Talk:Gore Vidal/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

The entry gives the impression that Vidal's apology to Buckley (published in Esquire magazine) was both related to his actions at the debate, and voluntary. In fact, Buckley had filed a libel suit against Vidal, and as part of the settlement, Vidal was required to pay money and issue an apology. The Esquire article was that apology. (A brouhaha recently erupted when Esquire ran its "Best of" issue, and included portions of Vidal's libelous article. Esquire agreed to publish a retraction/correction, and send a copy of the corrections to anyone that requested it.) I think for the sake of clarity, the entry should be corrected to remove any reference to Vidal's apology, or at least clear up that it wasn't voluntary or related to his actions at the debate.

"openly gay novel "The City and the Pillar" "

The pedant in me says "novels aren't gay, people are gay" -- does this need to be rephrased?

Actually, Vidal doesn't even believe people are gay. He is of the "'homosexual' describes behaviors not people" school. I'll attempt a minor rephrase. - Hieronymous

I'm not sure that Vidal is gay, so much as asexual. He was attracted to another boy during his youth, but nothing came of it. In any case, whether a novel is "gay" doesn't imply anything about the author: plenty of gay writers WRITE straight (Clive Barker) and Mr. Vidal isn't exactly gay.

Correction. Your information is incorrect. After years of vigorous sexual activity, almost solely with other young men, Vidal lived with Howard Austen for almost his entire life. Although they apparently never had sexual relations, Vidal considered Austen his lifelong companion. Vidal claimed that combining sex with a long-term personal relationship was impossible for him, and that his relationship with Howard could never have been sustained that long if they had become sexual partners. You write that he had an attraction to snother boy, but "nothing came of it." The boy was Jimmie Trimble, a fellow classmate of Vidal's at the St. Alban's School for Boys. Trimble and Gore had sexual encounters a few times, but then Trimble was drafted, and was killed in the Battle of Iwo Jima in 1945. Vidal dedicated his novel The Smithsonian Institution to Jimmie. 66.108.4.183 21:36, 3 November 2006 (UTC) Allen Roth

gay also means happy, so perhaps it's a happy novel —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.113.49.126 (talk) 19:01, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Funny he'd run for Congress in '82 having said in '80 he didn't vote anymore. (United States, p954) (i'm looking for the first time he said the Reps and Dems are two right wings of the same party, I presume that's after '80 =)

[R23] There is no inconsistency. When available candidates differ superficially and represent identical interests, there is no choice. Voting implies consent. Suppose everybody withheld their consent, ie, nobody turned up to vote. That would send the "Property" a party profound message: provide real choices. Candidates at the federal level benefit the underclasses only by accident, not by design.

[R23] A reference to the two right wings of the Property party appears in the 1972 essay "Homage to Daniel Shays" found in Vidal's "Collected Essays 1952-1972."

Domhoff accepts the Ferdinand Lundberg formulation that there is only one political party in the United States and that is the Property Party, whose Republican wing tends to be rigid in maintaining the status quo and not given to any accommodation of the poor and the black. Although the Democratic wing shares most of the basic principles (that is to say, money) of the Republicans, its members are often shrewd enough to know that what is too rigid will shatter under stress.

[R23] Ferdinand Lundberg, The Rich and the Super-Rich. 1969

Somehow it should be said that he's a kind of homegrown Chomsky. He says much the same things in much the same way. He may even have said some of them before Chomsky...

Isn't Chomsky the home-grown Chomsky? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.22.123.145 (talk) 01:51, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

re his name. from New York Review of Books 1973 Oct 18, as "West Point" in United States

[Dad] had no memory for the past, his own or that of the family. He was so vague, in fact, that he was not certain if his middle initial "L" stood for Louis, as he put on my birth certificate, or for Luther. It was Luther. At fourteen I settled the confusion by taking my grandfather's name Gore.

The Luther portion of the name comes from Gore Vidal's paternal grandmother's side, Margaret Ann Rewalt. Her father's first name was Luther and he was a prominant physician in Pennsylvania. --Miguellabrego 18:52, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Have added, once again (it was deleted at some point), Vidal's birth name and the various permutations afterward: according to Vidal's memoir Palimpsest (Deutsch, 1999, page 401), "... my birth certificate says 'Eugene Louis Vidal': this was changed to Eugene Luther Vidal, Jr.; then Gore was added at my christening [in 1938]; then at fourteen [sic] I got rid of the first two names."Kitchawan (talk) 13:39, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

I do wonder if the "do as I advise" quote is used quite as intended. I happened to stumble on a possible original, which is clearly in toungue-in-cheek mode: "...I am at heart a propagandist, a tremendous hater, a tiresome nag, complacently positive that there is not one human problem that could not be solved if people would simply do as I advise." (New Word Writing #10 1956, as "Writing Plays for Television" United States) I thought the thing didn't sound quite like the Vidal I was reading... now I see why. (Not that he's lacking in ego or things to say; but his self-promotion is a lot less smack-in-the-face than this suggests.

