Robert Boynton
teaching the book articles bio contact contact

Review of Norman Podhoretz’s “Ex-Friends: Falling Out with Allen Ginsberg, Lionel and Diana Trilling, Lillian Hellman, Hannah Arendt, and Norman Mailer”

The New York Observer, February 15, 1999

In all the trips I've made to the Strand bookstore, I don't think I've ever
failed to find at least one copy of Norman Podhoretz's 1967 memoir, Making It,
somewhere on a dusty shelf. I've considered several theories to explain its
cut-rate ubiquity. Perhaps Random House, anticipating a best seller, printed an
enormous number of copies, a reasonable proportion of which were subsequently
discarded. Or maybe thousands of readers threw their copy across the room in
disgust and packed it off to the used book store. I like to imagine that Making
It was snapped up by hordes of enthusiastic readers who at first appreciated Mr.
Podhoretz's audacious chest-thumping and then, as his politics grew more
reactionary and his prose more leaden, came to so loathe him that they simply
had to banish his book from their homes.

Aside from being the most emotionally satisfying, this last theory has the
advantage of mimicking the pattern – infatuation, gradual disappointment and,
finally, outright contempt – by which Mr. Podhoretz says he lost most of his
friends over the past 40 years. And quite a group of friends they were, as we
learn even before we open the third volume of his memoirs, Ex-Friends – the
subtitle lists the companions with whom he has "fallen out": Allen Ginsberg,
Lionel and Diana Trilling, Lillian Hellman, Hannah Arendt and Norman Mailer. The
notion of a memoir organized around the principle of mutual antipathy has its
own peculiar charm, and since Mr. Podhoretz has never been a particularly subtle
hater, one opens Ex-Friends confident it will be free of the winsome nostalgia
that usually plagues the genre.

Moreover, Mr. Podhoretz has lived through genuinely interesting times –
about which a more candid, forthcoming book should one day be written. A student
of Mark Van Doren's and Lionel Trilling's in the 1950's, he attended Columbia
University along with the editor Jason Epstein and the poets Allen Ginsberg and
John Hollander. After studying English literature with F.R. Leavis at
University, he returned to America to write literary criticism for The New
Yorker, Partisan Review and Commentary, of which he eventually became the

Taking over Commentary in 1960, Mr. Podhoretz transformed a cautious,
parochially Jewish magazine with a dogmatic pro-America, anticommunist agenda,
into a provocative, liberal literary monthly that published some of the most
controversial political and social criticism of its time. He serialized Paul
Goodman's Growing Up Absurd in the first three issues of the "new" Commentary;
he ran essays by Norman O. Brown, as well as by the group Mr. Podhoretz calls
"The Family," established New York intellectuals like Alfred Kazin, Hannah
Arendt, Dwight Macdonald and Irving Howe. Although I've always been skeptical of
Mr. Podhoretz's insistence that he was a "radical" during this period (a claim
that conveniently lends authenticity and drama to his "conversion" from left to
right), it's certainly true that he edited a scintillating magazine.

In fact, I'd argue that one can't really understand the state of so-called
highbrow culture today without first coming to terms with the career of Norman
Podhoretz. Along with Jason and Barbara Epstein, Robert Silvers, Susan Sontag,
Norman Mailer and a few others (the "children" of Edmund Wilson, Lionel Trilling
and Philip Rahv), Mr. Podhoretz reconceived the very idea of what it means to be
an intellectual. The sense of urgency and expectation that swirled around this
third generation of New York intellectuals is often overlooked by historians who
view the late 60's as the end, not beginning, of a grand New York tradition.
Victor Navasky, in a 1966 New York Times Magazine article, "Notes on Cult: How
to Join the Literary Establishment," quoted one critic's bold prediction:
"There's an intellectual revolution going on and we're about to see the
emergence of a new intelligentsia … Guys like Epstein and Podhoretz are
riding herd on the hurricane. They are giving direction and shape to this

For their elders, an intellectual was first and foremost a thinker who
lacked power; for Mr. Podhoretz's generation, the duty of the intellectual was
to come to terms with cultural and even economic power itself – whether by
starting a magazine like The New York Review of Books, establishing
ideologically oriented think tanks, advising businessmen or protesting U.S.
Government policy. This generation realized that power, unless it was embodied
in institutions, would simply fade away. (The intellectual's lust for success –
the "dirty little secret" Mr. Podhoretz trumpeted in Making It – was taken more
or less for granted by his peers; what dismayed them was the unironic, artless
way he announced it.) The period during which Mr. Podhoretz ran Commentary (1960
to 1995) might be thought of as a cultural test tube in which two elements –
power and ideas – were combined and shaken up. The experiment may be too recent
for us to judge the results with any accuracy; but it's clear at least that the
revolution in the culture industry which took place during this time was as
momentous as the battle for modernism and against communism that had preoccupied
the previous generation. For better or for worse, this is Norman's and Jason's
world; we just live in it.

