Or, as we call them now, DFH’s. Frank Rich on Norman Mailer on 1968, in the New York Review of Books (which is, as we know, the real outlet for public intellection; please please ask me to write an essay on the new historical revisionism, NYRoB!):
… he is left to contemplate the Yippies in Lincoln Park with their signs of “Vote Pig in 68″: “Were those unkempt children the sort of troops with whom one wished to enter battle?” He frets that Vietnam and “Black Power” are “pushing him to that point where he would have to throw his vote in with revolution,” and asks, “What price was he really willing to pay?”
This question is not resolved by the end of the book, which finds the author, manhandled but unbowed by Daley’s thugs, repairing to the revels at Hugh Hefner’s Playboy mansion. But Mailer knows the trajectory that lies ahead for the country. “We will be fighting for forty years,” he suggests. Perhaps he thought that was hyperbole at the time, but we now know it was portent.

8 comments
Comments feed for this article
May 15, 2008 at 12:14 pm
The Modesto Kid
How to cover an election
I’d like to put in a vote for “Hunter Thompson in 1972″ over “Norman Mailer in 1968″.
May 15, 2008 at 2:38 pm
andrew
What is the “new historical revisionism”?
May 15, 2008 at 3:39 pm
eric
You have to wait for my essay in the NYRoB.
May 15, 2008 at 3:55 pm
andrew
I knew that would be the answer. But I thought it would be worth asking.
May 15, 2008 at 7:20 pm
SEK
I’m with the Modesto Kid. (I even updated it a few months back.) There’s nothing like sending up the absurdity of the modern campaign with, you know, actual absurdity. (Added bonus: Thompson’s earnest love of Jimmy Carter, which he feels, deeply, despite himself.)
May 16, 2008 at 6:12 am
Matt Lungerhausen
Yes, I agree with the Modesto Kid and SEK. I like all of HST’s work, but Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail 72 has to be his most enduring book. Hells Angels and Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas were fun when I was twenty, but when I tried to read them recently, they seemed dated.
I like the NYRB, but as a venue for “public intellection” its a little too smug and parochial. According to the NYRB, everyone worth knowing or writing about is in that elliptical orbit that loops between Manhattan and London. I will be letting my subscription lapse, like my Catholicism.
May 17, 2008 at 11:58 pm
ben wolfson
Why don’t you just propose it to the editors, Eric?
May 18, 2008 at 9:08 am
John Emerson
I hated Mailer’s book when it came out, because it was Mailercentric. Neither his mind nor his sensibility nor his writing style has appealed to me, not since 1963 anyway. He, personally, turned me forever against all forms of sexual politics and sexual ideology. He wrote a load of crap on those topics.
His “The White Negro” also can be paired with Norman Podhoretz’s “My Negro Problem — and Ours” as a chilling precursor of identity politics and American Zionist Fanonism.