I go more his own comment on Tennessee Williams: "self-pity and self-serving kept in exquisite balance by the finest comic style since S. L. Clemens." (US p1134)

If I ask why source citations included as HTML comments (so as not to clutter the visible text so badly) were also deleted, would I get an answer?

Apparently not.

re the half-n-half of Ben-Hur: I'm not trying to gussy up "Vidal and Fry wrote Ben-Hur." As Vidal recounts it, his half is the first and Fry's is the second.

I think that the long excerpt from the Times about his house in Italy exceeds "fair use" limits and should either be cropped, rewritten, or deleted. Hayford Peirce 20:20, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Vidal's full name is Eugene Luther Gore Vidal. There's no "Jr." His father's name was "Eugene Luther Vidal." (See, e.g., "Palimpsest")

If that is so, then a part of his Wikipedia article contradicts your statement. The contradicting text is as follows:

".....Gore Vidal's mother was an actress and socialite who made her Broadway debut in Sign of the Leopard in 1928. She married Eugene Luther Vidal Sr. in 1922 and divorced him in 1935....."

Also, some sites I have seen, such as [[1]] one, state his name as "Eugene Luther Vidal Jr.". Perhaps "Eugene Luther Vidal Jr" was his birth name and he later on took up the name "Gore Vidal" in place of "Eugene Luther Vidal Jr.". Does this sound logical? Thesomeone987 (talk) 11:41, 16 October 2010 (UTC)Thesomeone987

I seriously doubt if this picture is uncopyrighted or has been released. It is a picture that appears in Vidal's autobiography "Palimpsest". Hayford Peirce 23:59, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

My mistake -- I've just checked my copy of "Palimpsest" and neither picture therein is the same as the one in this article. But I'd still like to know where it comes from.... Hayford Peirce 00:17, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Nope, I was right the first time. I've gone through "Palimpsest" another time, and this time I found the photo that was in the article on page 22. The "Photo Credits" on page 457 of the book says clearly that it is from the "collection of Gore Vidal". As such, Mr. Vidal himself, I'm pretty sure, would have to give Wikipedia specific permission to use it. The editor who inserted this picture gives us no such information, nor any information at all, for that matter. I am, therefore, removing the picture. Too bad -- I gotta say that Jimmy Trimbal is a very cute fellow; I knew a boy at Exeter (which Vidal also attended) who was the spitting image of him. Hopefully my own lightfoot lad is still alive.... Hayford Peirce 00:33, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

:o( Yes, very cute. I don't recall where the image came from. But I got it off the web somewhere. I remember it was easy to find and there were several copies since I initially found it through google images. I certainly didn't scan it in or anything (it would be of far higher quality if I did!), though someone apparently did. Considering he died in '45 that image has to be at least 60 years old. When does this enter public domain?! When Vidal dies? Is this image also in the book [2]? What CAN be used? Ugh, it's beyond purposterous that images of people who've been dead for over half a century can't be freely used. --Deglr6328 09:49, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It's preposterous but, apparently, true. The "fair use" thingee is very difficult to understand but I would think that as long as Vidal is alive he controls all rights to that picture. When he dies it would be his estate, I suppose, assuming that he wills his photo collection to someone in particular. Unless, of course, Vidal himself did *not* take that picture himself and had it given to him by, say, Trimble's sister. In which case it would probably belong the sister or Jimmy's estate or god knows who.... I myself own numerous paintings and sketches by my uncle Waldo Peirce, a semi-celebrated painter, but apparently I can't even take a photo of one of them and post it to the article about him -- his estate still owns the rights to reproductions of his paintings even though those paintings are hanging on my walls. I could, I suppose, try to get the written permission from his three surviving children.... But it's easier just to forget about the whole thing, just as it probably is with the Trimble picture. 17:11, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Copyright protection extends farther than you might imagine. And it belongs to the creator of the work (or their subsequent estate), not to the subject or current owner, unless of course there's an agreement with the creator. Even if a museum owns an item, it might not have any control over the reproduction of that image if it's still in copyright. Copyright also has to do when the work was created and what law was in effect, when it was first published (if so), what country it was created in, etc. Fair use has it's own rules. Unfortunately, some people choose to interpret "fair use" as "cuz I want it".

• WP has encyclopedic articles about copyright.
• Here is the US Copyright Office: http://www.copyright.gov/ and http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-duration.html#duration
• This table might help for US works: http://www.progenealogists.com/copyright_table.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wordreader (talk • contribs) 00:16, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Vidal does have rather pronounced politicals views and while touched on, I think a section should be added discussing his "anti-abti-communist" position during the Cold War, his advocacy of isolationism in prep school, and his support of Tim McVeigh.

If you think this relevant, I will add.

