that it does not surprise, nor inform, nornentertain. Attitudes that are fashionablenat the expense of intelligence simply bore.nm» /hat is truly surprising is an articlenthat appeared at the end of last year, innThe New York Review of Books, titledn”The Art and Arts of E. Howard Hunt.”nUnlike Vidal, I never heard of Mr. Huntnuntil the Watergate scandal surfaced, butnin this article he interrupts the narrative,nfor the thousandth time for a personalnnote. He tells us that Mr. Hunt obtainedna Guggenheim Foundation grant in anyear when both Truman Capote and Vidalnhimself received rejections. He thenntraces Mr. Hunt’s career as a writer, CIAnofficial, etcetera with hatred, and concludesnwith some truly scabrous implicationsnthat imply the CIA, or formernPresident Nixon, might have had somenconnection with the shooting of Mr.nGeorge Wallace. At the time this appearednin print, Mr. Hunt was in prison,nhis wife was dead, his reputation shatterednand his career destroyed, his possessionsnstripped by lawyers. He was, innother words, fair game for those whonattack the fallen.nThe same hating and lynch-like spiritnsuffuses Vidal’s comments about Mr.nNixon. One is reminded of the passagesnthat describe social demoralization innCharles Diehl’s classic Byzantium: Greatnessnand Decline, and in particular twonpassages. The first, on pages 144-145,ndescribes how the mob mutilated andnmurdered the fallen Emperor AndronicusnComnenus, and the second, on pagesn147-148, describes a successful courtier,nof the same eleventh century period. “Henwas,” says Diehl of Michael Psellus,n”learned, talented and versatile … anwriter of the first order, full of humournand verve . .. but he intrigued with thenworst. It was said of him that he was anprofessional journalist, who knew thatnhis pen was a weapon … It is certainnthat he preferred charges against his oldnfriends when so ordered … that henyielded without protest to the revolutionn… He was mean, cowardly and corrupt;na perfect example of the Byzantine courtier,nin whom a contemptible nature wasncombined with a first-class brain.”nIn reading Vidal’s articles, one is impellednto wonder if, in our present timesnof social demoralization, we are not producing—andnelevating to undeservedneminences—the same sort of unscrupulousntalents, whose efforts may dazzlensome and nauseate many more. •n”Gore Vidal as an essayist accomplishes what so many Victorian novelists set out to do—tonentertain and to edify. He is always funny and often witty. His paradoxes at their best rival OscarnWilde’s best. . V—Harper’s Magazine.n”… whatever his subject… it is nearly always he who is the subject you find the most interestingn. . .”—Stephen Spender, The New York Times Book Review.n”He is a moralist whose subject is hypocrisy and the cliches which provide the public with short cutsnto self-congratulation . . V —The New York Review of Books.n”His self-possession, intelligence and wolfish wit are everywhere visible . . T—Newsweek.n”Not since Thomas de Quincey’s chronicles of halcyon days with Wordsworth and Coleridge hasnthere been such a hilarious wedding of criticism and remembrance . . .”— Village Voice.n”… a fascinating exercise . . V—Publishers Weekly.n”Recommended.”—Library fournalnnn15nChronicles of Culturen