What do you think?
Rate this book
The Fire Is upon Us: James Baldwin, William F. Buckley Jr., and the Debate over Race in America
How the clash between the civil rights firebrand and the father of modern conservatism continues to illuminate America's racial divide
On February 18, 1965, an overflowing crowd packed the Cambridge Union in Cambridge, England, to witness a historic televised debate between James Baldwin, the leading literary voice of the civil rights movement, and William F. Buckley Jr., a fierce critic of the movement and America's most influential conservative intellectual. The topic was "the American dream is at the expense of the American Negro," and no one who has seen the debate can soon forget it. Nicholas Buccola's The Fire Is upon Us is the first book to tell the full story of the event, the radically different paths that led Baldwin and Buckley to it, the controversies that followed, and how the debate and the decades-long clash between the men continues to illuminate America's racial divide today.
Born in New York City only fifteen months apart, the Harlem-raised Baldwin and the privileged Buckley could not have been more different, but they both rose to the height of American intellectual life during the civil rights movement. By the time they met in Cambridge, Buckley was determined to sound the alarm about a man he considered an "eloquent menace." For his part, Baldwin viewed Buckley as a deluded reactionary whose popularity revealed the sickness of the American soul. The stage was set for an epic confrontation that pitted Baldwin's call for a moral revolution in race relations against Buckley's unabashed elitism and implicit commitment to white supremacy.
A remarkable story of race and the American dream, The Fire Is upon Us reveals the deep roots and lasting legacy of a conflict that continues to haunt our politics.
On February 18, 1965, an overflowing crowd packed the Cambridge Union in Cambridge, England, to witness a historic televised debate between James Baldwin, the leading literary voice of the civil rights movement, and William F. Buckley Jr., a fierce critic of the movement and America's most influential conservative intellectual. The topic was "the American dream is at the expense of the American Negro," and no one who has seen the debate can soon forget it. Nicholas Buccola's The Fire Is upon Us is the first book to tell the full story of the event, the radically different paths that led Baldwin and Buckley to it, the controversies that followed, and how the debate and the decades-long clash between the men continues to illuminate America's racial divide today.
Born in New York City only fifteen months apart, the Harlem-raised Baldwin and the privileged Buckley could not have been more different, but they both rose to the height of American intellectual life during the civil rights movement. By the time they met in Cambridge, Buckley was determined to sound the alarm about a man he considered an "eloquent menace." For his part, Baldwin viewed Buckley as a deluded reactionary whose popularity revealed the sickness of the American soul. The stage was set for an epic confrontation that pitted Baldwin's call for a moral revolution in race relations against Buckley's unabashed elitism and implicit commitment to white supremacy.
A remarkable story of race and the American dream, The Fire Is upon Us reveals the deep roots and lasting legacy of a conflict that continues to haunt our politics.
496 pages, Hardcover
First published October 1, 2019
293 people are currently reading
4334 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 208 reviews
December 20, 2019
“What concerns me the most, is that unless we can talk to each other and hear each other, the days of reason are numbered. When reason loses its authority, violence fills the vacuum.”- James Baldwin
“There is never time in the future in which we will work out our salvation. The challenge is in the moment, the time is always now.”- James Baldwin
“We should focus on the necessity to animate [the] particular energy in the black community that has served other minority groups well throughout American history." -William F. Buckley
I am an unrepentant James Baldwin fan. I believe he was one of the most important voices on race in the 20th century and someone whose voice continue to resonate well into 21st century. William Buckley however, did not share my enthusiasm for James Baldwin or his ideas.
In this extremely intriguing book, the author examines these two men, the debate they staged at Cambridge Union in 1965, and the social forces they grew up and flourished in.
The author’s portrait of Baldwin is admittedly more flattering than that of Buckley, who he clearly has little love for (a position which, as one reads this book, comes to be completely understandable), but he never discounts Buckley’s impact on the 1950s and 1960s and the Conservative movement which it can rightly be said he nurtured.
At issue in this debate, and the larger social debate at large is the question: “The American dream is at the expense of the American Negro”.
For Baldwin this was an indisputable truth and one that by 1965 he had spent the better part of his life writing about. Central to his writings was the idea that the hate whites showed toward blacks, while obviously harmful to the well being of black men and women, paled in comparison to the spiritual damage it was wreaking on white people and the nation at large. The source of this hate for Baldwin was based above all else in fear:
“ ‘One of the reasons people cling to their hates so stubbornly is because they sense, once hate is gone, that they will be forced to deal with pain’ But this, Baldwin could see, would not do, for hatred, ‘could destroy so much and it never failed to destroy the man who hated and this was an immutable law.’ "
Until white America come to terms with its fear, it could never really begin to move forward.
William Buckley on the other hand believed it was black people who were holding themselves back. While acknowledging that American history is replete with examples of black people suffering at the hands of white people, Buckley believed that federal intervention such as civil rights laws, busing, and integration of schools, buses and lunch counters was unconstitutional. How then you ask do we right this wrong?
According to Buckley the only way forward was for blacks to wait until whites were ready to move forward. As blacks were uneducated (the causes for this perceived lack of education he doesn’t elaborate on) they were incapable of voting responsibly and therefore were better off under a system of benign paternalism. In addition, whites (particularly Southern whites) were entitled to their way of life and if didn’t include sitting with blacks in restaurants that wasn’t an issue for the federal government to intervene in.
To be fair, Buckley also advocated for less people to vote irrespective of their race, and yet it is quite breathtaking to read his writings and remember that he is seen today as the darling of “serious” conservative thought. Buckley was by his own admission hostile to democracy and seemingly would have been much more comfortable in a monarchy or dictatorship (providing of course as George W. Bush once quipped ‘I’m the dictator’).
As the author neatly summarizes:
“Buckley’s position was hostile to both democratic and liberal values. He was far less concerned with the demand that all human beings should have a say in their political destiny, or that all individuals have rights that ought to be protected, than he was with the idea that those who were best suited to preserve civilization were authorized to do what was necessary to achieve this goal.”
While many seemingly found, and continue to find, Buckley charming or erudite, it is difficult for me to find his beliefs anything less than repellent. Baldwin, after a televised debate with Buckley, would say much the same:
“I was trying to do what Martin was doing. I still hoped people would listen. But Bill’s a bully, he can’t listen, he uses weapons I simply won’t use. I said people who live in the ghetto don’t own it; it’s white people’s property. I know who owns Harlem. He (Buckley) said ‘Do the landlords tippy-toe uptown and throw garbage out the windows?’ And I tuned out. If a cat said that to me in life, I’d simply beat the hell out of him. He was saying Negroes deserved their fate; they stink. To my eternal dishonor, I cooled it, I drew back and I lost the debate. I should have beat him over the head with the coffee cup. He’s not a serious man. He’s the intellectuals’ James Bond”
Buckley liked to consider himself intellectually superior to the George Wallace’s and Bull Connor’s of the world in that he never openly espoused the hate that they would. Rather he crafted his racism in rhetorical turns of phrase that in many ways were far more dangerous than anything Wallace or Connor did. Buckley was, unlike them, a man of ideas and through his ideas he created a movement that exists to this day and espouses many of the beliefs he helped foster.
“There is never time in the future in which we will work out our salvation. The challenge is in the moment, the time is always now.”- James Baldwin
“We should focus on the necessity to animate [the] particular energy in the black community that has served other minority groups well throughout American history." -William F. Buckley
I am an unrepentant James Baldwin fan. I believe he was one of the most important voices on race in the 20th century and someone whose voice continue to resonate well into 21st century. William Buckley however, did not share my enthusiasm for James Baldwin or his ideas.
In this extremely intriguing book, the author examines these two men, the debate they staged at Cambridge Union in 1965, and the social forces they grew up and flourished in.
The author’s portrait of Baldwin is admittedly more flattering than that of Buckley, who he clearly has little love for (a position which, as one reads this book, comes to be completely understandable), but he never discounts Buckley’s impact on the 1950s and 1960s and the Conservative movement which it can rightly be said he nurtured.
At issue in this debate, and the larger social debate at large is the question: “The American dream is at the expense of the American Negro”.
For Baldwin this was an indisputable truth and one that by 1965 he had spent the better part of his life writing about. Central to his writings was the idea that the hate whites showed toward blacks, while obviously harmful to the well being of black men and women, paled in comparison to the spiritual damage it was wreaking on white people and the nation at large. The source of this hate for Baldwin was based above all else in fear:
“ ‘One of the reasons people cling to their hates so stubbornly is because they sense, once hate is gone, that they will be forced to deal with pain’ But this, Baldwin could see, would not do, for hatred, ‘could destroy so much and it never failed to destroy the man who hated and this was an immutable law.’ "
Until white America come to terms with its fear, it could never really begin to move forward.