Alas, this is not the tale Mr. Podhoretz chooses to tell in Ex-Friends.

Instead of a genuinely searching exploration of a few unlikely, intense
friendships, Mr. Podhoretz has chosen to write a memoir whose covert function is
to assure himself that he's better off as he is: "I was who I was in some part
because of my friendship with them, and I am who I am in larger part because we
ceased being friends."

One often wonders how much self-deception was involved in these friendships.
Mr. Podhoretz writes that he was dazzled by Lillian Hellman's "easy references
to legendary literary characters" until he wearied of her intellectual
hypocrisy. There is no one for whom he has higher regard than Hannah Arendt –
until she writes about Adolf Eichmann and he realizes "there was nothing
admirable about brilliance in itself." For Mr. Podhoretz, Lionel Trilling was
"the most important literary figure on the Columbia faculty." Trilling tells him
he was "the best student he ever had" – then loses his nerve when faced with
the naked honesty of Mr. Podhoretz's first memoir.

Making It is a tremendously vital book that burns with the yearnings of a
brash 35-year-old. Breaking Ranks is the wistful political memoir he wrote a
decade later. Ex-Friends is a new departure: By now, Mr. Podhoretz fancies
himself a neoconservative eminence grise; his high-minded tone is designed to
convince the reader that he has written a more important, more sophisticated
book than he actually has. The deadly sobriety makes one long for the
jaw-dropping egotism and forthrightness of his earlier work.

The new book rehashes – and often outright cannibalizes – his previous
memoirs, with certain episodes tweaked or, "filled out," with details Mr.
Podhoretz may have hesitated to include while his "ex-friends" were still alive.
But a hint of deja vu is not necessarily fatal when your stories are as good as
some of these are: the disastrous, and ultimately humiliating, orgy Mr.
Podhoretz joins in his Maileresque quest for sexual liberation (Mr. Mailer later
tells him it was "a concentration-camp orgy" and that he was lucky to have
gotten out alive); Ginsberg's parting threat to Mr. Podhoretz that the Beats
would "get you through your children!" (judging by the hard-right politics of
Norman's son John Podhoretz, the Beats failed miserably); Lionel Trilling's
advice to conclude Making It with a mealy-mouthed final chapter, a play-it-safe
retraction; Mr. Mailer privately telling Mr. Podhoretz he admired Making It, and
then denouncing it in the pages of Partisan Review as "a blunder of
self-assertion, self-exposure, and self-denigration."

The only ex-friend about whom Mr. Podhoretz seems to have genuinely
unresolved feelings is Norman Mailer; at one point, he even compares their
friendship to the one between Edmund Wilson and F. Scott Fitzgerald. "I felt a
certain proprietary interest in Mailer – he was my tiger," Mr. Podhoretz
writes. Fellow son of Brooklyn, fellow "nice Jewish boy," Mr. Mailer still casts
a spell over Mr. Podhoretz – never mind the nasty comments about recent Mailer
novels. One wonders how different literary history might be had Mr. Mailer given
Making It a good review. Would Mr. Podhoretz still have taken his right turn?
Might "The Family" have held together?

The two Normans once had an extremely intimate bond, traces of which sneak
into the book. In the wake of the "concentration-camp orgy," Mr. Mailer attempts
to soothe Mr. Podhoretz's disappointment. After a dinner with one of Mr.
Mailer's girlfriends, the three return to her hotel room for a nightcap. The
atmosphere is charged and Mr. Mailer gets up and goes into the bathroom. "A few
minutes later he returned stark naked and directed a very serious look straight
into the eyes of his girlfriend. It was as if he had decided to make up for
having inadvertently misled me by demonstrating what a proper orgy was like."
Unfortunately, the girlfriend simply laughs Mr. Mailer off and apologizes to Mr.
Podhoretz for the misunderstanding, leaving the reader to ponder another great
"What if?"

"I must admit that I was more disappointed than relieved," Mr. Podhoretz

Me, too.

back to top