian Assange and “invalidate[d] the alleged rape victims stories.”
Of course, I saw nothing in that link you provided where I did anything of the kind, and I knew I wouldn’t, because you completely fabricated that extremely serious accusation.
At no time have I ever uttered a derogatory word about Assange’s complainants or insinuated in any way that their accusations are invalid. My view has always been exactly the same every time I’ve written about it: I have no idea if the accusations are true, and they deserve to be taken seriously.
You flat-out lied when claiming I based those alleged rape victims. People should be careful when making accusations in general; when making extremely serious ones such as rape-apologist and bashing alleged rape victims, extra caution is required. You did the opposite: spewed the accusations without an iota of basis.
I for one am much more interested in what Glenn Greenwald has to say about Gore Vidal in general than in this distracting minor debate on Polanski.
As for the NYT, Tanenhaus’s remark was idiotic and Vidal’s nailed him. For some reason, the NYT has had it out for Vidal ever since they refused to review The City and Pillar back in 1946 and even refused to mention Vidal’s name in the paper for the next 20 some odd years.
I also agree with Vidal that the NYT is a bad paper. It is at the very least highly overrated. Most of the reports and articles are dull, overly long, repetitious and patronizing. The editorial page is a joke: I don’t think I can stomach it these days. Who do they have? Friedman, David Brooks and that guy who writes about Christianity, Ross something? Give me a fucking break.
As for Vidal, he will be terribly missed by a lot of us, esp. on the left I suspect. I’ve read almost all of his books, and even the not-so-great ones (like, say, Myron or his political books over the last decade which revealed signs of aging) are a delight to read. For my money, Burr is his single greatest creation, and his essays from the 60’s and 70’s are the best – of all time, perhaps?
Glenn, I never said you were a rape apologist and I never said that you insinuated in any way that their accusations are invalid. Don’t twist my words. I linked Cohen’s piece as an example that you are all about Assange. I think Cohen pointed out well that you go to absurd lengths to defend Assange, just like Vidal did with Polanski in that interview he gave with the Atlantic. That’s the point. You may not have uttered a derogatory word about Assange’s complainants. I recognize that. But you certainly don’t advocate for them in your writings per se. If Assange thinks the women’s stories are BS, then he should face the charges.
Sweden is not going to extradite Assange to the U.S. The issue that the US has a secret grand jury to extradite him is remote at this point. And Sweden is not even part of NATO , so they are not likely to extradite him on free speech grounds. And there is no chance in my mind that Assange could ever be executed in the U.S. even if he were extradited, which I do not think Sweden would ever do.
I completely disagree with you with what you’ve said in the past about Swedish rape laws. Feminists and women who advocate for rape survivors will tell you is one of the best systems in the world to seek justice against their accusers. I think you make a big deal of the fact that Assange was not charged. Fine. That’s true. But that is the very progressive Swedish legal system’s way of giving the accused the benefit of the doubt.
If Barack Obama or someone else you despise politically were the accused in this case, would you still be complaining about Swedish law? I doubt it. But it’s your hero, Julian Assange and you have gone out of your way to defend him, even where you think Ecuador is a great place for asylum. So don’t lecture me about how you show partiality when it comes to making comments about sexual violence.
Glenn, I’m not interested in getting into pissing wars with you. I’ve got better things to do. Stick your neck out for the alleged victims as much as you do for Assange, please. Assange has a right to publish classified US cables, and his accusers have a right to have him face them in court.
Couple of clarifications:
*** If Assange thinks the women’s stories are BS, then he should face the charges. ***
I meant allegations, not charges.
*** Assange could ever be executed in the U.S. even if he were extradited, which I do not think Sweden would ever do. ***
I meant “which I do not think Sweden would ‘allow.'”
I think Julian Assange is a hero and a colossal dick at the same time, Glenn. Like I said above, Assange should continue to publish classified U.S. cables but the alleged victims should also have a right to have him face them in court. I wish you would advocate and write more on behalf of the alleged victims, not just about the plight of Assange.
ctrenta: “Glenn, I never said you were a rape apologist and I never said that you insinuated in any way that their accusations are invalid. Don’t twist my words.”
ctrenta (earlier): “It reminds me of how progressives reacted to Julian Assange’s alleged rape victims. If there’s anything I’ve learned, it’s that leftists/progressives are just as culpable of bashing alleged rape victims after they approach police about the alleged crimes. Look at Naomi Wolf… Look at Glenn Greenwald, Michael Moore… and others. Vidal’s comments are right up there with theirs. It’s no different than how sports figures are treated when sex assault allegations come up: bash the victims, stand up for the accused because he’s one of us.” (My emphasis)
I can’t imagine how anybody could have misinterpreted that.
ctrenta: “Sweden is not going to extradite Assange to the U.S. The issue that the US has a secret grand jury to extradite him is remote at this point. And Sweden is not even part of NATO , so they are not likely to extradite him on free speech grounds.”