I completely disagree. Vidal is foremost a fiction writer and essayist. Why all the discussion of this politics? This should have more about his art. --Griot

I added it mostly because, of late, Vidal's writings have concentrated on politics. AMcalabrese

Why are his beliefs on religion under conspiracy theories? That seems to imply his disbelief should be mocked and discounted and seems pretty biased towards religion. --Sparrowhawk64 (talk) 23:12, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Shouldn't there be some mention of Vidal's recently expressed opinion that Timothy McVeigh--the greatest mass murderer in the history of the US--was "a true patriot" and a "Constitution Man?" I understand that lefties view Vidal as something of a hero but, come on, at least be honest about what the guy actually thinks. And since you mention Vidal's relationship to McVeigh. I think these quotes should be included, if they do make him look (very) bad. Here's a link to the interview.

http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/the_way_we_live/article6854221.ece

--Sean Smith —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.27.45.173 (talk) 15:43, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Regarding the third paragraph, what does a detailed description of a verbal clash between Dick Cavett and Norman Mailer have to do with Vidal's political views? And for that matter, in the first paragraph, why is Vidal's possibly shared heritage with Al Gore mentioned under 'political views'? 75.106.248.30 (talk) 21:13, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

The more recent photograph of Vidal on this page has no copyright information. It is clearly a copyrighted image--it appears to be an author photo from a book. If someone can make a fair use claim, that would be fine; such a claim would have to specify why this picture rather than any other is necessary to illustrate the article. If not, the image will probably be deleted.

Vidal also says that, referring to a revered Jewish figure of the middle ages, that Shahak's book is "...a joy to read on the great Gentile-hating Dr. Maimonides." [citation needed] This book, which argues that Jews themselves are to blame for anti-semitism because of their mistreatment of gentiles, has been largely debunked by scholars with greater expertixe on the subject. The Interpretational Errors of Israel Shahak A review of Jewish History, Jewish Religion Shabbat and Gentile Lives.

The spelling error here, and the word debunked, need to be replaced. Offer insightful criticisms or refutation might read better than "largely debunked" which is not NPOV. There is an article dealing with the book, which contains arguments against its interpretation of scripture which are likely to sway the reader towards the view of the cited scholars. However the assumption that the reader would hold one opinion in higher regard than another is just that, an assumption.

I have read both Burr and 1876 by Gore Vidal recently. I found Burr to be excellent and 1876 merely adequate. In both, however, I love his interpretations of historical figures and his use of satire. I was looking for an artist who may somehow parallel Vidal in terms of theme or style. I researched but could not find one who did.

Does anyone know of any such artist?

While his style is markedly different from that of Vidal's, I highly recommend to any aficcionado of well-written biography William Manchester's two volumes on Winston Churchill. Sadly, Manchester died before he could complete the third and final volume, and I have been searching since then for a biographer who is his equal.

If I may be so bold as to comment, I believe that what gives Vidal his bitingly ironic style--unusual to a degree when writing historical fiction--is his being gay. Most historical fiction writers--Herman Wouk, for example, an excellent and accurate such writer--take their subject and craft seriously. TOO seriously, Vidal might say. What is missing is humor and irony, which are both a vital part of good observing of historical situations, and the people who play in them. I agree, that Vidal has no equal in this particular dimension of his writing. And I believe that it stems from his being gay (though he would definitely deny this, and deny it wittily), because his perspective is inevitable affected and tinged by the formation of his sensibility through his personal life experiences. We simply don't view the world and its personalities quite the same way as straight people. Not that we have a more accurate point of view. Not at all. Just slightly different; slightly skewed. Note to above writer: You shouldn't be comparing Manchester to Vidal: Manchester is writing history; Vidal historical fiction. A major difference. One strives for accuracy. The other for inspired depiction of a zeitgeist, with the assistance of historical persons and events. That's why I reformulated your comment with other writers of the same genre: Wouk, Uris, Meyer Levin. As for your original question: Who else writes historical fiction in a similar style? I'll give some more thought to that, and see if I come up with any suggestions. But, for superlative examples of writers of historical fiction, there are many suggestions just waiting--Shakespeare (his history plays), Tolstoi, War and Peace, Styron, Confessions of Nat Turner. Plenty of irony there. And much more. 66.108.4.183 02:27, 8 November 2006 (UTC) Allen Roth

The link to the "Jewish History" article (the very last one) seems to be broken. I'm not sure how to proceed; does someone want to try to fix it, or shall I delete it? BarrettBrown 19:44, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Someone has written: In his preface, Vidal states that: "(s)ometime in the late 1950s, that world-class gossip and occasional historian John Frank Kennedy told me how, in 1948, Harry S Truman had been pretty much abandoned by everyone when he came to run for president.... I'm pretty sure that this should be John Fitzgerald Kennedy, but, of course, there's a chance I'm wrong. Does anyone know for certain what Vidal wrote at that time? Hayford Peirce 01:04, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Vidal was a homosexual. Does this or does this not have a place in the article? The tagline was removed by anonymous editer 72.204.9.237 . Again, as it was critical to his work and politics, does it or does it not belong in the first paragraph as: "Eugene Luther Gore Vidal (born October 3, 1925), known simply as Gore Vidal, is a prolific and versatile homosexual American writer of novels, stage plays, screenplays, and essays and has been a public and often controversial figure on both the American literary and political scenes for nearly sixty years."