William Buckley on the other hand believed it was black people who were holding themselves back. While acknowledging that American history is replete with examples of black people suffering at the hands of white people, Buckley believed that federal intervention such as civil rights laws, busing, and integration of schools, buses and lunch counters was unconstitutional. How then you ask do we right this wrong?
According to Buckley the only way forward was for blacks to wait until whites were ready to move forward. As blacks were uneducated (the causes for this perceived lack of education he doesn’t elaborate on) they were incapable of voting responsibly and therefore were better off under a system of benign paternalism. In addition, whites (particularly Southern whites) were entitled to their way of life and if didn’t include sitting with blacks in restaurants that wasn’t an issue for the federal government to intervene in.
To be fair, Buckley also advocated for less people to vote irrespective of their race, and yet it is quite breathtaking to read his writings and remember that he is seen today as the darling of “serious” conservative thought. Buckley was by his own admission hostile to democracy and seemingly would have been much more comfortable in a monarchy or dictatorship (providing of course as George W. Bush once quipped ‘I’m the dictator’).
As the author neatly summarizes:
“Buckley’s position was hostile to both democratic and liberal values. He was far less concerned with the demand that all human beings should have a say in their political destiny, or that all individuals have rights that ought to be protected, than he was with the idea that those who were best suited to preserve civilization were authorized to do what was necessary to achieve this goal.”
While many seemingly found, and continue to find, Buckley charming or erudite, it is difficult for me to find his beliefs anything less than repellent. Baldwin, after a televised debate with Buckley, would say much the same:
“I was trying to do what Martin was doing. I still hoped people would listen. But Bill’s a bully, he can’t listen, he uses weapons I simply won’t use. I said people who live in the ghetto don’t own it; it’s white people’s property. I know who owns Harlem. He (Buckley) said ‘Do the landlords tippy-toe uptown and throw garbage out the windows?’ And I tuned out. If a cat said that to me in life, I’d simply beat the hell out of him. He was saying Negroes deserved their fate; they stink. To my eternal dishonor, I cooled it, I drew back and I lost the debate. I should have beat him over the head with the coffee cup. He’s not a serious man. He’s the intellectuals’ James Bond”
Buckley liked to consider himself intellectually superior to the George Wallace’s and Bull Connor’s of the world in that he never openly espoused the hate that they would. Rather he crafted his racism in rhetorical turns of phrase that in many ways were far more dangerous than anything Wallace or Connor did. Buckley was, unlike them, a man of ideas and through his ideas he created a movement that exists to this day and espouses many of the beliefs he helped foster.
February 14, 2020
“The American Dream is at the expense of the American Negro”. That was the topic of the 1965 debate between James Baldwin and William F Buckley, Jr. held at the Cambridge Union. The actual debate is included in the Epilogue of the audiobook. The sound quality is a little iffy, especially for Buckley who seemed to roam away from the microphone, but it was fascinating to hear these men. However, the debate itself is only a small part of this book.
The book covers the parallel lives of Baldwin and Buckley and what shaped them. There is an analysis of their published works within the context of contemporaneous events. It also covers politics, the civil rights movement in the United States and the profoundly divergent views of the 2 men. Baldwin wanted change, while Buckley defended the maintenance of traditional American patterns (which was just a way of maintaining white supremacy without actually mentioning race). I got a great deal more than I was expecting from this book. The extensive research was incorporated so well that the book never felt like a recitation of facts. Each man expressed some extreme and controversial views and the book was evenhanded in its approach. It’s really an exceptional book.
The book covers the parallel lives of Baldwin and Buckley and what shaped them. There is an analysis of their published works within the context of contemporaneous events. It also covers politics, the civil rights movement in the United States and the profoundly divergent views of the 2 men. Baldwin wanted change, while Buckley defended the maintenance of traditional American patterns (which was just a way of maintaining white supremacy without actually mentioning race). I got a great deal more than I was expecting from this book. The extensive research was incorporated so well that the book never felt like a recitation of facts. Each man expressed some extreme and controversial views and the book was evenhanded in its approach. It’s really an exceptional book.
October 4, 2019
This book was fantastic! So well-written and so timely. I had watched that stunning Oxford debate years ago and I've also read practically everything Baldwin has ever written and most of Buckley's work as well. They were both excellent writers and thinkers though Baldwin was clearly the superior intellect. This book is less about the two men than it is about two reactions toward racism in America. If it had ended at Buckley vs. Baldwin, the latter would clearly have won the future, but I think the right got a lot better at articulating their opposition to civil rights activism. Buckley believed and was fine stating his belief of white superiority even as he couched his opposition in states rights. When the VRA was overturned recently, no one but some fringe right wing people explicitly championed the idea that fewer people voting was actually better. Buckley did. It was just so fascinating to read missives from across time from people across the aisle and think about how much as changed and how much hasn't.
November 30, 2025
This book brilliantly uses the dramatic, 1965 debate between James Baldwin and William Buckley at the Oxford Union as a focus to examine the cultural clashes of the Civil Rights Movement and the ongoing racial divide in America. Baldwin and Buckley were the most eloquent voices on opposite sides of the conflict, and the author gives us mini biographies of both men to establish their backgrounds, influences, and works, with a primary focus on their concentration (on opposite sides) on the serious racial issues of their time.
This book’s primary value to me was its focus on Buckley. I’ve read most of Baldwin’s works, as well as a couple different biographies of him, but my primary knowledge of Buckley was from his tv presence, primarily on his public affairs show, Firing Line, and from his reputation as the founder of the modern conservative movement. I was never motivated to read any of his books, such as God and Man at Yale, Up From Liberalism, etc., so my knowledge of the man was not as deep as it could have been.
The picture this book draws of Buckley is startling when contrasted with his sophisticated, urbane image of elite charm. While I was not unaware of Buckley’s racist leanings, I had no idea just how central the protection of White Supremacy was to Buckley’s core program and philosophy. His dissatisfaction with the extreme racist violence happening in the South had more to do with his fear that it would ultimately hurt the cause of White Supremacy, and even at that, he was often willing to tolerate the more violently extreme racists for the power they could add to his conservative cause. This book traces the evidence that a strong commitment to the preservation and protection of White Supremacy was present from the foundation of the modern conservative movement, and is not a recent development under MAGA.
After meeting and debating Buckley, first at the Oxford Union, and later on American television, Baldwin made this judgment on the man:
”He’s not a serious man. He’s the intellectual’s James Bond.”
The Fire Is Upon Us is an outstanding book. It gives you all the information you need to understand the cause, the issue, and the main combatants in this epic clash of philosophies. The audiobook includes the original recording of the Baldwin/Buckley Oxford Union debate in an appendix, which is outstanding added value. Most importantly, the author traces the aftermath of this clash into our modern world, with its unfortunate ascendancy of Buckley’s world view (now express in all its rawness sans intellect or charm):
Buckley lost many battles over the years, but there was no doubt that racial politics helped him win the war. The price of victory, though, has been incredibly high. The American Right seems to be in much the same place today as where it found itself over half a century ago. To achieve overwhelming power, conservatives have had to rely on the political energy provided by racial resentment and status anxiety. Much like Buckley, many conservative elites find reliance on such energy unseemly, but they cling to it because they know it gives life to their agenda. For the American Right, the price of power has been a deal with the devil of White Supremacy. This was true in Buckley’s time, and it is true in our own.
Baldwin was, in a sense, admitting that Buckley won the war for the American soul. Through their words and deeds, Baldwin and other Civil Rights revolutionaries laid bare the utter depravity of White Supremacy, and yet decades later we find ourselves still caught in its merciless grip. The story of Baldwin and Buckley reminds us that moral righteousness is often not sufficient to gain political power. This is a sad truth, but it is a truth we ignore at our peril.
This book’s primary value to me was its focus on Buckley. I’ve read most of Baldwin’s works, as well as a couple different biographies of him, but my primary knowledge of Buckley was from his tv presence, primarily on his public affairs show, Firing Line, and from his reputation as the founder of the modern conservative movement. I was never motivated to read any of his books, such as God and Man at Yale, Up From Liberalism, etc., so my knowledge of the man was not as deep as it could have been.
