Posted on 02/27/2005 12:55:01 PM PST by TFFKAMM
Not since the death of Princess Diana has so much worshipful ink been spilled on the occasion of a mere mortal's passing. He was a giant among men. Who cared that for years he had been a largely burned-out case, more of a circus act than a serious writer, reveling in adolescent stunts with firearms, alcohol, narcotics -- the predictable paraphernalia of the self-styled outlaw who wowed the chattering classes and other assorted rubes and poseurs long after his appeal had worn off for almost everybody else?
Indeed, by coming not to bury Hunter S. Thompson, but to praise him -- unreservedly, remorselessly, endlessly -- his adoring acolytes, who shared the same trade, may be saying more about themselves than about the journalistic practitioner who ended up fantasizing about shotgun golf for ESPN. com.
For it was through Hunter Thompson, in life and in death, that we journalists could do what we do best -- live vicariously, through others. Wild times, no restraints, so removed from our more humdrum reality. Ah, but if we can just speak of "Hunter," we're there, in our own minds, fearing and loathing and congratulating ourselves on our infinite cool. We might not have the capacity for the enormous amount of stimulants Thompson consumed, but we could at least get a contact high just being associated with him, no matter how remotely.
That much of his consumption was illegal -- the kind of "gotcha" infraction journalists drool over when it comes to other kinds of public figures (which Thompson most certainly, and deliberately, was) -- was of no consequence. That Thompson's literary product was largely "drug fueled" gets high-fives in the same publications that, for example, expose, in an off-with- their-heads manner, the steroid-fueled achievements of ball players...
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Hindsight, as they say, is 20-20.
Although in the past I only skimmed through H. Thompson's works, I probably had liked him AT THE TIME. I was more naive back then, and, of course, liberal. Having grown up around these kind of people (they were friends of my father) I see, in retrospect, that the quality that made them exciting also made them dysfunctional, even evil.
See today, of course, even Thompson's best writing is childish at best. Stylish, yes. The quirkiness makes it fun. But totally inane on any intellectual level. What passed in my mind back then for profundity is seen now, through adult eyes, as the ravings of a drug-induced mania.
Thompson was unquestionably a talented guy. Too bad the talent was wasted on such vicious pursuits.
I am not at all surprised at how he died. My friend's grandfather, also raving liberal, shot himself. I predict the same outcome for many of Thompson's ilk.
Hunter was a "DARLING" of the LEFT and ike CASTRO their HERO.
Well, I did read Norman Mailer's "Armies of the Night" and thought that, although it was repulsive, it was also a wonderful glimpse into the heart of the Countercultural Revolution with all its madness. In fact, I think it's Mailer's best book.
As for Hunter Thompson, I've never had the faintest desire to read him. Maybe I'm missing something, but I saw a fair amount of hippiedom at first hand, and I really have no desire to see any more of those drugged out losers.
HUH?
For instance?
Holy crap!
If TFFKAMM happens to be a Bill Murray fan, he can catch the flavor of what I think you're saying by renting a copy of Where The Buffalo Roam. That will probably be all he might want to know about the late great Hunter S. Thompson.
I am not at all surprised at how he died. My friend's grandfather, also raving liberal, shot himself. I predict the same outcome for many of Thompson's ilk.
That has been the end for a lot of hard living creative people. Two from just before my time were the novelist and short story writer, Ernest Hemmingway, and the actor, George Sanders. Hemmingway did himself in with a shotgun, as he said he would eventually do once he could no longer write. Don't know what method Sanders used, but the note he left behind laid the cause to simply, "life had become a bore."
I'm sure there are others I've simply forgotten. And so it goes . . .
For me, Mailer is a much more interesting as a person than Thompson. Or was, for a long while. His first novel, The Naked and The Dead, was based on his combat service with the 112th Cavalry Regiment, a pre-war horse unit of the Texas National Guard. (No, I'm pretty sure he wasn't a Texas boy.) Some have said he wasn't much of a soldier. Those who served with him, at least the ones I've talked to, say he was a fine soldier. A captain once told he was the easiest trooper to find, because when they went looking for him, he was always sitting around somewhere writing at something.
Time to find a copy of that novel. Haven't read it in decades.
Hey! It's only been a [day/week/month/year/decade] since the man died. How dare you speak ill of the dead!
You're not alone..
I haven't either.
Good analysis, but on one level you're comparing apples and oranges. The coverage of Thompson's demise has been almost universally adulatory, worshipful even, while most of the coverage worldwide of President Reagan's death was unrelentingly hostile and even hateful.
The American MSM had to tone it down a lot, since there was such an outpouring of love of and mourning for President Reagan (something they were totally unprepared for, BTW), but even in the "smiley face" coverage they gave, you all too often saw the contempt and hatred they held for him peeking around the edges.
The non-American media, of course, had no such restraints and let the Reagan-bashing run unfettered.
This is the passage I was referring to:
"Who cared that for years he had been a largely burned-out case, more of a circus act than a serious writer, reveling in adolescent stunts with firearms, alcohol, narcotics -- the predictable paraphernalia of the self-styled outlaw who wowed the chattering classes and other assorted rubes and poseurs long after his appeal had worn off for almost everybody else?"
Does this guy really think as much has been "penned" about Hunter as about Diana's death?
If so, I sure missed it.
Actually , all of this speaks volumes. It speaks to Blue State Secular values. It speaks to the disconnect between the MSM and mainstream America. It's the "Passion Of The Christ" vs. "Farenheit 911" paradigm. No wonder newspaper sales are way off.
Remember the Left is "religious". They look down their noses at people of faith. Meanwhile, this is about the death of a Saint. The guy was a burnt out, semi-coherent, moderately talented artist. However, in the twisted Worldview of Secular Leftists this guy is an icon. Remember when Jerry Garcia died? The vigils and the candles burning in the park?
No. Watching this continued tribute to a derelict is important and fascinating. Dr. Gene Scott (looney but entertaining televangelist died Monday)got scant mention in most papers. My guess is, more Americans were familiar with Gene Scott than Hunter Thompson.
I'm sure nothing will top the Dianna coverage until
WBJ Clinton passes on. But this coverage is getting a little old.
Wasn't HST the 'protype/role model for Doonesbury's "Uncle Duke"?
Drugs destroy lives and will destroy a person's soul given enough time.
The idea that we have a media praising this man's life after he blows his head off is really wierd.
That's the tragedy. What went down then was Thompson's shot, his schtick, the best he could do. He never grew from it. Instead he mistook the drugs and antisocial behavior that were its trappings for its cause, and despite a deliberate effort to cultivate them could never reclaim the artistic edge that he thought they inspired.
And so I tell my uncomprehending friends the pathetic truth as I see it - yes, he was good once. He really was. But the world got better and he didn't.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.