Amicuspublilius 23:50, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

No, it does not belong in the first paragraph. Vidal is a writer, not a homosexual writer. Sigh. Does the Hemingway article say in the first paragraph that he was "a straight writer"? Later in the Vidal article, it might be mentioned that a number of his works deal with homosexuality and that he has long been a openly declared homosexual. Hayford Peirce 23:56, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, Hemingway was bisexual. (92.11.217.30 (talk) 17:53, 15 October 2009 (UTC))

I think the article should contain a section about his life as a homosexual man. How did it affect his career when he came out? When did he come out? I recall reading that at one point he wanted to be the President. I imagine that for a man with ambitions like his, being gay must've been difficult. I think this is an important aspect of his life. Copy Editor 16:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree 100% -- but not in the first paragraph as "a homosexual writer". Vidal has written a lot about his homosexuality and his political -- "yearnings", I would say, is the correct word, rather than actual realistic "ambitions". His memoir Palimpsest has a lot about this, as do various of his essays and articles over the years. A number of his books are obviously infused by his homosexuality -- others, let's just take Burr as an example, are not, not even a teeny, tiny bit. He is, therefore, a writer who just happens to be a homosexual, rather than a "homosexual writer" who writes about nothing but the homosexual experience. Hayford Peirce 16:25, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Mystery writers are not writers who have written nothing except mysteries, and poets are not writers who have never written prose. The appropriate question isn't about absolutism, but whether homosexuality is a prominent theme in his writing. Cribcage 05:39, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Vidal is bisexual. Or omnisexual. Or something. Reading Palimpsest that is the impression, though I cannot remember whether he explicitly states that he is bisexual. Wulfilia 08:52, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

He is the gay, rite? And why he likes Bush!? But he is sick fag gay and old man. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 214.13.141.100 (talk) 09:31, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Vidal's latest memoir, which I have not read, apparently contains a passage about his long time partner, who passed away a few years ago. Surely this is worth mentioning. If anyone has read the book, it would be easy enough to cite the relevant passages. gar in Oakland (talk) 20:13, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Vidal has called himself a "homosexualist"

I didn't want to drop this information into such a well developed article, since there didn't seem to be an obvious spot to put it. But if any regular contributor would like to find a place for it, here it is: In 1955, Vidal was given an

Since he is still a living person, is there a more contemporary photo available of him? Even if the current photo remains at the top of the article, I think there still should be one elsewhere from the more modern era. Compare to Bob Hope; he was most famous in the top image, but they still have a photo from 1990, much later in his life. --UNHchabo 02:29, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

He's listed in the category "American tax resisters." Now, I know he has written that the income tax is theft, and that he gave a positive review to

Does there need to be? It seems to me that you're conceding he's a "tax resister" and asking whether there's evidence that he's a "tax evader." The terms aren't equivalent. Cribcage 05:36, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

See it yourself: [3] --Striver 02:54, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I just added a few headings & subheadings. The first two thirds of what had been called "Writing career" are now broken down into "Fiction" and "Essays and memoirs"; I feel pretty confident about that. The last third of what had been "Writing career" includes a paragraph about his involvement in Democratic Party political life and a paragraph about his cameos in movies & his tireless self-publicity. It was right to break it off from "Writing career," but for now I've crudely labeled it "Vidal in public life." Most of this probably belongs in the following section ("Political views," which perhaps should be renamed to incorporate also political activities), but the show business stuff should probably be treated either parenthetically with Vidal's writing for the cinema, or in a minor section towards the end of the article. Wareh 15:30, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

All right, I've followed my own advice. See the cumulative effect of my redisposition (no new writing) here: diff. Let me make clear that I'm not trying to make a dig by titling a section "Acting and publicity-seeking" — I'm simply reflecting the fact that the article, as I found it, contained a paragraph about acting & publicity-seeking that was not clearly related to the topic of any other section. (My suggestion above about squeezing it into the discussion of his writing for the movies would probably create a convoluted and rambling mess.) Wareh 15:41, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I think the change was for the best, but there are still many facts under the wrong heading, perhaps because they concern a little of each subtopic. I'm not sure how to deal with that, given the current structure of the article.

I also don't think that the two sentences on publicity seeking containing a quote pulled from context really deserve an entire section heading. Vidal most certainly is a "tireless self-publicist", but I just don't think that's quite as important as the section heading would make it seem. His acting, too, is not really notable enough, in my humble opinion, for its own section. Also, the two don't really go together in the first place, so I don't see the logic behind putting them together under a single heading. The info about Parini doesn’t really belong there either. 67.86.86.217 04:15, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Just seen a clip of him here in Havana. -- Beardo 06:13, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

All the links to Vidal's book "Hollywood" point to a different book with the same title, by Charles Bukowsky. I don't think this would make either man happy.

