ComnieriiiablesnPodhoretz’s MonitionnNorman Podhoretz: ThenPresent Danger; Simon & Schuster;nNew York.nby Alan J. LevinenNorman Podhoretz has writtennfar and away the best of thenrecent spate of warnings aboutnthe international situation andnreappraisals of America’s position.nIt is a brief and penetratingnexamination of the dilemmasnfacing the Western world. Podhoretz’snaccount of the evolutionnof American attitudes andnpolicies since 1960 and the impactnof the Indochina War isnparticularly succinct, effectivenand devastating. The debilitatingn”culture of appeasement,”nas Podhoretz calls it, is tornnapart and exposed as the tissuenof corrupt lies and suicidal delusionsnit is. The fashionable rationalizationsnemployed for appeasementnare thoroughly refuted.nAmong them: the claimnthat military superiority was ofnno value, that the Soviets are anstatus-quo power and any aggressionsnthey launch will be defeatednby the forces of local nationalismnand that today’s “real” conflictnis between “North and South”nrather than “East and West.”nThough Podhoretz does not examinendefense problems in greatndetail, what he says is clear andneminently sensible. He showsnwhy a build-up both of conventionalnand strategic nuclearnweapons is needed.nA few minor defects, however,nshould be noted. Podhoretznfrequently speaks of the dan-nDr. Levine is an historian innNew York.nger to the United States as “Finlandization”—anquiet, humiliatingnsubordination, rather thanntotal defeat, though he clearlynrecognizes that a policy of appeasementnmust lead to a communistntakeover of Western Europe.nBut Finland’s position isnnot comparable to that of thenWest. The Finns did not choosen”Finlandization” through cowardice,nstupidity or insanity; itnwas the best deal they could getnunder the circumstances, andnthey were willing to fight tonkeep such independence as theynhad. A policy of surrender bynthe West has no such obviousnstopping place. As things standnnow, it looks like the West hasnbecome so debilitated—rationallynand morally—that it’sndoubtful whether any deal cannbe made, let alone one whichnmight be rooted in Western selfinterest,nor which may possessnany sound survival instinct.nSome parts of Podhoretz’snsummary of the earlier years ofnthe Cold War are a bit oversimplified.nFortunately it’s not quitentrue that the Soviets had a completelynfree hand before the containmentnpolicy was made explicitnin 1947. It is very doubtfulnthat the Kennedy administrationnwas any more anti-Sovietnthan Eisenhower’s—this notionnseems to mistake pose for reality.nIt seems probable that thenbeginning of the disintegrationnof the containment policy cannbe dated to the Kennedy-Johnsonnera rather than to the Nixonnadministration, although Kennedynand Johnson were men ofniron compared to their successors.nOddly, Podhoretz seems tonaccept the idea that the Indo­nchina War was unwinnable,nthough he now summarily dismissesnattacks on American policynas “jmmoral.”nPerhaps a more serious faultnis Podhoretz’s failure to examinenthe long-range causes of thenWest’s predicament, as opposednto the developments of the lastntwenty years. He frequentlynwrites as though things wouldnbe all right if only we had notnIII FocusnPhotography & StylenBeaton; Edited by JamesDanziger;nViking Press; New York.nby Mary Ellen FoxnCecil Beaton was a renaissancenman: illustrator, societyncolumnist, costume and set designer,nauthority on fashion,ndiarist, man-about-town andnphotographer.nI saw him shortly before hisndeath, paralyzed by a stroke,nbeing pushed in a wheelchair bynDiana Vreeland as she gave himna personal tour of the MetropolitannMuseum’s Costume Institute.nFollowing their entouragenas closely as I dared, I was a bitnoverwhelmed by the still-extantnvitality and glamor of his handsome,naged figure. Neither IngridnBergman on Madison Avenuennor John Gielgud on Lexington,nnot even Martha Grahamnon East 57 th Street could approachnhis way of projectingngrandeur.nThis book concerns itself withnhis talents as photographer, andneven in this one field they arendiverse and multifaceted. Chroniclernof society figures and thenBeautiful People for 60 years,nDr. Fox is a frequent contributornto the Chronicles.nnnabandoned or slackened the containmentnpolicy. Yet it can benargued, and was argued by somenpeople at the time it was begun,nthat containment was nevernadequate—and moreover, as andefensive, reactive policy it borenwithin itself the seeds of itsnown destruction. But such reflectionsnshould not detract fromnthis brilliant description of ournpresent dilemma. Dnofficial photographer to thenBritish royal court, photographernof celebrities—stage andnscreen, the arts and politicsfashionnphotographer, travelnphotographer, recorder of thenBritish war experience: his cameranseems to have investigatednevery corner of his time’sn”better” reality.nThrough it all, he appears tonbe constantly and meticulouslynposing his subjects, human andninanimate. This is natural in hisnflattering tableaux of Edwardnand Wallis or in the pictures ofnhis big romantic crush, GretanGarbo. However, the most strikingnexample of his quest fornaesthetic pattern is a shot, circan1940, of evacuated childrennduring a blackout. The nakednlittle bodies lying in a tanglenarouse less pity than curiosity:nis their pattern natural or wasnit arranged by Beaton for maximumneffect.-‘nThis preoccupation with hownthings look—perhaps to the detrimentnof how things are —naroused much criticism of hisnwork in later years, when Beaton’snstyle slid from vogue to benreplaced by more modern andnfashionable photographers suchnas Penn, Avedon and HelmutnNewton. Yet one has only tonJanuary/Febrttary 1981n