How Christopher Buckley blew it

‘Losing Mum and Pup’ is beach-book stuff, fascinating, well-written, but inessential

by Barbara Amiel on Thursday, June 18, 2009 2:40pm - 13 Comments

How Christopher Buckley blew itI talk to my dogs but, though a lot of enthusiastic tail wagging takes place, I’m not blind to the observation of William James that they have no more understanding of the delights of literature and music than I do of the rapture of bones under hedges or smells of trees and lampposts. They belong to a different universe. I’m aiming to get two more: a rescue kuvasz next and then perhaps a Caucasian ovtcharka.

These are not breeds to turn over to dog walkers or leave to idle in the kitchen, unless you are aiming to become that mythical old woman who dies and is eaten up by her pets. They are work if owner and dog are to happily survive. “Industry is the enemy of melancholy,” William F. Buckley said, and when I last visited him in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., shortly before his death, he had a new puppy creating havoc, was so ill he could hardly remain vertical, yet was still writing marvellous prose in his final book on Ronald Reagan. Inspired by this, on the level of mole to mountain lion, I find my two kuvaszok and writing deadlines leave me little time for elegant woe.

I came across that Buckley quote in Losing Mum and Pup (Pup being William F. Buckley, not a young canine), written by Christopher Buckley after the death of both parents within a few months. Having one extraordinary parent is burden enough for any offspring, two is Sisyphean. Still, Christopher is at pains to emphasize the “greatness” of both parents.

“I use the term precisely,” Christopher writes, “for Pup was a great man . . . a great Catholic author, a great debater.” Similarly, his mother, Patricia Taylor Buckley of Vancouver, was a “great lady . . . (I boast) great, even grand.” But he isn’t up to explaining this greatness. I quite see how resentful one gets when your father can write a superb column in five minutes flat and sends you an email about your last novel that reads “P.S. this one didn’t work for me. Sorry.” But, while no man is a hero to his valet, it is sad when the son has pretty much nothing but the valet’s point of view himself.

What Christopher gives us, apart from a wonderful chapter about sailing with his father, is Pup trivia: lists of important people; Pup’s disdain for normal protocols on urination, leading to some unique pissing moments; his addiction to prescription medication, including enormous amounts of Ritalin. Most of us, including Christopher, could take Ritalin till we levitated but fat chance we’d produce the quality of work Buckley did. As for his mum (so glad he didn’t use that ghastly “mom” word), Pat was apparently a compulsive liar matched only by her compulsive drinking, which led to “Mum’s serial misbehaviour.” Her lying was world-class, disconnected from any reality as in “the king and queen always stayed with us when they were in Vancouver,” delivered with magnificent panache.

All good beach-book stuff, fascinating, well-written, but inessential. After all, we are talking about the man who wrenched America into a new path of thought that brought forth, among other things, Ronald Reagan, and I want to know more about the “greatness” before I read about the eccentricities. Christopher had a marvellous opportunity in this book but, following one of Pup’s personal habits, he pissed it away.

Almost anyone doing work that requires higher-than-usual mental activity has a touch of eccentricity. All those damn neurons firing across the brain’s synapses must take some offbeat paths. This can inhibit rather than help. J.D. Salinger has lived in the same New Hampshire town for the last 50 years and speaks to almost no one and has published almost nothing since The Catcher in the Rye. One local said her last exchange with him was in the 1990s when she accidentally dropped a homemade loaf of bread at his feet. “I can’t remember what he said,” she recalled, thus robbing literary life of new Salingerisms, “but he was very irritated.”

Writing families often write about each other. Generally it falls to the lesser talent to write about the greater one. Alexander Waugh (son of the wonderful Auberon, grandson of Evelyn) tried to evade the task by writing a biography of God during the bereavement period for his father, an eccentric but apt distraction for the heir to such an Anglo-Catholic inheritance as Brideshead Revisited. After that, he caught the family thing in a biography titled Father and Sons.

Martin Amis has established himself as the exception to the lesser talent rule. His father Kingsley was a hugely talented author, an attractive and dishevelled man living in a complicated ménage à trois, while Martin was short and dentally impaired. Martin overcame these challenges with new teeth and literary success, which resulted in a chorus of priggish British mockery and an industry of former girlfriends chronicling his “dating” habits in the British press. He relocated to America where whiter-than-white dentures are protected by the Constitution.

“I always knew I would have to commemorate him,” he writes of Kingsley in Experience. “He was a writer, and I am a writer; it feels like a duty to describe our case—a literary curiosity which is also just another instance of father and son. This will involve me in the indulgence of certain bad habits. Name-dropping is unavoidably one of them. But I’ve been indulging in that habit, in a way, ever since I first said ‘Dad.’ And I do it because it has been forced on me. I have seen what perhaps no writer should ever see: the place in the unconscious where my novels come from. I couldn’t have stumbled on it unassisted. Nor did I. I read about it in the newspaper.” That’s the Amis writing gene refined to a high degree.

Martin has five children. Eccentricity has been their petri dish. With luck, great literature will be the cultivated product.

Bookmark and Share
  • Anon

    If Bill Buckley was surrounded by people like Barbara Amiel, no wonder he abused amphetamines. My eyes started glazing over at "Caucasian ovtcharka," and I was comatose by the end of it.

    Awful. Just awful

  • felix_jones

    Barbara and Christopher Hitchens should really get together. It would be a pretension-off of epic proportions.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/swedishanna swedishanna

    Why does everybody knock Barbara Amiel. She is not pretentious and
    she is actually a very sensitive woman who should be praised for
    her loyalty and her genuine love of her husband (like him or not). She has shown remarkable courage and strength of character throughout her recent tribulations. She is the first person to admit her faults .
    Her writing is thoughtful and yes, sometimes droll and she is well-
    informed. She is not pretentious, she makes no bones about her
    origins and she is rightly pleased to have been able to enjoy a better
    security in her life. She is always direct in her accreditations for her
    fortune – good or bad. Leave this lady alone for the sake of decency! Please. Is chivalry totally dead???

    • Caldog

      oh my Gosh! You are really Barbara Amiel under pseudonym! Too funny!

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

    Well put, Milord.

  • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

    LOL, we are really living in the age of savage satire.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/swedishanna swedishanna

    Hello Jack, I guess you are not a knight in shining armour and you must think you are perfect.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

      It's all relative, eh?

    • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

      It's all relative, eh? As to being a knight in shining armour, I'm fighting a dragon as we speak.

  • haithabu

    What are you on, scissorpaws?

  • Very.amused

    Just finished reading "Losing Mum and Pup". It is hilarious and thoughtful.

    Unlike Henry Kissinger, the Incarcerated lord and his lady received NO mention at all. Nada.

    How Christopher Buckley blew it? Black and Amiel didn't register in C.B.'s musing.

  • E. F. Taylor

    Barbara, I just ordered your book "Confessions" via Amazon, hoping that it will reveal how you preserved your view of liberty and conservatism as a girl in Canada. Barbara, you are an icon, a national treasure, and a living library of Canadian as well as international conservatism. Although it was decades ago, I remember vividly my professors at Ryerson and the University of Toronto excoriating your writings as they shook copies of the The Toronto Sun at the class, in an effort to school us exclusively in leftist dogma. How you so splendidly survived the hatred and disdain, and continued to write bravely, fills me with wonder. Despite everything, you have lived a full, generous life, and set an example of truth and individuality. Thank for being you, Barbara Amiel, and for writing about it well.

  • nigswander

    Always good writing. Who has your literary gene been handed down to?

From Macleans