I have no idea how to fix this. Will somebody with more know-how swoop in> —The preceding

The article is incomplete, does not make sense in multiple places, contradicts itself in multiple places, is laden with bias and opinion, has misleading information, and does not do an ounce of justice to the complex and interesting life Vidal has led. Please, fix these errors before everyone with more knowledge than a seventh-grader finds Wikipedia to be a horrid maelstrom of ridiculous and useless facts that leave the real gems in history permanently tarnished. 67.86.86.217 06:26, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

• There is an "edit this page" tab at the top of the article in case you would care to adopt a more productive form of criticism. --Dystopos 06:30, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I was under the impression that my personal criticism didn't belong in the actual article. I thought that's what the talk page was for. Silly me. Perhaps I should create a new section entitled "Personal Views About This Article". Then we could all share how crappy we think it is.

Nice to see you bothered to help the situation after arrogantly dismissing my legitimate concerns. 67.86.86.217 16:18, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

We're all doing the best we can, if you think you can do better have at it. LilDice 20:23, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I

gigantic taskforce dedicated entirely to deciding which of these ridiculous pieces should dress the main page on April Fool’s Day, there absolutely must be someone out there who has the necessary leisure to improve this article to a level above "start" class. 67.86.86.217

04:27, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Is this Gore Vidal writing? I don't know if he would read wikipedia articles relating to him and it would seem silly to assume such, but who knows? Keithbrooks 03:00, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

People write about that of which they know and is of interest to them. What's pathetic is people complaining about wikipedia articles not being very good when those same people complaining either cannot or will not take the time to improve them. It's not Brittanica. Nobody gets paid to do it. Nobody's name is on the "blame line" so to speak, but the volunteers who research and write the entries, free of cost.Caisson 06 (talk) 14:21, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

• Your concerns are legitimate. Perhaps what you have observed is that the articles which interest people with no jobs get more attention than articles which might interest people with limited time. I was not suggesting that you add a "personal criticism" section to the article, but that you spend what little time you have to spend here with us making improvements instead of creating homework assignments for strangers. --Dystopos 06:12, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you are right, I should improve the article in any small way possible, even if I cannot make any large changes. Otherwise I most certainly would be a hypocrite. However, I'm still in awe that nobody thinks Vidal to be a subject worth writing about. Even if the typical Wikipedia editor does not find such mainstream subjects to be interesting, surely the community desires their encyclopedia to be viewed as complete. If I had the time to write articles here, I would derive much more satisfaction from knowing that casual users found a piece deeply helpful than from completing a "fun" article that really has no use beyond my and a few select others' personal entertainment. Isn't an encyclopedia supposed to be for the readers? It should be their interests that influence content, not those of the editors. 67.86.86.217 03:56, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Vidal´s fiction should occupy a much more prominent place in this article (after all, he is primarily a writer). It is plain silly that the dispute with William F Buckey occupies nearly as much space. 201.141.40.241 17:07, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Encyclopedia articles should not have trivia, facts are either important enough to include in the main body or they don't belong at all. Regarding the 4 trivia notes:

• If he was the inspiration for a character in A Separate Peace that is not noted in that article. If someone can write up a section on friends that Vidal influrnced, that could be mentioend there
• It does not help in any way to explain Vidal's life and fame to note that he went on a talk show where the host thought he was someone else
• For the film Infamous ditto my comment above, we need a section on influences where it could be mentioned
• I guess the Simpsons and Family Guy refs can go in the self-promotion section. Dread Pirate Westley•^Aargh 16:16, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

"It does not help in any way to explain Vidal's life and fame to note that he went on a talk show where the host thought he was someone else" Unless you are referring to Da Ali G Show, in which case Ali G's satirical confusion of him with Vidal Sassoon underscores Gore Vidal's fame. --Adam Brink (talk) 05:34, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

If Gore Vidal does hold the opinion about the 9/11 attacks described in this section, which isn't cited, I fail to see how most of the text of the section has to do with the 9/11 attacks. Instead, it talks about the Bush administration's goals and plans, which don't directly support any "Bush allowed the 9/11 attacks to occur" theory and are anecdotal evidence, if that. Why is this a section at all? Vidal holds many opinions that are of more prominence in his writing, and they don't have a separate section. Seems to me like this was written by someone in the "9/11 Truth" camp to legitimize the "Bush did it" theories about the attacks. Even if Vidal does believe the theories, I don't see why it warrants this much attention beyond advertising for "9/11 Truth" 68.118.188.117 13:29, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand the statement, "He even claims that American intelligence even put into writing "Bin Laden determined to strike in U.S."