Why make these feeble excuses? (Wrong in all sorts of ways, but I won’t get into that.) What do you care if ends up at Gitmo? The guy is an alleged Rapist right? Don’t let the bigger picture get in the way. Remember, it’s about Rape. The whole illegal wars, freedom of the press, US imperialism thing… irrelevant. Why? Because Rape.
After re-reading it several times now, I misspoke and unfairly misrepresented G. Greenwald. Mea culpa. But as I said above, he hasn’t nearly written as much about supporting the alleged victims as he has about supporting Assange. I think it’s clear who is more important to him.
As for the others, I think there is a case that they treated the alleged victims and their stories like crap. I also stand by my comment about Vidal and how I think it constitutes as rape apology.
I’ll say it one more time. Assange should continue to publish classified U.S. cables but the alleged victims should also have a right to have him face them in court. I think many progressives have lost sight of the fact that the alleged victims’ stories are just as important and we should be supporting them more … and Assange should have a fair shot at defending himself from the allegations.
I’m done now.
For goodness sakes. So Vidal made a comment about a 40-year old case that many find distasteful, morally repugnant…etc. So freaking what!!! Vidal *isn’t* Polanski. Anybody with any opinions worth a damn will say stupid things once in a while. That’s why he’s Gore Vidal and most of the whiners who hate him are nothing but prudes or ideologues. Now let him be honored for being among the best writers of our generation and R.I.P.
I think somebody is playing a practical joke on ctrenta. In light of the fact that anyone can sign in with any corny name (such as FreeSpirit) it would be so easy for someone to chime in as Glen Greenwald. Unless unbeknownst to me, the FAIR blog is frequented by dignitaries. In which case I should check my grammar more carefully!
As for the Assange situation, my understanding is that Sweden HAS indeed extradited people to the US before. Also, if Assange is only wanted for questioning, why don’t the Swedes question him in England? Something smells like fish here.
Finally, the apologies for Gore Vidal here are disturbingly reminiscent of to those made for Obama and his Corporate-sycophantic war-criminal Constitution-shredding administration. The problem with the left is that once we identify with someone we idealize him/her and won’t tolerate criticism. I think Jung made it quite clear that we can all act saintly and evil simultaneously. This is more pronounced with geniuses. Should be stop playing Wagner because he expressed anti-Semitic sentiments?
Freespirit – G.G. tweeted a link to this post about Vidal.
Notice how the spamming fuckwit troll ‘ctrenta’ apes the NYTs attacks on the late great Vidal when it tries to smear him using a tissue of lies and pretty much every fallacy going. Very amusing.
While the press on Vidal’s image: good, bad, evil, brilliant, etc. Here’s a contrast to consider. The left will analyze, chew on all sides of a rape case ad infinitum. The right’s take on rape: “She” was asking for it.
Of course, they rarely ask women what they think. In our sex crazed society it is only one of the “50 shades of grey.”
I like to think I criticize people who do not push too much to have abusers held accountable. Vidal was friends with a rapist and based his free choices on that. He’s being evil there. But where Vidal doesn’t care about the victims, where we see he’s repulsive to all moral people, at least he’s pretty upfront about it. He recognized his sadism was a result of protecting someone he liked more. That’s more of a pragmatic choice about self-control, not about the media, and I think he’s a an idiot for trying to make it otherwise. It’s repulsive to insult a 13 year old girl, who- -discounting Freudian sympathies for child sexuality– by any psychological standard today (his measure, if you recall) is a rape victim. So for a little balance, FAIR should have brought a lot of that up. We’re adults, let’s be frank.
I think criticism should go even further, and try to see where the press could learn even from Freudian psychology’s political trace ( see Reich’s “Mass Psychology of Fascism”), since we can see repressed sexuality leading to bullying in Mitt Romney’s story, and in various school shootings, and crazed paranoia about responsibility with sex.
Come on. Isn’t human nature a better guide for helping people than winning a passive aggressive ego battle? This is where Vidal and ctrenta actually have everyone beat, which is ironic looking at it in those terms but perfectly understandable. Both make it easy to find the roots of these common errors, while honestly saying what they believe and how they feel. The belief that seems to go against both, bringing out the ugly ignorance not worth quoting, is pretty simple, that we “can’t separate the facts from their ideologies” when our hero is attacked.
ctrenta has a much more important point than Vidal. I don’t think establishing how much one cares about rape is a serious issue for debate. Vidal proved this with his repulsive imagery on both sides while taking the more awful side himself. Instead, one should document who the victims are and push against its cause. Is it the Times being jerks, or is it something in human nature that we are all responsible for?
Reading these comments, I can see that ctrenta does not like Gore Vidal, but not much else. Given the volume of writing, can we say that this one comment, or another about Bill Clinton and southerners are grounds for dismissing the whole body of work. Hardly.
As that great humanist Rodney King once said: “Can we all just get along?” :-)
Gore Vidal.Good enough mind to make him interesting.Not always good enough though to make him a good person.