Get FREE NRO Newsletters

 

June 11 Issue  |  Subscribe  |  Renew

Close

New on NRO . . .

The Corner

The one and only.

Print   |  Text
 

Oh, Cripe

So, I’m reading this post by the formidable and valuable Anne Applebaum — and I encounter, “. . . the magazine,” meaning NR, “was founded by an old-style elitist, William F. Buckley . . .”

Oh, cripe. This is so wearying. And it will only get worse in coming years, as people make Bill whatever they want him to be. He was practically born kicking against the establishment. What was his first book? God and Man at Yale. Not a valentine to Yale or the Ivy League.

What was his most famous quip? That he would rather by governed by the first 2,000 names in the Boston telephone directory than by the Harvard faculty. Those are not the words of an “old-style elitist”: if old-style elitism means anything at all.

Tied for most famous quip? “Demand a recount.” When asked what he would first do, if elected mayor of New York, he said, “Demand a recount.” That and the Boston-phonebook thing were repeated to him, over and over.

He referred to one or the other — I believe the Boston quip, but maybe both — as “my C-sharp-minor Prelude.” What did he mean? Well, Rachmaninoff wrote a lot of things: but the public really, really loved his Prelude in C-sharp minor. Everyone played it at home, in the parlor. And when Rachmaninoff gave a recital, the audience expected, and demanded, to hear it: If it was not on the program, it had to be an encore. And Rachmaninoff grew tired of it.

As Bill grew tired of hearing about his Greatest Hits. (I’m not sure he was really and truly tired.) “My C-sharp-minor Prelude,” he’d sigh.

Anyway, Bill was big, really, really big, as we know. He was a lot of things. He contained multitudes. Yadda yadda yadda. But I can tell you this: He had a very, very democratic spirit, and a Christian universalist spirit. He loved fine things, of course. (Amen to that.) But I knew him fairly intimately, and if he was an “old-style elitist,” then I guess I have an extremely poor understanding of old-style elitism. I doubt it, though.

It was inevitable — it was written in stone — that people would say goofy things about Bill after he died: particularly when trying to score points against NR. We expected it, but it’s still kind of hard to endure. And, as I said, it will get worse, as Bill-in-the-flesh grows more distant.

I wish Anne Applebaum would not participate! And let me close this lil’ post by saying how grateful I am for her book on the Gulag, a masterpiece. I will also say this: Some months ago, I referred to Charles Kesler and Sally Pipes, who were guest speakers on an NR cruise, as “possibly the smartest couple since Pierre and Marie Curie.” Anne ’n’ Radek are right up there.

Just one more thing: You want to know what Bill thought, how he was? He wrote a few books and columns, taped a few television shows. Dig right in!

New on The Corner. . .


COMMENTS   7

EXPAND  

   10/13/10 15:43

Well, it depends on how you define "elitist." Some conservative commentators, Buckley included, seem to define "elitist" as "Ivy League faculty members." I don't quite know where that definition comes from or why it's useful, but it gets a lot of airtime.

Althouse seems to be using a different definition. Earlier in her column, she says that "Harvard Law School is no longer 'elitist' *in the traditional, landed-gentry sense of the term*" (emphasis mine). Buckley was certainly a traditional, landed-gentry sort of guy, and his views and attitudes--heck, even the accent he affected--were elitist in that sense. There's plenty of evidence for this, ranging from the now-famous racism of his early days at NR to his opinions on who did and did not deserve a spot at Yale.

I'm also a bit surprised by the claim that Buckley was a "Christian universalist," though perhaps I don't understand what the phrase is supposed to mean. I always thought that Buckley was a traditionalist Catholic, which, at least within the Christian domain, is pretty much the polar opposite of Christian universalism.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
 JPK
   10/13/10 16:04

Lorraine,
Since Catholics are Christian and the word Catholic is derived from the Greek word which translates in English as "Universal", I would say William Buckley was a Universalist Christian.

As far as today's elites, we are not speaking about the old aristocracy. Perhaps a better word would be Vanguard. But again, that word conjures violent revolutionaries. No, today's elites come from the middle and upper classes; as students they excelled in thier studies; they got aceepted into the most elite schools of the country (Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Univ of Chicago, Stanford, etc...).Most get advanced degrees or graduate from one of the prestigious law schools. From there, thier ambitions are usually political. But, many go into specialties that on the face of it, are non-political. They eventually staff the more senior posts in government, business, and education. You see them running the Federal Reserve, Goldman Sachs, HHS, the Justice Department, Treasury, etc... They are elitist in that they see the vast mass of citizens in need of "direction" - thier direction. There isn't a facet of our lives that they don't touch. From dictating how much water should be used to flush toilets, to how much energy a family of 4 should use to heat thier homes, to how many children a family should have, these elites have an opinion and a program for everything. And, of course they demand they taxpayer pays them for thier direction.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/13/10 16:09

The term "elitist" is the problem. People can use different definitions depending on which ox they want to gore. My understanding of the working definition of "elitist" is "someone who thinks they can design your life better than you can." That's not necessarily the old gentry, nor (necessarily) the Ivy League crowd. But if you believe that you should be telling people how to live, that indicates are fairly high opinion of yourself.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/13/10 16:55

Applebaum is off her gourd. Obama as an elitist to be loathed has less to do with education and more to do with attitude. The man's accomplishment in life? Politician. People tire of these clowns who've never done anything to create a business, or even run one, stand on high and pontificate. And I must say, Obama has yet to prove to me his genius. The teleprompter in chief is a droning bore.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/13/10 18:59

JPK writes: "Since...the word Catholic is derived from the Greek word which translates in English as 'Universal', I would say William Buckley was a Universalist Christian."

Well, that's an argument from etymology, but I have to say that I don't find it very convincing (it's rather like arguing that Protestants are protesters). Nordlinger can answer for himself, if he so desires, but somehow I doubt he was saying that Catholics are catholic (in no small part because an awful lot of Protestants would disagree).

"My understanding of the working definition of 'elitist' is 'someone who thinks they can design your life better than you can.'"

Certainly there are people who use that definition, but it's an odd one. Elite athletes aren't people who try to run your lives for you. Elite prep schools don't dictate policy, and neither do the elite units of the military. If you're recruited to some firm or other, and they tell you that "by coming here, you will be a member of the elite," they don't mean that you'll be running everyone's lives. The definition you cited just doesn't reflect the way the term is generally used.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/14/10 09:01

denroy:

"People tire of these clowns who've never done anything to create a business, or even run one, stand on high and pontificate."

Since when is this how we define success or achievement or ability or competence? How many of our best leaders, past and present, have created or run businesses?

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/14/10 09:50

Yes and Anne is suffering a bit of a disconect.

The Ivy's no longer crank out substantive leaders according to this recent WSJ survey of where employers go for grads.

External Link 

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse

Add a Comment

Already Registered? Log In Here.


The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


* Designates a required field.
© National Review Online 2012
All Rights Reserved.
Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital

Gift Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital
NR Apps
iPhone/iPad
Android

NRO Apps
iPhone
Support Us
Donate
Media Kit
Contact