The picture this book draws of Buckley is startling when contrasted with his sophisticated, urbane image of elite charm. While I was not unaware of Buckley’s racist leanings, I had no idea just how central the protection of White Supremacy was to Buckley’s core program and philosophy. His dissatisfaction with the extreme racist violence happening in the South had more to do with his fear that it would ultimately hurt the cause of White Supremacy, and even at that, he was often willing to tolerate the more violently extreme racists for the power they could add to his conservative cause. This book traces the evidence that a strong commitment to the preservation and protection of White Supremacy was present from the foundation of the modern conservative movement, and is not a recent development under MAGA.
After meeting and debating Buckley, first at the Oxford Union, and later on American television, Baldwin made this judgment on the man:
”He’s not a serious man. He’s the intellectual’s James Bond.”
The Fire Is Upon Us is an outstanding book. It gives you all the information you need to understand the cause, the issue, and the main combatants in this epic clash of philosophies. The audiobook includes the original recording of the Baldwin/Buckley Oxford Union debate in an appendix, which is outstanding added value. Most importantly, the author traces the aftermath of this clash into our modern world, with its unfortunate ascendancy of Buckley’s world view (now express in all its rawness sans intellect or charm):
Buckley lost many battles over the years, but there was no doubt that racial politics helped him win the war. The price of victory, though, has been incredibly high. The American Right seems to be in much the same place today as where it found itself over half a century ago. To achieve overwhelming power, conservatives have had to rely on the political energy provided by racial resentment and status anxiety. Much like Buckley, many conservative elites find reliance on such energy unseemly, but they cling to it because they know it gives life to their agenda. For the American Right, the price of power has been a deal with the devil of White Supremacy. This was true in Buckley’s time, and it is true in our own.
Baldwin was, in a sense, admitting that Buckley won the war for the American soul. Through their words and deeds, Baldwin and other Civil Rights revolutionaries laid bare the utter depravity of White Supremacy, and yet decades later we find ourselves still caught in its merciless grip. The story of Baldwin and Buckley reminds us that moral righteousness is often not sufficient to gain political power. This is a sad truth, but it is a truth we ignore at our peril.
January 8, 2020
This book is an excellent example of what rhetoricians and those interested in the scholarship of debate and argumentation can produce. Unfortunately, this book was written by a political scientist. I am afraid it is an excellent example of something that rhetorical critics should be doing - long view, multimedia analysis of rhetorical responses between intellectuals on issues they care about.
This book is not a treatment of the Cambridge debate between Baldwin and Buckley. I bought it in order to read that account, and I was certainly not disappointed. Buccola spends 2 chapters of the book on the details of the night of the debate, including excellent analysis of what was said and how those in that audience, and the BBC audience responded or could have interpreted what was said. These two chapters alone are fantastic and serve as an excellent example of scholarly inquiry on a text that is identified primarily as a traditional debate.
But where the book shines is Buccola's expansion of the sense of debate as something well beyond a simple presentation held at a university between speakers. Buccola correctly frames the night at Cambridge as one iteration of a long-running engagement between these two thinkers on the question of civil rights for African-Americans in the 1950s and 1960s. Although they only directly engage two or three times in their lives, the nature of written or spoken discourse aimed at a larger audience for the purpose of changing feelings or thoughts (aka rhetoric) has a visceral effect or impact of being seen as a debate, albeit happening across 2 decades. This book seems similar to the treatment of the Lincoln Douglas Debates that was given by Zarefsky in a treatment in the 1990s, and more recently (but less effectively) in a book by Allen Guelzo. This book can serve as a model for re-thinking events known as "debates" as flash phenomena of larger debates occurring out of clear sight, much like the mushroom - we only see the stalks and call them mushrooms, but the organism is underground, out of sight, and all around us, larger than we think.
Buccola spends a good amount of time trying to work through the positions of Buckley and Baldwin on race and civil rights, and is fair to both men. I believe his treatment of Buckley's racism is very thoughtful, complex, and appropriate. I know I would have had a lot of trouble trying to present those ideas as workable, and Buccola does a very good job. James Baldwin, as we learn in the book, is dedicated to the idea that we should try to learn to see things from the perspective of all involved. Buccola takes that idea to heart in his treatment of Buckley, who quite honestly has some hair-raising opinions about non-white Americans.
The book is excellent, and is high quality history and rhetorical scholarship. Well written, thoroughly researched, and thoughtful, it is a great book if you are interested in the very direct, rhetorical reactions of two writers to violent, horrible, and powerful events going on around them. Both of them feel compelled to try to change the minds of others with text. That unites them, and also drives the narrative of the book. It's fabulous reading.
This book is not a treatment of the Cambridge debate between Baldwin and Buckley. I bought it in order to read that account, and I was certainly not disappointed. Buccola spends 2 chapters of the book on the details of the night of the debate, including excellent analysis of what was said and how those in that audience, and the BBC audience responded or could have interpreted what was said. These two chapters alone are fantastic and serve as an excellent example of scholarly inquiry on a text that is identified primarily as a traditional debate.
But where the book shines is Buccola's expansion of the sense of debate as something well beyond a simple presentation held at a university between speakers. Buccola correctly frames the night at Cambridge as one iteration of a long-running engagement between these two thinkers on the question of civil rights for African-Americans in the 1950s and 1960s. Although they only directly engage two or three times in their lives, the nature of written or spoken discourse aimed at a larger audience for the purpose of changing feelings or thoughts (aka rhetoric) has a visceral effect or impact of being seen as a debate, albeit happening across 2 decades. This book seems similar to the treatment of the Lincoln Douglas Debates that was given by Zarefsky in a treatment in the 1990s, and more recently (but less effectively) in a book by Allen Guelzo. This book can serve as a model for re-thinking events known as "debates" as flash phenomena of larger debates occurring out of clear sight, much like the mushroom - we only see the stalks and call them mushrooms, but the organism is underground, out of sight, and all around us, larger than we think.
Buccola spends a good amount of time trying to work through the positions of Buckley and Baldwin on race and civil rights, and is fair to both men. I believe his treatment of Buckley's racism is very thoughtful, complex, and appropriate. I know I would have had a lot of trouble trying to present those ideas as workable, and Buccola does a very good job. James Baldwin, as we learn in the book, is dedicated to the idea that we should try to learn to see things from the perspective of all involved. Buccola takes that idea to heart in his treatment of Buckley, who quite honestly has some hair-raising opinions about non-white Americans.
The book is excellent, and is high quality history and rhetorical scholarship. Well written, thoroughly researched, and thoughtful, it is a great book if you are interested in the very direct, rhetorical reactions of two writers to violent, horrible, and powerful events going on around them. Both of them feel compelled to try to change the minds of others with text. That unites them, and also drives the narrative of the book. It's fabulous reading.
December 20, 2025
I would read anything about James Baldwin, so no pitch was necessary for me to dive into The Fire Is Upon Us. Nicolas Buccola's dual biography unfolds as a classic compare-and-contrast between the careers and written works of James Baldwin and William F. Buckley Jr., with a focus on their famous Cambridge Union debate in 1965. It was interesting to read about a time when "public intellectuals" challenged other adults to lengthy discussions on TV rather than sourcing random college kids for TikTok sound-bites.
This was a surprisingly timely read. Buckley was the epitome of white Christian supremacism in academic spaces. A regressive policy-designer hiding behind an intellectual veneer designed to give civilized cover to paternalistic, racist ideas. We've seen how quickly Buckley-esque rhetoric has bubbled back up in the last few years. The current U.S. administration is trying to make anti-intellectualism and anti-civil-rights action into chilling policy in government agencies and on campuses across the country.
It's also depressing that politeness, rather than the content of a person's words, is still used to judge discourse. That old 'tone' argument, you know. Buckley was genteel in his punditry and he even had leftist friends, so he must be applauded for congeniality. Where else have we heard this lately?
Many people observe that Baldwin thoroughly won the Cambridge Union debate. He dragged Buckley's ass! I agree, but to what end? Here we are 60 years later and university students are being snatched off the street for thought crimes. God and Man At Yale is still in print and the National Review just ran a headline that white men suffer discrimination despite their overrepresentation in Fortune 500s and elected office. What does it mean for progressives to "win" without winning power?
BTW, Aeon Video has the full length 1965 debate on YouTube. Enjoy every opportunity to hear James Baldwin's voice: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Tek9...
This was a surprisingly timely read. Buckley was the epitome of white Christian supremacism in academic spaces. A regressive policy-designer hiding behind an intellectual veneer designed to give civilized cover to paternalistic, racist ideas. We've seen how quickly Buckley-esque rhetoric has bubbled back up in the last few years. The current U.S. administration is trying to make anti-intellectualism and anti-civil-rights action into chilling policy in government agencies and on campuses across the country.
