Viewing entries in
Magazines

Comment

"Call Me Bill"

NATIONAL REVIEW
November 23, 2013
 
by James Panero

A winter spent skiing with Buckley in Switzerland, and being his assistant and protégé.

The winter after my senior year in college, Bill Buckley invited me to Gstaad, Switzerland, to help him on a novel called Spytime: The Undoing of James Jesus Angleton. Our program there followed much of what he had been doing each year. For a little over a month, he and his wife Pat and a small staff took over a chalet in the ski area, in a village called Rougemont. Somewhere in Switzerland, Bill had stored a crate of old dictionaries, videocassettes of Brideshead Revisited, abstract paintings, and leopard-print throws. In the days before his arrival, the staff used these items to convert the chalet into another Buckley office and home. And each year, Bill brought along a young college graduate to be his writing assistant. He put us up in an inn just down the hill.

I first got to know Bill, a bit, as the undergraduate editor of The Dartmouth Review. Jeffrey Hart showed him a piece I had written — I think it was a review of the movie Kids — and Bill wrote back approvingly. That translated into an internship at NR, then an editorial job. But I had really met him only a handful of times when he called me into his office and asked me if I liked to ski. I said, “Yes, Mr. Buckley, I do.” He put his hand on my shoulder and said, “Call me Bill.” The invitation to Switzerland came the next day.

“There is never a good time for a busy man to take a vacation,” Bill once said. “And since there is never a good time, he might as well take it whenever we wants.” But Bill never vacationed, even on vacation. He never took weekends off, most likely because his greatest fear was boredom.

So Bill gave himself the assignment of writing a book each year during his stay in Gstaad. The winter I was there, it wasn’t one of his Blackford Oakes novels, but it was a Cold War thriller. The book was a fictionalized first-person story as told by James Angleton, the real life head of U.S. counterintelligence. Angleton’s archenemy, in our book as in real life, was Kim Philby, the famous double agent from the British secret service. Philby had been recruited by the Communists as one of the Cambridge Five and defected in 1963 to the Soviet Union, where he was awarded the Order of Lenin. For Angleton, Philby was the spy who got away, and our novel hinted that it drove Angleton insane.

So in Gstaad, while everyone else went on holiday, we made a novel. Bill woke up at 4:30 every morning. I drove up to the chalet, overlooking the mountain face of the Videmanette, at 7:30. Bill always lent out his four-wheel-drive Peugeot to his young assistants. He handed me the keys our first day at the top of the hill and gave me a quiz about the route to get his morning newspaper. I didn’t want to admit I couldn’t drive stick. So I learned on the road from my hotel to the chalet, and promptly burned out the clutch.

We worked for several hours together every morning, our desks catty-corner to each other. The Goldberg Variations — the Glenn Gould recordings — played in the background as Bill typed. If Bill wanted to set a scene in Beirut in the 1960s, he’d ask me to come up with the detail. Then we went to lunch in one of the hamlets dotting the resort, or in the private restaurant atop the Wasserngrat called the Eagle Club. Here we’d discuss what should happen next in the plot. How about we hide a gun in the camera? Let’s kill off so-and-so. He had very little sense of where his book would go. Then we would ski for a few hours. Then we would return for the afternoon session.

Buckley had it in him to write 1,500 words a day — after a month, you have a novel. But those 1,500 words needed a second pair of eyes, and that’s where I came in. In his first drafts, character names changed. Dates were all wrong. I helped fix those in the afternoon sessions. Then at 7 p.m., Julian, his cook, brought in a kir — white wine with a drop of crème de cassis — for each of us. We’d pull out the Dutch cigars and discuss the day’s progress.

Things moved quickly into evening. The Buckleys almost always included me in their entertaining, which was Pat’s full-time job in Gstaad (she didn’t ski): Where should we sit the princess of Denmark, the actor Roger Moore, the pretender to the throne of Greece, the would-be czar of Russia, and Julian, do we have enough fois de canard for everyone? “James,” Bill would say, “you sit here next to me.” As every young person learned around Bill, he always wanted to hear your opinion, even if you didn’t have one. To close out the night, he would have me sing standards while he accompanied me on a piano. This promptly cleared out the house. He liked to be in bed by 10. We repeated it all the next day.

The time I had with him was a fairy tale, of course, but it was also an intense experience. I imagine it was something similar for all the young people he brought in over the years, a list that runs from Neal B. Freeman and Linda Bridges and Paul Gigot to Peter Robinson and Lawrence Perelman and Danilo Petranovich — and to more than one or two apostates. Being so close to Bill could be like staring at the center of the sun. It certainly caused me to reevaluate the writer I wanted to be. After Gstaad, I ended up enrolling in an art-history graduate program before moving on to my current job at The New Criterion. Bill and I kept up with overnight sails across Long Island Sound. He also asked me to write to him often and was encouraging in whatever turn my life was taking.