I don't know what Vidal "claims," but Condoleza Rice said that Bush received such a headlined document in front of a Congressional hearing. So saying that Vidal "even" claims this is like saying "Vidal even claims that the sun comes up daily." Vidal is claiming an accepted fact. I think that the section needs to be rewritten.75.83.0.34 (talk) 05:44, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Vidal clarified his views on this last year - I have inserted a quote from him and deleted the line about "Bin Laden determined ..." since the document in question is well known, and the sentence is not relevant. WPWiles (talk) 14:57, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Should the bottom of the page list him as a U.S. Army veteran? Does anyone have more info on his time in the Army - was he an officer? 141.210.9.36 16:10, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

This line seems very confusing to me

"Vidal had four half-brothers from his parents' later marriages (the Rev. Vance Vidal, Valerie Vidal Hewitt, Thomas Gore Auchincloss, and Nina Gore Auchincloss Steers Straight) and five step-brothers from his mother's third marriage to Army Air Corps major general Robert Olds."

Valerie and Nina don't sound like the names of half-brothers!

--Nwjerseyliz 16:06, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I've seen Ben-Hur several times. It's quite a good film -- if you can ignore Charlton Heston's wretchedly stiff performance. It's hard to understand how anyone as self-deprecatory as Heston can be such a bad actor.

Anyhow, the story given here that Gore Vidal posited an earlier affair to motivate Messala's hatred of Ben-Hur is not only unlikely (given the Romans' discomfort with homosexual behavior, and the Jews' detestation of it), but psychologically implausible. As strictly heterosexual men can and do have intense emotional relationships with each other, it's perfectly natural for Messala to be upset -- even outraged to the point of hatred -- when his close childhood friend refuses to do as he asks. There's no need for sex.

And this story is almost certainly untrue -- we have Gore Vidal's word on the matter! In a interview in the supplementary material for the multi-disk edition of Ben Hur he says that the story is a misrepresentation -- that what he really suggested was that Stephen Boyd play the part as if Ben-Hur and Messala were lovers or spouses who'd had a falling out. This is hardly the same thing as them actually having been sexual lovers.

As for whether this is visible in the film... I don't see it, and I'm looking for it! Stephen Boyd was an actor of minimal talent; I doubt he had the skill to convey anything so subtle.

Regardless, someone should review the DVD interview and update the material accordingly. I don't have the time, and I don't really like to make such substantial changes to someone else's work.

WilliamSommerwerck 17:55, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Why no reference to "The Left-Handed Gun" which I believe was a stageplay adapted for the big screen and directed by Arthur Penn with Paul Newman in the lead?Charleybonkers (talk) 18:23, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

By IPA /vida:l/'s [ɨ] should be pronounces as Russian 'ы'. Is it not English name? What is origine of the name Vidal? Or, just incorrect transcription? --89.218.21.70 (talk) 19:19, 27 January 2008 (UTC) It's romansh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.76.235.41 (talk) 11:31, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

And it is most certainly not pronounced" /vɪˈdæl". The second syllable is "dahl," as in Arlene Dahl. 173.16.252.154 (talk) 18:46, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

In light of William F. Buckley, Jr.s death this article will probably get more "traffic". Since the fact that almost half of the information in Gore's biography is posted as "needs citation" I think it is imperative that Wikipedia re-examine the article and include only verifiable information. This is where Wikipedia needs to show that the written word is based on facts. In my opinion this is a very questionable written piece! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Palmdoc (talk • contribs) 07:22, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Is there anyone out there who could turn this entry into a cohesive article on Vidal? It is one of the most fragmented, disjointed and uneven Wiki entries I have ever seen. POV phrases such as "American Imperialism" etc don't help either. Plus it should probably be made clear that Vidal never provided any evidence whatsoever that his relationship with Jimmie Trimble was anything other than a friendship, albeit with a sexual infatuation on Vidal's part. As Trimble was a person of note in his own right, Gore's claim to have had a sexual relationship with him should be viewed for what it is - a claim, and possibly just wishful thinking on Gore's part. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.246.71.166 (talk) 12:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

"Gore's claim to have had a sexual relationship with him should be viewed for what it is - a claim, and possibly just wishful thinking on Gore's part." -- well, go ahead and make the claim that Mr Vidal is lying when he explicitly states he had sex with Trimble in his memoir 'Palimpsest' if you wish, but it should be noted this claim is just as lacking in evidence as is Mr Vidal's ...Alex Paige (talk) 06:36, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Go for it,

U.S. Department of Justice apparently took the time to edit this page! (See diff.) WTF? -Colfer2 (talk

) 18:31, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Then again, somebody there also has artistic differences with Roger Ebert, see diff. -Colfer2 (talk) 18:36, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Why has any mention of Vidal's novel 'Messiah' (1954) been omitted, deleted or suppressed? I've just discovered a copy in a school fair, and (IMHO) it's a remarkably prescient piece of work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.50.0.100 (talk) 04:03, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