It's also depressing that politeness, rather than the content of a person's words, is still used to judge discourse. That old 'tone' argument, you know. Buckley was genteel in his punditry and he even had leftist friends, so he must be applauded for congeniality. Where else have we heard this lately?
Many people observe that Baldwin thoroughly won the Cambridge Union debate. He dragged Buckley's ass! I agree, but to what end? Here we are 60 years later and university students are being snatched off the street for thought crimes. God and Man At Yale is still in print and the National Review just ran a headline that white men suffer discrimination despite their overrepresentation in Fortune 500s and elected office. What does it mean for progressives to "win" without winning power?
BTW, Aeon Video has the full length 1965 debate on YouTube. Enjoy every opportunity to hear James Baldwin's voice: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Tek9...
September 16, 2020
My book club had the opportunity to speak with Nicholas Buccola just as The Fire is Upon Us was released, but his humble demeanor hadn't prepared us, in any conceivable way, for what he put on paper. Certainly, The Fire is Upon Us, is one of the most carefully crafted and consciously written books on the work and brilliance of James Baldwin. Fully charged, and unapologetic, Buccola delivers most impressively.
April 5, 2024
Unparalleled close study of William Buckley and James Baldwin's careers and writings, leading up to their public debate "Is the American Dream at the the expense of the American Negro" at the University of Cambridge in February 1965. The full transcript of the debate is appended in the book, and also available in several permutations on YouTube, most recently re-cast and scripted by two orators at Cambridge playing each part in the same meeting hall as the original debate.
While the debate is the crux of the book, it is also a dual biography, and a post-mortem of sorts. Buccola compares and contrasts Buckley and Baldwin's upbringings and their tandem rise to the cultural icons that they became in the 1960s-1980s, and their copious writings during the Civil Rights era. Buckley's long shadow on American conservatism continues today, and the book notes Buckley's transitions in messaging over time, and his (convoluted) opinions on political and cultural icons of this era, from George Wallace to Ayn Rand.
I recently read Baldwin's collection Nobody Knows My Name, and this book gave rich context behind many of those essays ("Faulkner and Desegregation", "Fifth Avenue, Uptown", "Fly in the Buttermilk"), and made me eager to continue reading more of his work, and revisit some I've already read.
A good review of THE FIRE IS UPON US from The Atlantic:
The Famous Baldwin-Buckley Debate Still Matters Today by Gabrielle Bellot, December 2019 [free to paywall]
While the debate is the crux of the book, it is also a dual biography, and a post-mortem of sorts. Buccola compares and contrasts Buckley and Baldwin's upbringings and their tandem rise to the cultural icons that they became in the 1960s-1980s, and their copious writings during the Civil Rights era. Buckley's long shadow on American conservatism continues today, and the book notes Buckley's transitions in messaging over time, and his (convoluted) opinions on political and cultural icons of this era, from George Wallace to Ayn Rand.
I recently read Baldwin's collection Nobody Knows My Name, and this book gave rich context behind many of those essays ("Faulkner and Desegregation", "Fifth Avenue, Uptown", "Fly in the Buttermilk"), and made me eager to continue reading more of his work, and revisit some I've already read.
A good review of THE FIRE IS UPON US from The Atlantic:
The Famous Baldwin-Buckley Debate Still Matters Today by Gabrielle Bellot, December 2019 [free to paywall]
November 19, 2019
This book was very helpful in helping me understand the white, educated backlash against dismantling White Supremacy.
June 19, 2020
**** Recommend it
For an old white man, I try to be cognizant of the world around me. I try to be empathetic to the people who have not had it as easy as me. I understand that I am the epitome of white privilege and I at least try to educate myself about the way of life for citizens of my country who are not. In an ironic twist I find that I am astonished that I knew nothing about James Baldwin before I read this book. If that isn’t the definition of white privilege, I don’t know what is.
I mean, I recognized the name and knew he was a respected literary scholar, but I knew no context. In my entire lifelong education, nobody every handed me any of his writings and suggested I should read them. How is it that I did not know? His idea about the white man, who pushes American exceptionalism at the expense of the black man, hurts the white man as much as the black is a revelation to me. The white man’s hypocrisy that is illuminated with Baldwin’s spotlight is like a punch to the gut. In his debate speech at Cambridge, when he switches the pronoun for the black slave from they to I, it made me weep.
"Let me put it this way, that from a very literal point of view, the harbors and the ports, and the railroads of the country–the economy, especially of the Southern states–could not conceivably be what it has become, if they had not had, and do not still have, indeed for so long, for many generations, cheap labor. I am stating very seriously, and this is not an overstatement:
*I* picked the cotton,
*I* carried it to the market,
and *I* built the railroads
under someone else’s whip for nothing.
For nothing.
The Southern oligarchy,
which has still today so very much power in Washington, and therefore some power in the world, was created by my labor and my sweat, and the violation of my women and the murder of my children.
This, in the land of the free, and the home of the brave.
And no one can challenge that statement.
It is a matter of historical record.”
And finally, when he discusses the black man’s hopelessness when he realizes that not only is the deck stacked against him in his lifetime, but that his children have no chance either, I just want to raise my fist in the air and scream.
In the same vein, I did not know that William F. Buckley, the founder of the conservative movement in America, was an elitist, states-rights, religious, racist, bigot. He wasn’t a klu-klux-klan level racist that advocated violence, but his writings and speeches convinced the religious right in the seats of power to do nothing about the situation. Even thou he lost the debate to Baldwin in 1965, he helped win the war in the long run. The conservatives keep winning and the black man never does.
For an old white man, I try to be cognizant of the world around me. I try to be empathetic to the people who have not had it as easy as me. I understand that I am the epitome of white privilege and I at least try to educate myself about the way of life for citizens of my country who are not. In an ironic twist I find that I am astonished that I knew nothing about James Baldwin before I read this book. If that isn’t the definition of white privilege, I don’t know what is.
I mean, I recognized the name and knew he was a respected literary scholar, but I knew no context. In my entire lifelong education, nobody every handed me any of his writings and suggested I should read them. How is it that I did not know? His idea about the white man, who pushes American exceptionalism at the expense of the black man, hurts the white man as much as the black is a revelation to me. The white man’s hypocrisy that is illuminated with Baldwin’s spotlight is like a punch to the gut. In his debate speech at Cambridge, when he switches the pronoun for the black slave from they to I, it made me weep.
"Let me put it this way, that from a very literal point of view, the harbors and the ports, and the railroads of the country–the economy, especially of the Southern states–could not conceivably be what it has become, if they had not had, and do not still have, indeed for so long, for many generations, cheap labor. I am stating very seriously, and this is not an overstatement:
*I* picked the cotton,
*I* carried it to the market,
and *I* built the railroads
under someone else’s whip for nothing.
For nothing.
The Southern oligarchy,
which has still today so very much power in Washington, and therefore some power in the world, was created by my labor and my sweat, and the violation of my women and the murder of my children.
This, in the land of the free, and the home of the brave.
And no one can challenge that statement.
It is a matter of historical record.”
And finally, when he discusses the black man’s hopelessness when he realizes that not only is the deck stacked against him in his lifetime, but that his children have no chance either, I just want to raise my fist in the air and scream.
In the same vein, I did not know that William F. Buckley, the founder of the conservative movement in America, was an elitist, states-rights, religious, racist, bigot. He wasn’t a klu-klux-klan level racist that advocated violence, but his writings and speeches convinced the religious right in the seats of power to do nothing about the situation. Even thou he lost the debate to Baldwin in 1965, he helped win the war in the long run. The conservatives keep winning and the black man never does.
July 29, 2020
Excellent book about the debate between William F. Buckley and James Baldwin at Cambridge University on February 28,1965. Their topic was “the topic was “the American Dream is at the expense of the Americas Negro”. William F. Buckley took the side that Negros weren’t civilized enough to take full responsibility for full citizenship. Baldwin took the side that America needs to get itself together and include Blacks for full participation in the American Dream (citizenship rights). It was decided that Baldwin won but the legend of the debate lived on. Baldwin died young but Buckley was long haunted by his opinions and the experience. The book covers the the two men’s lives and experiences in order to give insight into their beliefs. The debate and its aftermath are covered. I always thought it was a tough debate to watch (used to be on YouTube) but this book made it more accessible and fun. The book itself is very enjoyable and helped me think of something we’re losing, instead of shaming and silencing someone a conversation in a controlled setting might be important. I also was involved in a conversation about All in the Family that brought up the topic too. And it’s Norman Lear’s birthday. Happy Birthday Norman!
