Greenroom - Christopher Hitchens | Charlie Rose

[@traeHkcalB]

I could listen to Hitch talk about paint drying for hours. RIP :(

[@nomore5668]

Superb orator

[@robg71]

One thing I admired about Hitchens, was His loyalty to his friends. When Rushdie was issued the fatwa, so many people remained silent. Large numbers of the religious leaders, sided with, khomeini. Hitchens was one of the first people, to speak out on Rushdie's behalf. Hitchens was a pleasure to listen to. Never once did I see any, religious figure, beat him in a debate.

[@InformationIsTheEdge]

The closest I ever saw to Hitchens even being on the ropes, as it were, in any debate was that time he was on a panel of himself and 4 preachers. Oh, I should add the moderator too. They all more or less ganged up on Hitch and he still held his own. The reason he did not look so decisively in control like usual was the constant interruptions and abrupt topic changes from the other preachers whenever Hitch would score a valid point. Still quite something to watch.

[@jackstonebaby]

I, agree.

[@dmoney9285]

We still miss you Hitch, you brilliant bastard x

[@surelady]

Does anyone else think its so surreal and also totally awesome to have Hitchens talk directly to the camera like this? Its as if hes talking to you personally. I'm so used to seeing him in profile or looking generally in another direction while hes talking, so this is a novel experience.

[@SamuelDaram]

I could listen to him all day !

[@heidigone]

I hope you still do. I feel the same way.

[@hayleyanna2625]

Christopher we bloody miss you so. Thank goodness his brilliant writing remains and we have KZbin to watch his superb debates. Great wit and spectacular public speaker.

[@seenandnotheard]

Did anybody else notice the "interlude" pun/double-meaning? How brilliantly beautiful.

[@turbozed]

I love his description of the writing of Nabokov and Proust, that they "appear not to be written by human beings." Haven't read Proust yet but am a huge fan of Nabokov and couldn't have phrased a better description.

[@Ryan-cr2xw]

I have to argue with his first answer when he said that it was "the closest he ever got to being on stage". He was on stage many, many times, whenever he debated with anybody or made any kind of speech. He was more captivating than many plays or films I have watched.

[@katrinanelson5360]

Ryan 77 the question was about the first time, you didn't listen

[@weefeatures]

​@@katrinanelson5360 I don't think you listened or got Ryan's point. Hitchens was talking about his first job, as a scene shifter, being the *closest* he ever *ever* got to the stage (being an actor). Ryan then made a sentimental point that Hitchens didn't need to be an actor do to that, because his public appearances were more evocative than you would find in many plays.

[@GamingBlake2002]

@@weefeatures I second this. @Katrina, you misinterpreted

[@samosmond2375]

Thank you Christopher x

[@IndianArma]

I miss this man so fucking much

[@Jeremyramone]

I felt the same way when I first read Nabakov, his writing doesnt seem to be composed by a mere mortal, it's a form of brilliance that transcends what one believes the mind is capable of, cheers to Chris Hitchens, the best writer of this generation.

[@no-oneman.4140]

....topher .....

[@gregorybrown9101]

*Christopher*

[@Inspiteofallthedanger]

Nabokov has always made me feel ashamed to write. To know that the man who makes me feel ashamed to debate feels likewise truly gives me a sense of my place on the totem pole.

[@johnclavis]

Thanks for posting this!

[@harhol]

@ialreadymadeone 1. How Green Was My Valley 2. For Whom the Bell Tolls 3. Coming Up For Air 4. Keep the Aspidistra Flying 5. A Clergyman's Daughter 6. Pale Fire 7. Remembrance of Things Past 8. Middlemarch 9. Ulysses 10. War & Peace 11. Crime & Punishment 12. Shame (Rushdie) 13. The Satanic Verses 14. The Moor's Last Sigh

[@MountainMist-m4u]

It is interesting to me to see that there is a deep humility in him.

[@Clifton100]

I've read about 11,000 books less than Hitchens... And it shows.

[@no-oneman.4140]

I'd go a lot higher.

