Paul Johnson is a prolific writer who has written over 50 books and contributed to several newspapers and magazines, notably The Daily Telegraph, the New York Times, and the New Statesman. As a historian, he has written biographies of Elizabeth I, Edward III, Napoleon I, Winston Churchill, and George Washington.
There is even a 49-member Facebook site dedicated to him. In appreciation, President George W. Bush presented him with the Medal of Freedom in 2006.
However, Johnson's life and works are not without controversy.
Johnson's Political Left and Right Leanings and Scandal
Johnson has meandered through political biases in his career. He started on the left, supporting Labour but by the 1970s he had abandoned his post as editor of the left-wing New Statesman and began endorsing right wing leaders such as Margaret Thatcher and Augusto Pinochet. Declared eminent by his conservative supporters and iconoclastic by his more liberal detractors, Johnson can seem to be mischievous or even roguish. In Forbes magazine (Oct. 6, 2006), he wrote in "The Nonsense of Global Warming", that "people can be suckers on a grand scale."
But Johnson is not without scandal himself and some have even said he was suckering the audience.
In Salon (May 28, 1998), gadfly Christopher Hitchens commented on the public break-up of Paul Johnson's 11-year affair with Gloria Stewart. She revealed that Johnson, who moralized about family values, liked to be spanked while lovemaking. Hitchens went on to say that "the Brit spanker" was revealed, if not reviled, as a charlatan.
As a George W. Bush and company favourite and a hypocrite, proven by his dalliance, can Johnson's historical analysis be trusted? Christopher Hitchens thinks not. But if a drunk slurs a good idea, is it any less a good idea? Johnson is still skillful in presenting food food for thought.
Johnson's Analysis of Marx, Ibsen, and Hemingway
Johnson wrote Intellectuals (Wiedenfeld & Nicholson, 1988) "as an examination of the moral and judgmental credentials of certain leading intellectuals to give advice to humanity on how to conduct its affairs" (p. ix). He studied a dozen persons plus commented on three others in a concluding essay. As a good historian he divulged his main sources and used ample footnotes to support his claims. He clearly defined his subjects as being secular intellectuals who believed they had the responsibility to reconstruct society mores according to their own principles. The problem, he feels, is that they didn't follow their own rules and treated others shabbily.
Although Johnson included several intellectuals from the Enlightenment, the Romantic Era, and what historian Eric Hobsbawn called The Age of Extremes, 1914-1991 (Abacus, 1994), three should illustrate his conclusions sufficiently:
- from the Scientific Age, Karl Marx, a German exile in England who wrote Das Kapital (1867) and the Communist Manifesto (1848);
- from theatre, Henrik Ibsen, a Norwegian and the putative father of of modern theatre, author of The Doll's House (1879) and Hedda Gabler (1890);
- and from literature, Ernest Hemingway, an American winner of the Nobel Prize in 1954 and author of several books including The Sun Also Rises (1927)and The Old Man and the Sea (1951).
According to Johnson these men shared several traits of the modern intellectual.
- Incivility: All three were abusive to others. It was as if they felt the world should be grateful to genius in their midst and society owed them. Civil rules did not apply to them.
A German report in 1850 said that Marx was unhygienic and often drunk; he borrowed money constantly and would not repay, disavowing the charging of interest. He was often angry with friends who might offer minute suggestions too (pp 73-77).
Although Ibsen challenged the psychological and social norms of Victorian society, he could be cruel too. He hated dogs and once poked his stick at one behind a gate for six to eight minutes (p. 104). In later age when his nurse helped him get to the street, he would swing his stick at her. He also had nothing to do with his father for over 40 years.
Hemingway embodied the 20th century American male of action, but his incivility was a concomitant failing. He had a profound hatred of his mother; he used cutting sarcasm on friends with whom he had a falling out; and he fondled whores in his wife's presence (p. 166).
- Deceit: Although modern intellectuals proposed new truths they seemed to be inveterate liars.
Marx claimed to be a scientist and researched documents in the British Museum rather than visit factories and working men. However he played loose with his evidence. Johnson makes the case that Marx misused facts cited by British reformers and completely ignored that their observations of abuses were actually being addressed by the resulting Factory Acts. Johnson says Marx misquoted and misrepresented (pp. 66-67).
Ibsen criticized society but loved their awards. He was constantly seeking praise and medals of honour, and lied about soliciting for them. Hemingway constantly lied about his war experiences and sexual exploits as if he were not heroic enough (pp.154-155).
- Inequality: Modern intellectuals usually espoused righting the inequalities and unfairness of the world; often they perpetuated what they fought against.
For instance, Marx was repressive regarding his daughters' education; racist towards one daughter's Cuban husband; and never remunerated the family maid for her services although he had a son by her that he never recognized. As for Ibsen, he felt for humanity but was repelled by individuals (p. 87). He also had an illegitimate son but never supported the mother or the boy. Hemingway's egoism lashed out often and viciously. He destroyed relationships and marriages, and eventually himself with drink. His was a perverse equality that first embraced some and then rejected many, including himself.
Johnson contends that Intellectuals' ideas may fascinate and motivate but that their lives are not worthy of emulation. In this case, it may take one to know one.
Join the Conversation