November 15, 2022
Interesting, a lot of ink has been spilled about the brief debate between the literary luminary and social critic, James Baldwin, and the father of modern American conservatism, William F. Buckley Jr., at The Cambridge Union in February 1965. I say this because in watching the debate itself and the loaded yet vague debate proposition ("The American Dream is at the expense of the American Negro"), it is hard to see its effect on the trajectory of racial politics at that time (civil right act had already become law) or its historical relevance to race relations today (other than our discourse continues to circle the same questions and sloppily pointing to Buckley's position in this debate allows progressive a cheap way to score points against conservatives). The debate does very little to even symbolize some cosmic conflict of visions between the Left and Right given that Baldwin's position is more moralizing and morose than the left of his time and Buckley hoped to actually consolidate different types of right-wingers under his particular ideological project (Frank Meyer's fusionism) but only ever managed to do so during the 80s and early 90s. To me, the preoccupation with this debate arises from our (as in America's) contemporary obsession with racial politics and our love of celebrity culture. Baldwin and Buckley are elite and niche intellectuals but celebrities nonetheless. Their performances are both erudite and compelling (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Tek9...), and their pairing is interesting in that it's a rare juxtaposition of two quite different intellectuals. Though in other ways, it is remarkable that Baldwin and Buckley paths crossed so minimally (even in print), especially because of Baldwin's close relationship with Norman Podhoretz, the Commentary editor who eventually joined Buckley's ideological project after becoming disaffected with the New Left in the late 60s.
After all this throat-clearing, we can finally address Nicholas Buccola's The Fire is Upon Us. This work is a close inspection of the Baldwin vs Buckley debate, which is the works climactic event. Most of the work is composed of interlaced biographical sketches of each figure combined with psychological and philosophical analysis of their written works on race and politics. Buccola's analysis is fair and accurate for the most part, but is more astute when it comes to Baldwin's ouerve. The author is clearly more familiar with Baldwin's work, which is forgivable in that Buckley's body of work is quite capacious, especially if his editorial choices at and leadership of National Review is considered, which of course it must be and is. Some of this gap in familiarity with Buckley may have induced Buccola to be overly critical when representing Buckley's positions on civil rights and race relations generally. The major oversight being that Buckley's position on civil rights changed significantly in the years after the debate, including Buckley's open acknowledgement that federal intervention was needed to end segregation, his strong criticism of George Wallace in 1968, and his “Why We Need a Black President in 1980" piece written in 1970.
I do think Buccola's stinging critique of Buckley's racial positions and politicking pre-1964 are warranted and reasonable (despite some of the presentism it relies on) in most respects, but he should have trained the same scrutiny on Baldwin's ideas as well, including his "morose nihilism" (a charge of Buckley against Baldwin) and his flirtations with radicalism. Instead Buccola is mostly a partisan of Baldwin's on all questions and to a minor extent tries to indict conservative ideas more broadly as inherently retrograde and immoral. I think it is reasonable to highlight like Buccola does how Buckley's willingness to entertain segregationist and anti-civil rights arguments in NR despite largely playing coy on that question himself or advocating gradual liberalization was likely incentivized by the composition of his readership and political strategy. But it is unfair to use Buckley's pre-1964 position on race to claim that, "his goal was to maintain white domination of the South, one way or the other." A closer and more accurate reading of Buckley shows that Buckley hoped that cultural change and local politics would improve the conditions and status of black Americans. Moreover, Buckley quickly realized that his pre-1964 prescriptions for race relations were inadequate for that moment and embraced civil rights.
I also wish that Buccola dissected Baldwin's argument about race in America a bit more. Some of Baldwin's ideas still animate many claims about race today made by progressives. His primary claim is that racism allows low-status white Americans to lay false claim to self-esteem and dignity because they can point to the relatively lower position of blacks. This is morally degrading to both parties. Baldwin also holds that this racial hierarchy is perpetuated by a willful blindness by whites generally about the injustices attendant to race. Thus, continued to immiserate and ghettoize blacks because the true problem must be ignored. There is some internal tension in this claim in that it implies that white Americans benefit from both race-consciousness and race-blindness. It's a tension that isn't resolved by Baldwin. Moreover, it doesn't respond to Buckley's point that Ameica is indeed quite concerned with improving life for black Americans and is likely to see those improvement if its founding ideals are fulfilled: “I challenge you to name another civilization anytime, anywhere, in the history of the world in which the problems of a minority is as much the subject of dramatic concern as it is in the United States.”
Despite Buccola's obvious rooting interest affecting his analysis and his distance from and enmity toward conservative thought, The Fire Is Upon Us is an interesting work. It was engaging to learn about Baldwin's ideas concerning literary criticism. For instance, he lambasted protest novels and primarily ideological works of art as hollow (an astute point I've intuitively felt for awhile). He felt that placing politics first in art erects barriers to emotional and psychological depth. I look forward to reading more Baldwin, and think others will enjoy Buccola's work if they're deeply interested in mid-century America political and cultural thought.
Other reviews of The Fire Is Upon Us I'd recommend:
https://lawliberty.org/the-fire-and-t...
https://www.nationalreview.com/magazi...
An extended review can be found here --> https://stetson.substack.com/p/baldwi...
After all this throat-clearing, we can finally address Nicholas Buccola's The Fire is Upon Us. This work is a close inspection of the Baldwin vs Buckley debate, which is the works climactic event. Most of the work is composed of interlaced biographical sketches of each figure combined with psychological and philosophical analysis of their written works on race and politics. Buccola's analysis is fair and accurate for the most part, but is more astute when it comes to Baldwin's ouerve. The author is clearly more familiar with Baldwin's work, which is forgivable in that Buckley's body of work is quite capacious, especially if his editorial choices at and leadership of National Review is considered, which of course it must be and is. Some of this gap in familiarity with Buckley may have induced Buccola to be overly critical when representing Buckley's positions on civil rights and race relations generally. The major oversight being that Buckley's position on civil rights changed significantly in the years after the debate, including Buckley's open acknowledgement that federal intervention was needed to end segregation, his strong criticism of George Wallace in 1968, and his “Why We Need a Black President in 1980" piece written in 1970.
I do think Buccola's stinging critique of Buckley's racial positions and politicking pre-1964 are warranted and reasonable (despite some of the presentism it relies on) in most respects, but he should have trained the same scrutiny on Baldwin's ideas as well, including his "morose nihilism" (a charge of Buckley against Baldwin) and his flirtations with radicalism. Instead Buccola is mostly a partisan of Baldwin's on all questions and to a minor extent tries to indict conservative ideas more broadly as inherently retrograde and immoral. I think it is reasonable to highlight like Buccola does how Buckley's willingness to entertain segregationist and anti-civil rights arguments in NR despite largely playing coy on that question himself or advocating gradual liberalization was likely incentivized by the composition of his readership and political strategy. But it is unfair to use Buckley's pre-1964 position on race to claim that, "his goal was to maintain white domination of the South, one way or the other." A closer and more accurate reading of Buckley shows that Buckley hoped that cultural change and local politics would improve the conditions and status of black Americans. Moreover, Buckley quickly realized that his pre-1964 prescriptions for race relations were inadequate for that moment and embraced civil rights.
I also wish that Buccola dissected Baldwin's argument about race in America a bit more. Some of Baldwin's ideas still animate many claims about race today made by progressives. His primary claim is that racism allows low-status white Americans to lay false claim to self-esteem and dignity because they can point to the relatively lower position of blacks. This is morally degrading to both parties. Baldwin also holds that this racial hierarchy is perpetuated by a willful blindness by whites generally about the injustices attendant to race. Thus, continued to immiserate and ghettoize blacks because the true problem must be ignored. There is some internal tension in this claim in that it implies that white Americans benefit from both race-consciousness and race-blindness. It's a tension that isn't resolved by Baldwin. Moreover, it doesn't respond to Buckley's point that Ameica is indeed quite concerned with improving life for black Americans and is likely to see those improvement if its founding ideals are fulfilled: “I challenge you to name another civilization anytime, anywhere, in the history of the world in which the problems of a minority is as much the subject of dramatic concern as it is in the United States.”