[@brautigan81]

could listen to him talk about literature all day

[@petrucci0858]

I absolutely agree with you PurushaDesa. How could anyone dis-regard Citizen Kane as being not the best film of 1941, but probably the greatest film of all time. The problem, it seems, is that Citizen Kane was not recognised till later when people started to realise how genius it was

[@urbanverificationist]

Reminds me of Sir Arthur Eddington's comment on the Uncertainty Principle. "Something unknown is doing we don't know what."

[@sqmuth]

Get well soon, Hitch. We need you.

[@nadinejoyce1203]

Finding hitch alive on these channels....grateful.💔💔💔💔💔💔💔💔💔💔

[@rjhjrt916]

@TheFragile89 - First he mentions Pale Fire by Vladimir Nabokov (which I can personally recommend) and the second is actually only one collection or series of 7 books, called In Search of Lost Time (À la recherche du temps perdu), which was once named, and still sometimes incorrectly named -- sorry Hitchens, but the first is a more accurate translation of the French -- Rememberance of Things Past by Marcel Proust. The Proust collection is lengthy (7 books), but well worth it. ENJOY! :)

[@PHOSPH3R]

Thanks comrade, I'll have to check 'em out.

[@U2Quark]

@Clifton100 Where did you get that figure on the number of books Hitchens has read? Mind you, I don't doubt it. Hitchens is undubtedly a learned man and I myself admire him immensely. But I want to know whether he has mentioned somewhere the number of books he has read. Thanks.

[@gamesbok]

@Emilsstuff Curious, but it's almost impossible to have a political conversation with anyone without reference to 1984 and Animal Farm. Two highly popular programs on UK TV at this moment are Big Brother and Room 101.

[@BrokenBard]

Unrelated to this video...I think they should choose political leaders based on if they can match up with Hitchens in a debate. The world would be a better place.

[@no-oneman.4140]

If only they could !

[@jonathanvernon2061]

Rainer Maria Rilke. It's from 'Letters to a Young Poet'.

[@jouyuanda]

what is the book he mentions after How Green was my Valley?

[@nicodemos91]

@clifton100 hitch has ended many a thought with the phrase "and it shows" just wondering if u were referencing him, if so kudos

[@hhiippiittyy]

markpianoman: Until the 40s scientists had not yet created fission because it is a complex process. This, however, has no relevance re: whether or not fission is a reality outside of our experiments.

[@allaboutdmagic]

@slitheringinterstate Thank you for expressing that so neatly.

[@Osvath97]

It is rather odd to read this message now, about three years later.

[@teenjonsnow6175]

what does he say at 2:05 "oxford playhouse ...."

[@teenjonsnow6175]

interlude have been forgotten by me until you asked nevermind

[@MountainMist-m4u]

If by that you mean as a fellow citizen of the US, you can. He has formally become a citizen.

[@camp4869]

Writing is what I'd like to do but I'm not sure it is the thing which I could not live without. Maybe I'm not writer material after all.

[@CmdrTobs]

@Emilsstuff i have that on audio book and have read a little of the lion & the unicorn

[@tylerjamesstephens]

He actually just turned 60, which further proves your point.

[@nathanrasmussen2817]

I could not hear the name of the writer who gave that tip in a form of a question ("if you want to be a writer you must ask yourself...") Anyone who heard it better than me? :)

[@elfred1980]

The god debate is the greatest issue of our time

[@nomore5668]

It used to be.

[@panchollamas6308]

I wish I could speak much better English and understand all his words but yes , we miss him a lot !

[@sanirday]

Digressing a bit, a quote: "Is got willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not Omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. If he is both able and willing, from whnce cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God." - Epicurus

[@hybridamerica]

@WastedTourist You should change the word, "descent" To "ascent".

[@PHOSPH3R]

Anybody recommend any books from Rushdie?

[@nomore5668]

Other than the satanic verses?

[@philmitchell91]

@@nomore5668 Shame is one many recommend if you want some understanding of Pakistan. And of course Midnight's Children which is probably his most respected book.