I'd just like to express my hope that someone adds to the article a mention of Vidal's 1986 article for The Nation, "The Empire Lovers Strike Back", the most vehement expression of Jew hatred in a respected US publication in decades. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.180.45.155 (talk) 09:46, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Does anybody know of what ethnicity the name Vidal is? His early life section doesn't mention it and he's not listed under any hyphenated American category. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.162.28.38 (talk) 00:55, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I believe it's Italian. There's an discussion of GV's father's origins in "Palimpsest." I think GV comes to the conclusion that his family was probably originally Jewish. I'd recommend looking at "Palimpsest" to answer this question, though I'm not sure if that's really the most important thing to address in this article.Flyte35 (talk) 07:00, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Seems to emphasize Vidal's sexuality over his literary career. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.86.52.123 (talk) 14:44, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't think Vidal ever endorsed Kucinich. I remember him appearing on British TV and saying that he supported Hillary but that "...it's imposible for her to win now." Sontag12

Vidal wrote an article in The Nation expressing his support for Kucinich. For what it's worth, Vidal didn't use the word "endorse". I added a reference to the article and removed the redundant sentence that said he "endorsed" Kucinich. I also fixed the two quotes from the Nation article, because they had been paraphrased a bit. Finally, I moved this paragraph from "other controversies" section up to "political views and activities" because....it's a political view and activity, and not a controversy. Professor slats (talk) 05:54, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

There's a lot of info about the rivalry between Vidal and Truman Capote in the aforementioned article, should I add something similar here or add a link to that article? It seems redundant to include the same info in two different articles. Master z0b (talk) 05:11, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

The article is littered with

"...the meticulously researched" "...the largely unappreciated" "Vidal is often seen as an early champion of sexual liberation" "The critic John Keates praised him as '[the twentieth] century's finest essayist.' Even an occasionally hostile critic like Martin Amis admits, "Essays are what he is good at...[h]e is learned, funny and exceptionally clear-sighted. Even his blind spots are illuminating."

This last sentence is perhaps the worst, which seems to assert that even critics that are "hostile" are in awe of Vidal. Vidal has his critics, past and present, yet they are curiously absent from the article (save the celebrated feud with Willam F. Buckley).

There are numerous quotes and claims that are uncited, many of which are noted with "citation needed" markers.

I'd like to edit the article some, but I'm not interested in getting into an edit war. I don't mean this to be an assumption of bad faith, but I thought it wise to get some opinions on the examples I noted before I waded in the article. What is the consensus currently as to the neutral POV of the article? Thanks. Supertheman ^(talk) 20:45, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Because this article is so extensive I don't think there's any way to go forward without expecting to confront some opposition. Nevertheless, this article has soon really unfortunate organizational and POV problems and I think it's great you want to correct some of those problems.Flyte35 (talk) 07:09, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I'd suggest that it's futile to even try to elide the hero worship, since the irrascible old coot's disciples will just restore it. On the bright side, anyone whose opinion you might actually care about should be able to spot pretty quickly that it's a fan page, rather than a biography. Rogerborg (talk) 04:54, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

The assertion (by Gore Vidal) that he is a distant cousin of Al Gore is not documented and probably untrue.

- quote follows - http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com/th/read/GORE/2001-05/0989347001 From: "James L. Gore" <[email protected]> Subject: [GORE-L] LOUISE GORE Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 19:36:41 +0100

Dear Arlene,

Reference is made to your posting of 24 August 2000 regarding the connection between Maryland State Senator Louise Gore and former U. S. Vice-President Al Gore Jr. Joyce Locke sent you a partial answer to your query and mentioned that I would have picked up on such a connection. I have just recently got on line so I did not see your posting until I went through Lowell's reading folder which he prepares for me each year when I come to the Indiana farm to visit him and Jerry. I do not see where anyone else has responded to your query.

The relationship between Louise Gore and Al Gore Jr. is 2nd cousin. Their common set of ancestors are Charles Claiborne Gore Sr. and Elizabeth Robinson which are their great grandparents. Louise is descended from their 5th child Benton Lemuel Gore (her grandfather) and Henry Grady Gore Sr. (her father). Al Jr. is descended from their 6th child Allen Gore (his grandfather) and Albert Arnold Gore Sr. (his father). The foregoing information was taken from my article in THE GORE FAMILY NEWSLETTER, Volume 1, No. 3 (Jul-Sep 1993), pages 246-251.

Whoever said in the article that you read that Louise Gore is related to Gore Vidal is totally mistaken (unless of course one can make a connection through Noah). I have traced Al Gore Jr's lineage back to his 8th GGF (my 7th GGF) John Gore who immigrated to Lancaster (now Middlesex) County, VA from England in 1653. Gore Vidal's ancestry, on the other hand, can be traced to the progenitor of his family James Gore (born 1680) of Prince Georges County, MD. These two lines do not cross.

Louise Gore was never the family historian of her family; however, her father Grady did a lot of work on his family using the research notes of Miss Carrie Gore of Gainesboro, TN as his foundation. I attempted to contact Grady before his death in 1980 but his wife and daughter sheltered him from any contacts with any other researchers. Ac cording to a personal close friend of this family, all of Grady's research notes were destroyed. I have also made several attempts to contact Louise Gore in the past twenty years as well as her three siblings; however, none of them have ever responded to any of my letters. A real family historian would never refuse to correspond with other researchers in his or her family. Therefore, the claim that Louise was the family historian is without any support as far as I can determine.

