Customer Reviews

Politics: Observations and Arguments, 1966-2004

5 star:		(10)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(5)

 

 

Hendrik Hertzberg is the most humane and articulate voice I've heard in the mainstream media in this decade. I wanted to stand up and salute, or cheer, or cry, or something, after hearing an hour-long interview with him on NPR. His writing, like his speaking, radiates kindness, humanity, wisdom, thoughtfulness: unlike almost any other writer analyzing U.S. politics (an automatically divisive subject), Hertzberg is unfailingly courteous, even solicitous, immensely and sincerely respectful of the reader, and above all, kind; yet his critique is razor-sharp and perfectly articulated. This is a writer who knows what words mean, and always uses exactly the right words to express what he means to say.

In short, if you read only one non-fiction book this year, let it be this one; Hertzberg will lift you up, he will restore your faith in humanity, and he will remind you of what the English language can do when it's properly employed.

The right wing review that preceded this one tells far more about the reviewer than about this perceptive, sensitive, sometimes brilliant collection of essays. Apart from his political acuity, Hertzberg's observations on other aspects of American culture, such as his wonderful piece on the experience of police at a post 911 Bruce Springsteen concert are exceptional. Yes, Hertzberg has a liberal bias and he makes moral judgements, most of them ones which are sympatico with our professed best American values. Even if you were to read only half of the columns in this book, you would get more than your money's worth.

Hertzberg has to be the preeminent political writer of our time. His writing is always witty and urbane, but also packs a political punch. Thankfully, he doesn't delve into the depths like many political writers at the moment. Instead, he relies on the facts and his wit to make his points, and respects the intelligence of his readers. If you are not familiar with his work, I urge you to pick up a recent issue of "The New Yorker" and read his pieces in "The Talk of the Town" section.

This book is an impressive archive of Hertzberg's writing over the past 40 years. Most of the book consists of his writing in the 1980s for "The New Republic" and his more recent pieces for "The New Yorker." While his writing has always been impressive, I found that it become more cogent, direct and "punchy" as time went on. His articles are organized into a variety of sections, from "Enough About the Sixties" (the hippies and classic rock), "Great Men," (articles on Carter, Reagan, and RFK), to "Judeo-Christians," "Wingers," "Wedge Issues," and "The Wayward Media."

I found "The Ghost in the Machine" section on proportional representation especially interesting. Not only would such a system do away with pointless anachronisms like the electoral college, but it would obviously be more democratic and representative. Unfortunately, we will most likely never see such a system because it is too threatening to the Powers That Be-- namely, the two major political parties. Sadly, we are much more likely to see a constitutional amendment so that a specific Viennese weightlifter can be President.

This book is a treasure trove of wit and wisdom, and I learned a great deal about recent political history reading it. I urge you to add this invaluable resource to your library.

Hendrik Hertzberg has been one of the clearest and most articulate commentators on the American scene for nearly forty years. As editor and writer at The New Republic and The New Yorker, he has set a standard for spare, simple prose that is both elegant and profound.

The articles in Politics range far and wide, from commentary on presidential elections to reviews of concerts. I particularly enjoyed Hertzberg's evaluation of Jimmy Carter and his Presidency (he was a speechwriter in that Administration) and his rueful analysis of how differently (and more wisely) an Al Gore Administration might have handled September 11 and its aftermath than did Bush. It was also interesting to see how prescient Hertzberg was at times in predicting election outcomes and cultural trends, and how at other times he was completely off the mark.

This is a book to be read carefully over a long period of time. Keep it handy, especially during the next few months before November 2004, and dip into it when a dose of clearheadedness is required.

Hendrik Hertzberg writes about any range of topics with style and insight, but I am particularly impressed with his nuanced and well-researched critique of our winner-take-all electoral rules in his set of essays in "Ghosts in the Machine." The lecture "The Case for Proportional Representation: Why Voting is Almost Never a Political Act in the U.S." should not be missed and has not appeared in any other publication.

There is no better way to be introduced to a piece of writing than hearing its author discuss his work. In January, I attended a lecture entitled "Politics and The New Yorker," given by the magazine's senior political editor. In a calm, earnest, reflective manner, Mr. Hertzberg spoke about writers of previous generations and about enduring relevance of the issues they raised. He talked of his hopes and his vision for the country. A book by this logical, articulate, sensitive person should be a worthwhile read, I thought. Too bad I could not get a copy right then and there, and have it inscribed - the organizers did not accept credit cards, and I did not have enough cash on me.

The next day I was at Borders, and found the book. It promised to be a real treat - the first impression that was fully confirmed as I kept reading. All of a sudden, my daily commute became both short and interesting. As an ex-Russian, I appreciated the breadth of the subject matter of this collection of essays, and its vivid writing. I learned a lot about recent American history; an American-born reader who is too young to remember Kennedy and Nixon, hippies and weathermen, will reap a similar benefit.