Despite Buccola's obvious rooting interest affecting his analysis and his distance from and enmity toward conservative thought, The Fire Is Upon Us is an interesting work. It was engaging to learn about Baldwin's ideas concerning literary criticism. For instance, he lambasted protest novels and primarily ideological works of art as hollow (an astute point I've intuitively felt for awhile). He felt that placing politics first in art erects barriers to emotional and psychological depth. I look forward to reading more Baldwin, and think others will enjoy Buccola's work if they're deeply interested in mid-century America political and cultural thought.
Other reviews of The Fire Is Upon Us I'd recommend:
https://lawliberty.org/the-fire-and-t...
https://www.nationalreview.com/magazi...
An extended review can be found here --> https://stetson.substack.com/p/baldwi...
January 3, 2021
This is simply an excellent book by any measure. It's well-researched and extensively footnoted, an insightful and fair representation of two VEEEERY different public intellectuals, and probably most importantly, superbly written. It's honestly a joy to read.
This is (partly) a dual biography of Buckley and Baldwin, though it's much more focused on summarizing their views on race than it is on telling their life stories. The focal point of the narrative is their debate at Cambridge, which takes up a significant page count in the book, and it's rendered exquisitely by Buccola. I learned a ton about the lives of both men, but more importantly, about the modern political movements they represent (neo-conservative and progressive). Buccola clearly favors Baldwin, and is arguably harsher on Buckley, which may rankle some readers, but I thought he does an admirable job of fairly analyzing and presenting the views of both men, largely straight from their own writings.
One paragraph from late in the book stopped me cold, as it reads like a lightning bolt that illuminates our current cultural divide on the issue of race and justice:
'And so we see revealed before our eyes one of the great chasms that would forever separate Baldwin and Buckley. As the liberal politics of concern marched forward, Baldwin could not help but support the march while Buckley, as we have seen, resisted it tooth and nail. As progress was made, though, Baldwin was forever dissatisfied because such steps did not alter the fundamental structure of American racial hierarchy. Yes, it was better, he though, to have a Civil Rights Act, Voting Right Acts, President Johnson instead of President Goldwater, and so on, yet these things only did minor damage to the fortress of white supremacy. As Buckley lost his battles against the Civil Rights Act, Voting Rights Act, and election of Johnson, he threw up his hands and said, What more do you want? "When, oh when," to borrow the title of his column, will "we" have done enough for "the Negroes"?'
The book is chock full of insightful paragraphs like this, and is an essential title for those interested in getting into the heads of those on the "other side" of the race and politics conversation today.
This is (partly) a dual biography of Buckley and Baldwin, though it's much more focused on summarizing their views on race than it is on telling their life stories. The focal point of the narrative is their debate at Cambridge, which takes up a significant page count in the book, and it's rendered exquisitely by Buccola. I learned a ton about the lives of both men, but more importantly, about the modern political movements they represent (neo-conservative and progressive). Buccola clearly favors Baldwin, and is arguably harsher on Buckley, which may rankle some readers, but I thought he does an admirable job of fairly analyzing and presenting the views of both men, largely straight from their own writings.
One paragraph from late in the book stopped me cold, as it reads like a lightning bolt that illuminates our current cultural divide on the issue of race and justice:
'And so we see revealed before our eyes one of the great chasms that would forever separate Baldwin and Buckley. As the liberal politics of concern marched forward, Baldwin could not help but support the march while Buckley, as we have seen, resisted it tooth and nail. As progress was made, though, Baldwin was forever dissatisfied because such steps did not alter the fundamental structure of American racial hierarchy. Yes, it was better, he though, to have a Civil Rights Act, Voting Right Acts, President Johnson instead of President Goldwater, and so on, yet these things only did minor damage to the fortress of white supremacy. As Buckley lost his battles against the Civil Rights Act, Voting Rights Act, and election of Johnson, he threw up his hands and said, What more do you want? "When, oh when," to borrow the title of his column, will "we" have done enough for "the Negroes"?'
The book is chock full of insightful paragraphs like this, and is an essential title for those interested in getting into the heads of those on the "other side" of the race and politics conversation today.
November 24, 2022
I've occasionally heard or read references to the iconic public debates WF Buckley and James Baldwin had over racism, but had not done a deep dive. Buccola, a political scientist, has produced a fantastic book, because he manages both to examine closely the themes, arguments, and immediate context of this debate, while also putting it into biographical context and carrying its importance through to the present day. Buckley and Baldwin were roughly the same age and both born in New York, and Buccola produces mini biographies of each of them that focus on the ways in which their thinking and experiences developed up to and after these debates. What most struck me about Buckley in particular was how intellectually unserious he was, for someone who was so interested in being seen as an intellectual. He was raised in a pretty cloistered environment, and Buccola demonstrates how consistently (from a young age) he reacted with total defensiveness and dismissal to other lived beliefs or experiences. It's a strikingly incurious attitude from someone with such academic pretensions. (And to be fair to Buckley, it's also clear from this book and others [Kevin Phillips' work, e.g.] that twentieth century conservatism was really defined in key ways by racism and segregation.) By contrast, there's real wrestling present in Baldwin's writing and speaking; his arguments (even for people who are not persuaded by them) are simply wrestling with a lived world more accurately. The final chapter of the book, which carries forward the themes of the debate to our present day, is evocative. If you're not an academic, do not fear: Buccola is an excellent, punchy writer. The book is engaging from the get-go, jargon-free, and driven by clear throughlines. Just a terrific piece of work.
May 25, 2021
I had been wanting to read this for some time. It was good, well researched and impressive exploration of Civil rights history through the lense of the Baldwin Buckley debate and their personal biography, as much as the historical detail allows for such biography (less so for Buckley and is evident).
At the same time I have also been reading Jane Crow, the biography of Pauli Murray, a leading thinker, lawyer, activist and black woman whose identity was fluid in many ways. She and Baldwin knew each other, she like many black women activists was deeply engaged with challenging Jim and Jane Crow (a term she coined to express the intersection of oppression she and other black women faced). Jane Crow is startling for the way it encapsulates how black women were marginalised and to many degrees, thrown under the bus. As they themselves said 'Black rights tends to mean, black men' s rights'. What I can't help but notice about Buccola's book is the absence of these women from the narrative of the civil rights movement that contextualises much of this work. Fannie Lou Hammer gets a single mention. Other than that, you'd think that no women existed in Buccola's version of the narrative, that their interseding played no part in formulating any of Baldwin thoughts, perspectives and indeed conversation.
It would be easy to be enthralled with this book. Instead I am still taken with Baldwin's biting veracity and ability to expound an articulation of not just his own experience but that of his black kin. I am just tired that 60 or so years later, male writers continue to ignore a nuanced picture, even as they write about 'equality'.
At the same time I have also been reading Jane Crow, the biography of Pauli Murray, a leading thinker, lawyer, activist and black woman whose identity was fluid in many ways. She and Baldwin knew each other, she like many black women activists was deeply engaged with challenging Jim and Jane Crow (a term she coined to express the intersection of oppression she and other black women faced). Jane Crow is startling for the way it encapsulates how black women were marginalised and to many degrees, thrown under the bus. As they themselves said 'Black rights tends to mean, black men' s rights'. What I can't help but notice about Buccola's book is the absence of these women from the narrative of the civil rights movement that contextualises much of this work. Fannie Lou Hammer gets a single mention. Other than that, you'd think that no women existed in Buccola's version of the narrative, that their interseding played no part in formulating any of Baldwin thoughts, perspectives and indeed conversation.
It would be easy to be enthralled with this book. Instead I am still taken with Baldwin's biting veracity and ability to expound an articulation of not just his own experience but that of his black kin. I am just tired that 60 or so years later, male writers continue to ignore a nuanced picture, even as they write about 'equality'.
January 12, 2020
A fantastic read for many reasons. Begins as a quick but adequately thorough bio of two of the most important figures in modern American thought, then surveys the careers and writings that shot both into the spotlight as spokesmen for opposing sides of the Civil Rights Movement.
It is an ingenious move to analyze race and specifically the black freedom struggle through a distillation of these two disparate intellectuals' views, climaxing in an actual historical face-off. The chapter on the televised Cambridge debate is hard to put down.
Buccola's method builds an engrossing plot around which you naturally sink into the ideas and themes of both figures. Their lives and words become allegories that illustrate, better than anything else I've read, the ideological and rhetorical impasse we cannot seem to overcome still to this day.
Baldwin won the debate and for good reason. To this day his prophecies continue to cut through the fog with alarming clarity.
"For Baldwin, one's love for the country was revealed by one's willingness to "criticize her perpetually." Buckley's love was a love of devotion, much like a child's love for his parents. Baldwins love was a love of confrontation. "Love is a battle," he insisted, "love is war. Love is growing up."