I trust that the above comments satisfy your query.

Regards, Jim James L. Gore, 4277 Dasher Road, Lake Park, Georgia 31636 Research editor for THE GORE FAMILY NEWSLETTER

-end quote -

I will remove the statement in this article that they are cousins, unless someone has reason not to. JamestownArarat (talk) 05:29, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Someone, most likely Russian, asked above about the pronunciation of the name Vidal:

By IPA /vida:l/'s [ɨ] should be pronounces as Russian 'ы'. Is it not English name? What is origine of the name Vidal? Or, just incorrect transcription? --89.218.21.70 (talk) 19:19, 27 January 2008 (UTC) It's romansh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.76.235.41 (talk) 11:31, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

The answer is that both "Gore" and "Vidal" are English names, but in one essay he remarked, "I fear that the best one can say of Solzhenitsyn is gore vidal (a Russian phrase meaning 'he has seen grief')." But in Russian gore is two syllables, go-re, and vidal, while pronounced more-or-less the same as in English, is a third-person-singular, past-tense verb.

"Горе видал!" she said. "Yes, but it is worse than grief. It is terrible. A woman, she have five sons, her only children, they all are killed at once in the war -- gore vidal! It has many, many meanings. 'I was beaten so much nothing hurts me any more' -- gore vidal. Sometimes it is sarcastic: we say 'gore vidal!' like Americans say 'Fuck you!' It is very common. I use it all the time." A review by Jonathan Raban Pawyilee (talk) 15:45, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Could we mention Vidal's support for Scientologists in Germany? Together with Goldie Hawn, Oliver Stone and other Hollywood stars he signed an open letter to the German government in the nineties, accusing Germany of discrminating against Scientologists. Very widely reported at the time and still occasionally mentioned in the press today. [4] Jayen466 12:13, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Is there a particular reason the POV tag (from Dec 2007) is still up? None of the discussions on this page concern the articles POV. croll (talk) 03:05, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

The section above titled "Weasel words" talks about this. There are not many glaringly obvious POV issuses I think, but many smaller bit that make the whole seem POV. IMO that is what the POV tag is talking about. An example is the section about Vidal "touching up" the Ben-Hur script. There is a large section explaining Vidal's part and what seems to be a SAG injustice, but the only reference is something I can't check myself. Then the end almost throws away that oh yeah um... Charlten Heston said Vidal was negligible. This could be a section that is POV or at least does not seem to present an even representation.MephYazata (talk) 07:08, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Ah; now I understand! May I suggest changing it to a weasel word tag {weasel} instead of npov tag, per

WP:AWW? Or, instead of tagging the entire article, tagging the specific instances of weasel words so it's easier to clean-up? croll (talk

) 00:14, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to remove it. December 2007 was a long time ago, and I don't see a whole lot of discussion about the matter for some time.Athene cunicularia (talk) 19:02, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

austen died in 2003 yet was buried in 2005... odd yes? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.123.14.139 (talk) 09:56, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Did whoever inserted a subheading of Conspiracy Theories ever read anything Vidal ever wrote or said? I mean, this is the height of irony. Vidal has stated that to label something a conspiracy is to let the listener or reader know that what they are about to hear is the truth that must never be spoken. It is heroically irresponsible to accuse Vidal of supporting "conspiracy theories" when you realize that he alone has defined what it means. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.248.180.183 (talk) 04:13, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I have cut out the following: "He wrote to Warren Allen Smith, "I regard monotheism as the greatest disaster ever to befall the human race. I see no good in Judaism, Christianity, or Islam". “Christianity is such a silly religion,” he told Time Magazine (Sept. 28, 1992)." He may well have written it, but it isn't a conspiracy theory. --Adam Brink (talk) 05:21, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I have cut the following: "In a September 2009 interview with The Times Online, Vidal said that Republican Senator

• 
  a
• 
  b
• 
  c

I can find no evidence for Gore Vidal being and Atheist activist so have removed this category until references can be found to support this. He is an atheist, but I can find no evidence of him being activist about it. Jenafalt (talk) 09:43, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

The lede as it is now has nothing about Vidal's politics or writing since 1948. He's had a career spanning over six decades since then, and this needs to be reflected. Grunge6910 (talk) 19:27, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Hop to it then, boy. I AM THE RIGHTEOUS FLESH DEVIL! 15:04, 16 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheRighteousFleshDevil (talk • contribs)

I've read it twice, and I can't see how it could be so classified. I'll try to find a legitimate source for its characterization (probably simply 'apocalyptic science-fiction')Hellbound Hound (talk) 12:13, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Gore Vidal: a critical companion AV3000 (talk) 14:04, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Okay, but I think the authors here have completely misunderstood the novel Kalki. I didn't see it as comedic or satirical. I'll look for another source before I reclassify it.Hellbound Hound (talk) 09:43, 5 December 2011 (UTC)