It is a given that a book by someone of Mr. Hertzberg's standing should be a brilliantly polished piece of literature. Poetics, irony, wit, sarcasm and plain lucid logic are masterfully employed, and perfectly fitted to the subject matter: an interview with John Lennon is pure poetry; passionate, argumentative language is used to convey dismay over the flaws in our political system. Descriptive passages are brilliant; and the punch line is always sharp and unexpected.

But aesthetics of writing is not the only attraction of this book. Its discussion of our political system, and suggestions for fixing its flaws are of no lesser interest. Not that one necessarily agrees with everything, but the book sure does make the reader think. For example, I cannot possibly agree with a suggestion to reserve some Senate and House seats to represent minority views of those who, while sufficiently numerous to potentially have seats in the House, are spread too thinly across the country to be able to win actual representation on the Hill. To give them representation in a way suggested by Mr. Hertzberg would be to institute in Congress a genuine inequality. One congressman would arrive at Washington shackled hand and foot by all manner of obligations to his local constituents; for him, to vote his conscience would be to risk political demise. The other one, sent by a constituency so vague as to be indefinable, would be beholden to no one, and at full freedom to vote his conscience. That's a huge inequality. And the very idea of a congressman or a senator voting his conscience is hugely problematic in itself; it goes against the very grain of representation. My representative should vote my conscience, not his. A representative who votes his conscience embezzles delegated power. But many of Mr. Hertzberg's points are very well taken indeed. He is perfectly right in criticizing the internal rules by which both chambers of Congress operate. His attack on the legality of filibuster makes perfect sense, as does his analysis of pernicious side effects of seniority. The most important effect of Mr. Hertzberg's criticisms and suggestions, of course, is having us realize that our political system does have room for improvement, and that improvement is indeed possible.

All in all, "Politics" is a superb book, a joy for a one concerned with the future of the country and interested in observing the sometimes tragic, sometimes amusing interplay of human ambitions, vanities, and interests that is called "politics."

Hendrik Hertzberg, speechwriter of President Carter and editor for The New Republic and the New Yorker, has collected the best of his essays in this book. Describing a variety of subjects and experiences, Hertzberg consistently takes a fiercely progressive and compassionate position, while at the same time never stooping to the level of the mud-flinging political 'books' so often published by Beltway insiders.

The book's essays are about a great variety of issues, both inside and outside the United States. Notable are his experiences as speechwriter to Jimmy Carter, his activities as election observer in Nicaragua and Pakistan, his work as a journalist during various presidential campaign candidates and his brilliant and insightful essays on the structural flaws in the American political system, in particular the elections.

Personally I do not agree with Hertzberg on many things (I'm more on the left than he is), but this book will appeal to any reader regardless of his or her political position. As long as you have even a passing interest in American politics, you will find this book provides some very pleasant, eloquent and humane reflections on the workings and effects of Washington and its policies. Despite the anecdotal nature of this collection, Hertzberg never loses sight of the bigger picture. It is hard to find a more intelligent and responsible defender of the weak and downtrodden in the United States today.

One of the finest nonfiction titles I've ever read. I can't recall having derived so much enjoyment from a book since Brave New World.

It's a must-own, especially in times where most politically oriented "Non-fiction" titles are so abysmal both in prose, substance, and veracity. Regardless of whether your passion is history, politics, or cadence and style (he is a former speech-writer), the book should prove fascinating (all the more if you're passionate about all of the above). The pieces on the 1988 election were especially well written.

Just an all-round pleasure. I enjoyed it thoroughly.

Hertzberg is one of my favorite writers - his articles are the first I read when I see them in The New Yorker. In this book he once again demonstrates his shrewd perspective, expressed in superb writing.

Unlike Christopher Hitchens whose prose screams "Look at me, look at me," Hertzberg is a more modest stylist: the words he uses are meant to carry his ideas and to explain them simply and clearly. He's an avowed liberal and makes no bones about it, but he is not strident or offensive in any way. Conservatives: If you find HH offensive to your sensibilities, it is unlikely that you are capable of holding a serious, rational, and thoughtful conversation. This is not "talk radio" or "cable news" fodder, both of which he discusses. And he is critical of both cowardly Clinton as well as the amnesiac Reagan. It is engaging from start to finish, though it gets a little confusing on Proportional Representation (but I'm not good with numbers). There are many short pieces written for The New Yorker and The New Republic making it easy to bounce around and read in short spurts; I didn't see any real need to read it in order from beginning to end. Inspiring Idea: Stop revering the Founding Fathers and start emulating them. Great quote I hadn't heard before: When told that George W. Bush said he sleeps like a baby, Colin Powell replied: "I sleep like a baby, too. Every two hours I wake up screaming."