It is an ingenious move to analyze race and specifically the black freedom struggle through a distillation of these two disparate intellectuals' views, climaxing in an actual historical face-off. The chapter on the televised Cambridge debate is hard to put down.
Buccola's method builds an engrossing plot around which you naturally sink into the ideas and themes of both figures. Their lives and words become allegories that illustrate, better than anything else I've read, the ideological and rhetorical impasse we cannot seem to overcome still to this day.
Baldwin won the debate and for good reason. To this day his prophecies continue to cut through the fog with alarming clarity.
"For Baldwin, one's love for the country was revealed by one's willingness to "criticize her perpetually." Buckley's love was a love of devotion, much like a child's love for his parents. Baldwins love was a love of confrontation. "Love is a battle," he insisted, "love is war. Love is growing up."
June 19, 2020
The Fire is Upon Us – James Baldwin and William F. Buckley, Jr., and the Debate over Race in America by Nicholas Buccola. I am constantly amazed at what I missed in my education and in my growing up. I was aware of Buckley being a conservative leader during the 1960s and the 1970s, but this book gave me new insight into his “assumptions of white supremacy” and his “philosophical commitment to elite rule.” During the 1950s Buckley in his segregation era essay, “The South Must Prevail” actually wrote: The central question that emerges—and it is not a parliamentary question or a question that is answered by merely consulting a catalogue of the rights of American citizens, born Equal—is whether the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not predominate numerically? [sic] The sobering answer is Yes—the White community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race. . . . In Fairness as the white supremacist leaders in the south brutalized blacks in the mid 1960’s, Buckley soften his defense of segregation and took on the “kooks,” like George Wallace and Lester Maddox of the South.
September 28, 2022
A brilliant examination of the debate between Baldwin and Buckley, not just the actual debate at Cambridge in 1965 but the debate between two fundamentally different and ultimately unreconcilable worldviews. What becomes clear is the fundamentally dishonest nature of Buckley's position (though Buccola bends over backwards to represent it fairly), which Buckley presented as principled conservatism, but which actually violates the very principles it purports to uphold (the primacy of the individual, respect for tradition, the rule of law, etc). And the level of wilful misunderstanding and misrepresentation Buckley relied upon is astonishing. What's truly mind-boggling about this book is how little the conversation has moved and how much conservatism, especially of the American variety, still relies upon the tricks and tropes and assumptions and strategies pioneered by someone like Buckley and his elitism and unexamined white supremacy.
February 11, 2021
Reading this in the wake of the attempted coup at the U.S. Capitol was a bit surreal. So much of the right wing thinking of today can be traced right back to Buckley, right down to the point where he insists he didn’t lose a debate he clearly lost.
The amount of research that went into this book is incredible. I have read many books on the Civil Rights Movement but none presented quite like this. Viewing it through the eyes of Baldwin and Buckley is fascinating. Kudos to the author for weaving the research into a coherent and entertaining narrative that doesn’t get too bogged down (for the most part) in unnecessary details. It is not a quick read but it is well worth the time.
The amount of research that went into this book is incredible. I have read many books on the Civil Rights Movement but none presented quite like this. Viewing it through the eyes of Baldwin and Buckley is fascinating. Kudos to the author for weaving the research into a coherent and entertaining narrative that doesn’t get too bogged down (for the most part) in unnecessary details. It is not a quick read but it is well worth the time.
May 4, 2019
really amazing and insightful look into a historic debate and its two figures.
October 18, 2019
“The Fire Is Upon Us” Examines Great Debate Between William F. Buckley, Jr. And James Baldwin
Review By Arelya J. Mitchell
I am sure the University of Cambridge neither cared nor was aware that it was Black History Month when they hosted the Super Bowl of debates between intellectual heavyweights William F. Buckley, Jr. and James Baldwin.
February 18, 1965 was the date, and that year was one year after the 1964 Civil Rights Bill was passed into law, and one year after the heated racially-divided presidential run between Lyndon B. Johnson and Barry Goldwater—and ’65 itself was the precursor to what would become the second most famous march outside of the ’63 March on Washington led by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. This showdown of a march was Selma which would live on in infamy in movies, books, and bitter memories which still resonate today.
However, the great debate at Cambridge has mainly been lost in history in spite of the fact that it, too, held all the symbolism of those turbulent 60’s. Yeah, the great debate was literally in black and white respectively in the person of James Baldwin and William F. Buckley, Jr. and yes, it was the race aspect which made it so highly anticipated in spite of the ‘intellectual’ aspect of one-upmanship of wit and barbs. In other words, this was really about seeing a black guy and a white go after each other on a mat of gray matter. Nobody really likes to say it this way because of the PC culture, but this is exactly what it was. Yes, there they were: Buckley, the white guy and conservative extraordinaire, ready to do erudite battle with Baldwin, the black guy and liberal extraordinaire. The debate topic was “The American Dream is at the Expense of the American Negro.” So much for MLK’s “I Have A Dream”.
Well, one needn’t worry about this great debate remaining lost at this juncture in the 21st Century. Nicholas Buccola has dug it out of the cobwebs of time in his “The Fire Is Upon Us,” published by Princeton University Press. For the sake of history, I’m glad Buccola decided to examine this event. He is the first to do it as a book.
I received the galley of “The Fire Is Upon Us” in April 2019, and I must admit that even though I thought this would be a rather dry subject, I still would have found it worth my while because I just plain love debates. Buccola’s style and tone of delivering you this historic debate drew me in to a point where I did not mind his going back-and-forth as if in a debate match to bring out the points and counterpoints in the debate. Nothing’s dry about this book.
Buccola captures the atmosphere of racial tension (to hate or not to hate; to segregate or not to segregate-- you get my point). He pulls in and explores the strong personalities of both men—and yes, even the arrogance of both men. One gets the feeling that there was not an ounce of humility between the two of them. Both men have now passed into the annals of time, but not before they contributed and amassed a bulk of worth in politics, political theory, literature, and the socio-economic dialectics to make for many future debates on race in America which tritely have continued in 21st Century America.
But shall we continue with Buccola himself? What I appreciated about the author was his ability not only to put readers inside the debate hall, but also inside the heads—the mindsets—of Buckley and Baldwin. I appreciated how he pulls this off with a biographical back-and-forth to distinguish both men—one born with a silver spoon and one who was not; the education route of each; the families of each; the youth of each separated by ‘race in America’ forming their psychological and philosophical trek all the way up to the great debate, into the great debate, and after the great debate.
“On the evening of February 18, the Cambridge Union was abuzz with excitement. The debating hall of the Union, which was modeled after the British House of Commons, was packed with seven hundred people. Students and guests at the idyllic campus of the University of Cambridge filled every spot available on the benches and in the galleries, and still more sat in the aisles on the floor. As the world’s oldest and most prestigious debating society, the Cambridge Union had often been the site of public attention, but this evening had the promise of something extraordinary…The people in the debating hall of the Union sensed that they were about to witness an intellectual clash for the ages.” Buccola sets this scene in his prologue. He continues: “As the crowd poured in, the space became hotter, stuffier, and further in violation of the fire code.”
With such a description, I could only think as indicated by his title “The Fire Is Upon Us.”
Certain ‘big’ footnotes must be pointed out which are (1) that this is the first book to be written on this historic debate and (2) that political commentator George Wills is practically another major figure in the book. True, Wills was an admirer of Buckley when he came on board Buckley’s National Review, but I hardly think of Wills as being Buckley’s protégé as it would seem Buckley would have thought of him. Buckley seemed to have thought of Wills as an intellectual-in-the-making albeit an intellectual pushover. Why wouldn’t he have? Buckley’s arrogance would have drawn him into judging that a young man such as Wills or perhaps anyone else would not have the capacity to stand up to him. Wills did. Read it for yourself. It’s worth it.
Buccola does an excellent job in juxtaposing the National Review and Progressive magazines and their respective editors and writers with Baldwin as a great literary figure in the mix of this civil rights era.
To be blunt, Buccola lays out and examines the National Review’s editorial Civil Rights stance. He writes: “In the early years of the National Review, Buckley and his colleagues developed a case against the civil rights movement that consisted of four major categories of argument: constitutionalist, authoritarian, traditionalist, and racial elitist. Each of these categories was undergirded by an assumption of cultural (if not congenital) white supremacy.”