In Miles Gone By, his most personal collection of essays, Bill devotes more than one chapter to his childhood music instruction. In addition to weekly piano tutorials, the Buckley children were exposed to an hour of phonograph listening four times a week by a tutor named Penelope Oyen. Buckley tells us that “Miss Oyen loved music with a passion. The use of that word here is not platitudinous. Because Penelope Oyen would weep when listening to music. Not always; not for every composer; but almost always for J. S. Bach. . . . I believed her when she said that music is very serious business. As poetry is very serious business. As art of any sort is very, very serious business: that which is sublime can’t be anything less.” Certainly, this sense for the sublime connected with his faith in God. His greatest regret, he said late in life, was that he wasn’t better at prayer.

This passage reminded me of what it felt like to be there in Gstaad. Bill was never a master at the piano, but he was a great virtuoso. In Switzerland, like a sort of music appreciation, Bill was giving out Buckley appreciation.

Bill found music in words. He played them into his writing, channeled Bach through the computer keyboard. He was probably second only to Shakespeare in bringing words into circulation. “Why do you want to be a party to diminishing the choices that you have, when you’re dealing with a language which you worship for its beauty?” he once said. This virtuosity combined with his great vocal presence. Willmoore Kendall once said that Buckley could do as much with his voice as Laurence Olivier.

I am still amazed how much he shared these gifts with someone who was an entry-level editor, and how much he believed in my help. Even when we were together in Gstaad, and emphysema was starting to take its toll on him, his talents were dazzling. “A sort of personal ebulliency sustains me,” he once said in an interview.

David Brooks said that “for all of Buckley’s contributions to conservative ideas, his most striking contribution is to the conservative personality. He made being conservative attractive and even glamorous.”

Bill Buckley’s unabashed life performance was his answer to the fallen century he had been born into, which he was determined to stand athwart. At the heart of this conservatism was this great generosity, to convey his brilliance through example, to reach across generations, and to have us close enough to listen in.

This piece is based on a speech delivered at Yale’s William F. Buckley Jr. Program earlier this fall.

Comment

Comment

"Future Tense" Now Available in Hardcover

Screen Shot 2012-10-11 at 12.42.51 PM


James writes:

I am excited to say that Future Tense: The Lessons of Culture in an Age of Upheaval, Essays from The New Criterion is now available in hardcover from Encounter Books.

Future Tense examines our pivotal era through a variety of lenses and includes "What's a Museum?" my essay on the cultural capital of art.

IMAG0996

Beginning with a meditation on memorials after the 9/11 attacks (Michael J. Lewis), the essays also address patriotism in relation to Pericles (Victor Davis Hanson), twenty-first century American pride and leadership (Andrew Roberts), the future of religion in America (David Bentley Hart), and the unwinding of the welfare state (Kevin D. Williamson). Continuing this arc, pieces examine self-knowledge and modern technology (Anthony Daniels), and the difficulties of making law in the modern world (Andrew C. McCarthy). In its penultimate essay, the book explores the possibility of a forthcoming political revolution (James Piereson), then closes with a reflection of culture’s role in the economy of life and the fragility of civilization (Roger Kimball).

Future Tense is now in stock and on sale at Amazon.

UPDATE: Tom Carson at The American Prospect offers an early review. Spoiler: he's a fan, (but calls my contribution "fun and smart").  

Comment

Comment

What's New & What's True: Remembering Hilton Kramer

Hilton photo0002

Hilton Kramer, 1928-2012

THE NEW CRITERION
May 2012

What's New & What's True
by James Panero

from "Remembering Hilton Kramer: Recollections from friends and colleagues," a special section in The New Criterion

In the 1980s, growing up in the ideological confines of the Upper West Side, I first knew I liked Hilton because the people around me didn’t. Or at least they professed not to, all the while turning, first thing, to his front-page art reviews in The New York Observer. I began to suspect that they objected to what he wrote not because it was wrong, but because it was taboo. For me, nothing could have been more appealing.

Ten years ago, when Hilton helped rescue me from graduate school and an uninspiring career in academia to join The New Criterion, he was revealed as simply a truth-teller with a typewriter. For a few hours in the room next door, he happily click-clacked through the social mores and false faiths of “what’s new” to reveal what’s true. In his columns he blew the whistle on our fake avant-garde while defending its genuine heirs. Then he went out for a long lunch.

Hilton appreciated the “historical epoch” of modern art because he saw our age as being little more than its carnivalesque reflection. In his fearless essay “The Age of the Avant-Garde,” he called out those “traditional antagonists of the avant-garde”—the media, academia, and the marketplace—now in “profitable alliance” pimping the next big thing. More than that, he cared about what artists and writers actually did rather than what the culture thought they should do.

It is for this reason that Hilton became a hero to so many artists—a fact that I’ve long known but which was reinforced by the calls that came in after his passing. He gave artists license to ignore the hype. He encouraged them to follow their vision. It was the same for writers, and why his magazine has never tried to edit the voice out of its essays. There isn’t only one good way to write, just as there isn’t only one good way to paint. What matters is that our creations never compromise to what’s expected. We are, of course, a compromising species, far more apt to wonder what others will think before we think for ourselves. Hilton therefore led by example. He was the most uncompromised critic I’ve ever known.

Comment