Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required. Learn more
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle Cloud Reader.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Making It Paperback – January 1, 1980
| Norman Podhoretz (Author) Find all the books, read about the author, and more. See search results for this author |
Explore your book, then jump right back to where you left off with Page Flip.
View high quality images that let you zoom in to take a closer look.
Enjoy features only possible in digital – start reading right away, carry your library with you, adjust the font, create shareable notes and highlights, and more.
Discover additional details about the events, people, and places in your book, with Wikipedia integration.
- LanguageEnglish
- PublisherHarperCollins (paper)
- Publication dateJanuary 1, 1980
- ISBN-100060907649
- ISBN-13978-0060907648
The Amazon Book Review
Book recommendations, author interviews, editors' picks, and more. Read it now
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Product details
- Publisher : HarperCollins (paper); New edition (January 1, 1980)
- Language : English
- ISBN-10 : 0060907649
- ISBN-13 : 978-0060907648
- Item Weight : 6.4 ounces
- Best Sellers Rank: #5,304,004 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- Customer Reviews:
About the author

Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read author blogs and more
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on Amazon-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
First, one should never write an autobiographical work at the young age of thirty-five. One has so little perspective at that age and in addition time has not matured one's wisdom, if that were to ever happen. Podhoretz's work is an example of this observation. He details his change from a Brooklyn kid through a Columbia College educated liberal arts student, through his ventures at Clare College Cambridge and then through the literary world of New York in the 1950s. He describes how he evolved, I guess is the current verb, from an ethnically insular individual to a worldly observer and commentator of the then prominent authors. It may be difficult for some in today's world to understand this mid-century intellectual environment but Podhoretz does lay out an interesting review of how the players interacted. The petri dish used was reviews like Commentary, Partisan Review, Paris Review and the other "literary" magazines that allowed those like Podhoretz to effuse forth their insight and critiques of various then dominant authors. For many, fiction ruled and publishing was in many ways at its prime.
In my opinion, Podhoretz writes a self-congratulatory work on the collection of Marxist oriented intellectuals in the post WW II generation. For the most part they are Columbia University related and works on such “journals” as Commentary, Partisan Review, and the like. Barrett is somewhat self-effacing and presents his fellow participants in all their glory and grunge. He speaks of such fellow travelers as Hannah Arendt and Mary McCarthy, the philosopher (former lover of Heidegger who was the German philosopher and Nazi follower) and the Vassar graduate who seems to have made her career by publicizing her sexual exploits starting when she was fourteen!
Then there was Rhav and Delmore Schwartz, the brilliant and socially complex participants. This was New York from 1930 to about 1960. It is New York when Greenwich Village was a place where one could walk through book stores and drink coffee at all hours, have conversations on any author one felt important and find a fellow conversationalist to compete with one’s views. Barrett's works does provide an excellent window on this world, which lasted through the 50s and into the very early 60s. The Village was a bastion of intellectual insight and an oasis for those who espoused these ideas. Now, of course, Greenwich Village is mostly and amalgam of NYU real estate and millennial startups.
Now Podhoretz starts as a fellow traveler of the left wing associates and then sees this a means to promote himself to some form of greatness. Unlike today where such greatness is being an early player in some start up then the player was someone who would write and publish a critique of some alleged work of art. The edgier the review was the more one felt a sense of self-worth.
Podhoretz presents his perceived path to glory. It was his ability to come out of Brooklyn as an East European Jew and move across the East River to Morningside Heights and achieve greatness by disavowing and abandoning his past, and taking up the culture of his new found associates. Eventually Podhoretz becomes one of the NeoCons in the early 1970s and into the Bush II administration. Specifically he was a major player in the Coalition for a Democratic Majority, which I also played a small role in when at MIT, before going to Washington. It was this change from classic Democratic to neo-conservatives, a pro-Defense move of what were called Jackson Democrats. Strange that so many started as extreme left wing critics of the arts and became strong right wing critics of an evolving Democratic Party, a post-Vietnam Progressive movement now in full bloom.
Barrett by contrast is a well-accepted philosophy professor, who made his acclaim as an early interpreter of Existentialism. In fact Barrett had the opportunity to provide some support to the travels of Simone de Beauvoir on her US trip post WW II. He had great insight into her views, often her confused and distorted perceptions of the US. What contrasts Barrett is that he is a true intellectual whereas Podhoretz is an interpreter of current political movements. Barrett aged into a classic professor and Podhoretz into a classic political commentator.
Thus Podhoretz’s book is worth the read peripherally for understanding the people and the times, but more so to understand Podhoretz, whereas Barrett is less understanding Barrett than in understanding the many personalities he so ably brings to life.
There does not seem to be any group of intellectuals like these. Those that try have flocked to cable TV and become participants in the cacophony of the new medium. Clearly McLuhan and his understanding of how a new medium can change what we understand as truth changes dramatically.
The interesting question would be; will the millennials use the evolving media to create their own new truths, and will we ever be able to understand the past by having a document like Barrett’s again? In summary, the republishing of the Podhoretz book is worthwhile because it provides a window on a period of change. This was the post War period where the 30s love of socialism and Marxism (as well as Communism, both pro and anti-Stalin) morphs into the slow transition to what would become the conservative movement that was sparked under Reagan and then again under Bush the Second. Whereas Barrett provides a superb window on the 30s and even 40s intellectual New York, Podhoretz shows some of the elements that led to the transition.
An early chapter of the book was so intellectually difficult that I had to read it twice to understand it. For all those who "read ambitiously", here's your challenge.
Making It was trashed by the New York Review of Books upon its original publication in 1967. The book's restoration to print as a certified classic by NYRB Classics 50 years later speaks eloquently to its lasting quality.