[@untwerf]

yes itdoes.and if our understanding of science was good enough, we'd be able to explain the 'need to write' that he talks about, through at a guess genetics and other biology related discplines and when our understanding grows even deeper through physics and mathematics..great writers may feel like it comes so easily to them, perhaps like a voice speaking to them and telling them what to write but this is by no means supernatural, i would say they're mostly personality and intelligence related

[@qzetu]

But how exactly is the expansion of stars due to god's power and not gravitational forces? Or some basic Newtonian physics? Saying "god did it" doesn't cut it when there are alternative explanations that do far more for the idea....it's called occam's razor. And the issue of which god comes into question....even if it could be shown that some sort of supernatural deity exists, it'd have to be shown to be a Christian deity, and not, say, a Hindu one

[@jeaves17]

Reading closely is a virtue. The line was "mostly, morally upright". Simply dismissing the qualifier does not change what was originally written. That being said, fascism is a belief that the individual is subordinate to the state. Either you don't know what fascism means or you don't understand the basic tenets of conservatism which Buckley espoused. As for being a lunatic, nearly all the accounts I have ever read reported Buckley was a generous and genuine person.

[@GallagherXXX]

Who?

[@byggarn]

The name was Rainer Rilke I think.

[@EliCross]

Was the angel also there when he wrote his infamous humorous musical pieces, containing crude sexual and scatological humour, the most famous being "Lech mich im ****", idiomatically translated "Kiss my A**"? If you believe he was guided by a divine hand, you must also find a way to account for his less that heavenly personality traits, including his aforementioned fascination with obesenity in some his compositions.

[@Washanuga]

Agreed. Very saddening.

[@qzetu]

let us examine that claim. what is life? what is DNA? what are cell walls, cell membranes, mitochondria, muscles, bone, brain material made from? all these are chemicals. and while abiogenesis still remains in it's developmental stages, it has made great strides in developing things like self replicating proteins or even basic carbon compounds needed for life. remember the amoebae? scientists are getting closer and closer to finding the "chemical equation" for life

[@markpianoman]

If you really step back and look at what that verse is saying, it makes complete sense! Here is a paraphrase to help you understand: Since the creation of the world, creation itself clearly witnesses to the fact of God's eternal power and divine nature -- therefore, men who reject the creator are without excuse before God.

[@YouAreIsrael]

@flight1100 - I simply made the observation that, as an atheist, it would seem more consistent for CH to change his name since he denies the actual meaning of his name. Nor can the origin of the meaning of his name ever be buried in the past. If it meant "bearing Christ inside" at one time then it would still mean the same today.

[@zeldagoblin]

I know, I would kill for a smooth forehead like that lol!

[@xomiakas]

@slitheringinterstate Now read this in your mind using Hitchens voice. You've got yourself a hitchslap.

[@TheGreatDeciever55]

@slitheringinterstate lovely

[@daleneparole1502]

If you dDidnt Listen and Learned from Christopher, You Wouldn't Be Who You Are....

[@johnclavis]

Oh Nietzsche, you're so fine You're so fine, you blow my mind Hey Nietzsche! (clap-clap, clap-clap) Hey Nietzsche! (clap-clap, clap-clap)

[@Stead3111]

haha not the way he drinks

[@MaxwellBennett]

@Clifton100 he must read so fast.

[@qzetu]

that complex things are ry class will show that complex compounds form on their own. so "small and complex" means nothing more than "small and complex circular reasoning" makes no sense :) it's a logic fallacy. it *doesn't* make sense thats the whole point of it being bad logic and another interesting fallacy shows itself..."it's the only explination which makes sense" that is known as an argument from ignorance. it only makes sense to you.

[@Inspiteofallthedanger]

@Clifton100 This would make a perfect t-shirt!

[@daniellamcgee4251]

It pains me that precious time was taken for the banal and lengthy introductory 'stage setting' scenes, which necessitated the editing of Christopher Hitchens' sharing with us, his audience. The cut and splice of film was viscerally painful to me.

[@jeaves17]

Hitchens statement about Falwell was based on the conceit that an enema will relieve shit, or bullshit. That was Falwell's forte. Spewing stuff he himself did not believe to people too ignorant to recognize his deceit. Buckley was nothing like Falwell. As a liberal myself, I disagreed with him often, but he was, mostly, a morally upright figure.

[@GallagherXXX]

HE LOOKS 25!

