Although I am not convinced that Christopher Hitchens was all that good at debating, he was a marvelous essayist, able to muster striking references to bolster his discussion. His book reviews, frequently published in The Atlantic magazine, are excellent.

My complaint about this volume, which was published after Hitchens' death, is with the editor, not the author.

While there are conventions associated with editing a book of essays, the overall goal is to allow the reader to read for the joy of learning something. The editor's work is to assist in the choice of essays to be presented and the way that the text is used.

My first and largest complaint is that the date and place of original publication is located at the end of the text. The essays are not presented chronologically or by theme and while we are reading we have no clue other than context to allow us to date the work in the context of his career. Hitchens started writing seriously in the 1980s and I argue that knowing the time of first appearance at the beginning is more useful than at the end, especially when, in a book review for example, a footnote appears at the bottom of the first page naming the book being reviewed but not when and where the review was published. That info is at the end of the essay. This split presentation is ferociously annoying when the citation is simply split with no punctuation at the end of the final word in the footnote. The remainder of the citation and the correct punctuation, come later.

My other big complaint is that while most of the essays in these books are easy to follow, there is not much explanation given when the topic under discussion might be unrecognizable to a non-local - in the case a UK reader who might not be overly familiar with US political silliness or vice-versa. A few NB from the editors would be helpful.

Anyway, this is a book to own, not borrow, so that you can pick it up off the shelf and read in an odd moment. The essays, or most of them anyway, will always satisfy. ( )

I started out this review by disclosing that I think that Christopher Hitchens was a great speaker, thinker, debater, essayist and writer. One can see his genius and mental flexibility by watching various videos on YouTube. I have read previous Hitchens books on religion, politics and Thomas Jefferson. The essays in this book were not as controversial as you may find in other Hitchens books--- there were a number of profiles, including one on Hitchens going through a self-improvement program. There are about 40 essays in this book – – some of which may interest the reader, some of which may not. But even on topics you may not be interested in, Hitchens makes it interesting. I highly recommend any book by Christopher Hitchens. RIP! ( )

If there was anyone I would ever want to sit and listen to it would be Christopher Hitchens. The man basks in knowledge and an ability to grasp events and history. One can just imagine the number of books that have been read and the talent to evaluate and grasp the story and its poignant reminders of depth and writer character. Hitchens sees the story within the story and rings-out the writer's personality in reference. It's a rare gift to have that focus. Hitchens understood many things and was always opinionated; but with style and substance. ( )

I'm a massive Christopher Hitchens fan; his death hit me hard. I'll buy anything with his name attached - and I get the feeling that the world's publishers know this only too well. This collection of essays and articles is a much lighter thing than 'Arguably', and you could argue that, posthumous as this publication is, it might have gone against Hitchens's principles.

These pieces were never meant to be read one after the other - it's Hitchens the journalist here slightly less than Hitchens the essayist, and so, for different publications, he repeats the clever expressions and bon mots he used in one article for the next on the same theme. The result is a book for completists more than casual readers; if like me you're still greatly enamoured of the Hitchens approach, it's worth a read - but otherwise stick with 'Arguably'. ( )

As always with Hitchens…snarky and erudite. Some essays resonated much more with me, while others seemed needlessly self-absorbed and overly critical…an uneven posthumous publication of a collection. ( )