[@PurushaDesa]

How Green Was My Valley? What, the book that infamous film that stole Citizen Kane's oscar, was based on? No hard feelings against a book I haven't read, but damn that was a real dick move from the Academy.

[@YouAreIsrael]

@SilentSputnik - That's probably true. But then again Christopher Hitchens, from what I've been told about his huge brain and wonderful mind is, apparently, not like "other people" (though he puts his pants on one leg at a time like I do). So I would think such a grand thinker as Chris is would have "thought" about this and changed his name accordingly. Just an observation.

[@nomore5668]

You claim to know his mind and what he thought about his own name. What point are you driving at because it seems rather moot?

[@oneill26011991]

i would say amen, but i need to think of sumthing new to express my agreement... Seconded :P

[@qzetu]

created. a basic chemistry class will show that complex compounds form on their own. so "small and complex" means nothing more than "small and complex" secondly, "circular reasoning" makes no sense :) it's a logic fallacy. it *doesn't* make sense thats the whole point of it being bad logic and another interesting fallacy shows itself..."it's the only explination which makes sense" that is known as an arguement from ignorance. it only makes sense to you. sorry i made a mistake

[@flight1100]

@YouAreIsrael Or perhaps he thought about it very briefly and dismissed it as nonsense. Witch of coarse is exactly what it is.

[@MrReasonabubble]

Hitchens' detractors tend to complain about his supposed arrogance. I think that's a false impression based on watching him in debates, where one has to exude confidence and certainty. His detractors would do well to watch videos like this one, which are evidence of Hitch's self-effacement.

[@michellestmarie]

I don't think he does. If you look at photos of him as a young man, he has very beautiful eyes. I think he just looks like that naturally and has done himself a bad turn due to unhealthy lifestyle (as have I).

[@beebobox]

the non existant god has blessed him with good fortune ! :p

[@qzetu]

Since the creation of the world, creation itself clearly witnesses to the fact of God's eternal power and divine nature -- therefore, men who reject the creator are without excuse before God. Really ,would you like to fill me in on how "creation itself clearly witnesses to the fact of God's eternal power and divine nature Since this verse is truth i sure cant undestand why we have millions of people who havent witnesses to the fact of God's eternal power and divine nature .

[@sqmuth]

Yep. Lot of good my comment did.

[@ls1z28chris]

Hope only requires no reason or faith if you have no expectation of your hope being realized. I think this is quite contrary to what most people believe when they say they hope for something. Therefore your two cents are worthless. Most people don't view their hopes as transient apparitions. They view them as desired outcomes. You make no distinction between the two. Your thoughts are worthless.

[@BoozyBeggar]

"How could a Buddhist be a Deist? That doesn't make sense." Simply by means of the two not being mutually exclusive. Deism: the basic belief that some creator god exists/ed yet plays no other role in the universe. Buddhism: a bit more complex but basically a set of philosophical and religious beliefs and rituals; life is suffering, souls exist, souls pass from creature to creature upon death/birth, enlightenment and nirvana are goals strived for, etc. Show me the exclusionary parts.

[@theleequa]

well, you got the hitchens tone! probably not so fun to drink with

[@SilentSputnik]

@YouAreIsrael Most people don't give a shit about what their name is supposed to mean.

[@kurtjk01]

Chukmaty, I respectfully reject your second statement categorically. Hope is independent of many things, including faith. Hope is simply the desire for a beneficial (to you and/or yours) outcome. This needs no faith, nor reason, nor anything else but desire. And desire is quite different from belief. Just my two cents.

[@YouAreIsrael]

@flight1100 - How do you figure? The meaning of the name Christopher has an origin and a direct meaning behind the name. One would think a man as bright (allegedly) as Chris Hitchens would certainly know this and change his name.

[@nomore5668]

Why would he change his name and insult his mother in such a way?

[@Deathstylus]

It's also Christopher, not Chris. To not know this is to reveal just how unfamiliar you are with who he was, especially if you are questioning his intelligence which is ironic coming from someone such as yourself. See? I can insinuate things too. As he put it, he always rejected "any circumcision of the name."

[@markpianoman]

That the creator God put it all in place is fully logical considering that he is the author of the laws of physics in which we operate.

[@nomore5668]

How do you know this? So God will put Physics in place and put bone cancer in children?

[@BoozyBeggar]

"Doesn't atheism hold that everything can be rationally explained?" No. Atheism: holding no belief in any gods. That's it. No overarching philosophy, nostrict set of moral codes to follow, no anti-eucharist to consume... A Buddhist could be an Atheist, but then again, a Buddhist could also be a Theist or a Deist. Knowledge of gods: I'm Agnostic Belief in gods: I'm Atheist Ritualism: I'm irreligious

[@GallagherXXX]

Crime and Punishment? Wow! It is a good one but not great. This guy is 25!

[@drdirs]

No, that sounds more like naturalism. Atheism only holds that we have no reason to believe in the existence of God(s). An atheist is someone who isn't a theist, the word means nothing more than that.

[@markpianoman]

Just as amoebae were not "fully understood" just a couple centuries ago....science will have to constantly adjust its views and conclusion....until....in the end -- we come back to the fact that "God created the heavens and the earth." Don't miss my point with the amoebae -- is simply that something sooo small can be sooo complex -- clearly evidence of the creator God.

[@nomore5668]

Oh ok, what about the natural deficiencies in say the eye? How could an all great creator be so incompetent to create a deficient organ?

[@flight1100]

@YouAreIsrael The origins of a name that are buried in the past have little relevance. I can not talk for Hitchens of coarse but for me to change it would be to acknowledge a value that does not exist. For example I call 25 Dec Christmas day simply because it is commonly known as such. Likewise the name Easter is derived from a pagan festival. Christians well know this but there is no attempt to change it. In modern English its ancient meaning is of no importance.

[@oneill26011991]

alchoholic and a smoker, but apart from that hes an awesome guy

[@TiltoftheZodiac]

What dogmas are we talking about here exactly?

[@andrewjenkinson8948]

I, for one, fail to see the reverence (in Hitchens and others) for Rushdie. I find his writing bloated and colourless, personally. But, each to their own.

[@nomore5668]

You're not the only one.

[@josephharley9448]

@@nomore5668 yes I gave Rushdie a go. like eating cement

[@GallagherXXX]

book's summary??? It is not a summary! READ IT! IT IS A REVIEW OF THE BOOK!I know what overrated Nietzsche has said about it!

[@croutonfada]

RAmen, brother. FSM!

[@GallagherXXX]

I have read that. Still it is not that great. It isn't even the best work of the Great Russian One. Read this cosmoetica-DOT-com/B315-DES255-DOT-htm

[@qzetu]

One can not assume something is true before one proves it. You can't say the bible is true when you are trying to use the bible to prove your point...that's called circular reasoning. No duh, amoebae wasn't fully understood. We didn't even know it existed for thousands of years. But you don't get to denounce science for learning. That's what knowledge does, it grows on itself. Scientists learn and look for the future, you Christians look to the past.

[@sinprelic]

noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

[@qzetu]

ah, now you claim that science will find god, i question that. you have yet to give any evidence, or really any logical argument for the existence of any god at all, much less your own. science has yet to invoke a supernatural explanation for really anything. thats what makes it science and not religion. and your comment for the amoebae is understood, it's an argument from complexity, the idea that complex things are

[@markpianoman]

Scientist have tried to produce life from organic material under ideal conditions but always fail because life is too complex. So how could it have occurred out there in some primordial soup? Even the single cell organism is mindboggling in its complexity. An ameba has so much genetic material in a single cell that it could fill a library of 50,000 volumes. Life had to come from an intelligence of infinite knowledge and power. Life did come from life - God.

[@nomore5668]

How could you possibly know? Where is your evidence?

[@qzetu]

If you really step back and look at what that verse is saying you might come to my conclusion "its a bunch of crap .

[@markpianoman]

qzetu, and who but God wrote the laws of gravity and physics which govern the expanse of the universe? THE CREATOR GOD! Col.1:16 - For by him (CHRIST) were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him. Call it "circular reasoning" -- it's the only explanation which makes any sense.

[@nomore5668]

How do you know that is true?