Ah, there’s that political hot button phrase again “white supremacy” which has punched itself all the way from the 1860’s Civil War era to the 1960’s Civil Rights Movement to what is happening in a 21st Century America. (As a side note, I would like to see the other side of the coin examined one day in the form of liberal white supremacy. Yet, I must wait for another time to assert my own observation on the hypocrisy of liberalism and my own concept/precept of liberal racism).
This brings me to what I think is the defining chapter in “The Fire Is Upon Us” which is chapter seven, entitled “The Faith of Our Fathers: Buckley at Cambridge.” One can almost guess that it would be Baldwin who would receive the standing ovation, but by the same token, I am presupposing that the ovation stemmed not so much from Baldwin’s gift as a novelist, writer of profound political thought, speaker, and Civil Rights activist but rather because he was Black. In my opinion, it is the ‘liberal’ who cannot get beyond ‘Black’ and it is the ‘Black’ who keeps accommodating this sophisticated fickleness (but I digress into my own excursion but it is Buccola’s handling of the subject and Buccola’s own speculation which prompted me to do so. This is how well-written “Fire” is. This is the flip side of a self-righteous liberal bias which in my opinion has yet to be fully examined either then or now.). Ironically, it is George Wills who has a more realistic grasp of the event which is depicted when Buccola describes Buckley’s state of mind as: “The standing ovation for Baldwin must have felt like an eternity to Buckley. He remained seated, leaning back, with his legs crossed and a pen to his mouth. In part because the ovation was lasting so long…” If you have ever watched the old “Firing Line” series on PBS, you can capture this picture of Buckley even better.
What Wills’ realistic grasp is, as Buccola writes: “Intellectuals, Wills had contended, were actually showing Baldwin a great deal of disrespect by greeting him with such uncritical adulation. This was disrespectful because his arguments did not merit such treatment, and he was being paid such deference because he was black.” I concur. All I can add to this, observing from the history of my own life, is to put in brackets the word ‘White’ in front of ‘Intellectuals’ in the above paragraph. Thus, why I give kudos to Buccola for having the guts to even put in such a paragraph regarding Wills.
Sometimes, there is this proclivity to place a collegiate debate held at an upscale university such as Cambridge out of the realm of the general public or rather common folk, but on the contrary this debate between Buckley and Baldwin was produced – or rather birthed from— what was going on among the masses which was a civil rights movement which stemmed from the “Negro Question” which had been asked since slavery which led up to the Civil War to the Civil Rights Movement to now. However, to be politically correct, one would label it “The African American Question” or “the Black American Question.” Will it ever be answered? (Also, keep in mind that the “Negro Question” was being asked internationally as well because of the unrest going on in the African colonial nations held by Great Britain.).
There is so much depth to this book that I doubt that even Buccola himself realizes that he pulled off a controversial masterpiece—in black and white—like a pencil drawing which needs to filled in perhaps with another passage of time. Buccola’s interjecting his own observations, interpretations, and commentary in portraying two strong-willed activist-intellectuals is just as (perhaps more so) dynamistic and dramatic as the warriors themselves inside the Cambridge arena. This is what makes a good book great.
“The Fire Is Upon Us” (Princeton University Press) is now available in bookstores, online, and in other retail outlets.
Review By Arelya J. Mitchell
I am sure the University of Cambridge neither cared nor was aware that it was Black History Month when they hosted the Super Bowl of debates between intellectual heavyweights William F. Buckley, Jr. and James Baldwin.
February 18, 1965 was the date, and that year was one year after the 1964 Civil Rights Bill was passed into law, and one year after the heated racially-divided presidential run between Lyndon B. Johnson and Barry Goldwater—and ’65 itself was the precursor to what would become the second most famous march outside of the ’63 March on Washington led by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. This showdown of a march was Selma which would live on in infamy in movies, books, and bitter memories which still resonate today.
However, the great debate at Cambridge has mainly been lost in history in spite of the fact that it, too, held all the symbolism of those turbulent 60’s. Yeah, the great debate was literally in black and white respectively in the person of James Baldwin and William F. Buckley, Jr. and yes, it was the race aspect which made it so highly anticipated in spite of the ‘intellectual’ aspect of one-upmanship of wit and barbs. In other words, this was really about seeing a black guy and a white go after each other on a mat of gray matter. Nobody really likes to say it this way because of the PC culture, but this is exactly what it was. Yes, there they were: Buckley, the white guy and conservative extraordinaire, ready to do erudite battle with Baldwin, the black guy and liberal extraordinaire. The debate topic was “The American Dream is at the Expense of the American Negro.” So much for MLK’s “I Have A Dream”.
Well, one needn’t worry about this great debate remaining lost at this juncture in the 21st Century. Nicholas Buccola has dug it out of the cobwebs of time in his “The Fire Is Upon Us,” published by Princeton University Press. For the sake of history, I’m glad Buccola decided to examine this event. He is the first to do it as a book.
I received the galley of “The Fire Is Upon Us” in April 2019, and I must admit that even though I thought this would be a rather dry subject, I still would have found it worth my while because I just plain love debates. Buccola’s style and tone of delivering you this historic debate drew me in to a point where I did not mind his going back-and-forth as if in a debate match to bring out the points and counterpoints in the debate. Nothing’s dry about this book.
Buccola captures the atmosphere of racial tension (to hate or not to hate; to segregate or not to segregate-- you get my point). He pulls in and explores the strong personalities of both men—and yes, even the arrogance of both men. One gets the feeling that there was not an ounce of humility between the two of them. Both men have now passed into the annals of time, but not before they contributed and amassed a bulk of worth in politics, political theory, literature, and the socio-economic dialectics to make for many future debates on race in America which tritely have continued in 21st Century America.
But shall we continue with Buccola himself? What I appreciated about the author was his ability not only to put readers inside the debate hall, but also inside the heads—the mindsets—of Buckley and Baldwin. I appreciated how he pulls this off with a biographical back-and-forth to distinguish both men—one born with a silver spoon and one who was not; the education route of each; the families of each; the youth of each separated by ‘race in America’ forming their psychological and philosophical trek all the way up to the great debate, into the great debate, and after the great debate.
“On the evening of February 18, the Cambridge Union was abuzz with excitement. The debating hall of the Union, which was modeled after the British House of Commons, was packed with seven hundred people. Students and guests at the idyllic campus of the University of Cambridge filled every spot available on the benches and in the galleries, and still more sat in the aisles on the floor. As the world’s oldest and most prestigious debating society, the Cambridge Union had often been the site of public attention, but this evening had the promise of something extraordinary…The people in the debating hall of the Union sensed that they were about to witness an intellectual clash for the ages.” Buccola sets this scene in his prologue. He continues: “As the crowd poured in, the space became hotter, stuffier, and further in violation of the fire code.”
With such a description, I could only think as indicated by his title “The Fire Is Upon Us.”
Certain ‘big’ footnotes must be pointed out which are (1) that this is the first book to be written on this historic debate and (2) that political commentator George Wills is practically another major figure in the book. True, Wills was an admirer of Buckley when he came on board Buckley’s National Review, but I hardly think of Wills as being Buckley’s protégé as it would seem Buckley would have thought of him. Buckley seemed to have thought of Wills as an intellectual-in-the-making albeit an intellectual pushover. Why wouldn’t he have? Buckley’s arrogance would have drawn him into judging that a young man such as Wills or perhaps anyone else would not have the capacity to stand up to him. Wills did. Read it for yourself. It’s worth it.
Buccola does an excellent job in juxtaposing the National Review and Progressive magazines and their respective editors and writers with Baldwin as a great literary figure in the mix of this civil rights era.
To be blunt, Buccola lays out and examines the National Review’s editorial Civil Rights stance. He writes: “In the early years of the National Review, Buckley and his colleagues developed a case against the civil rights movement that consisted of four major categories of argument: constitutionalist, authoritarian, traditionalist, and racial elitist. Each of these categories was undergirded by an assumption of cultural (if not congenital) white supremacy.”
Ah, there’s that political hot button phrase again “white supremacy” which has punched itself all the way from the 1860’s Civil War era to the 1960’s Civil Rights Movement to what is happening in a 21st Century America. (As a side note, I would like to see the other side of the coin examined one day in the form of liberal white supremacy. Yet, I must wait for another time to assert my own observation on the hypocrisy of liberalism and my own concept/precept of liberal racism).
This brings me to what I think is the defining chapter in “The Fire Is Upon Us” which is chapter seven, entitled “The Faith of Our Fathers: Buckley at Cambridge.” One can almost guess that it would be Baldwin who would receive the standing ovation, but by the same token, I am presupposing that the ovation stemmed not so much from Baldwin’s gift as a novelist, writer of profound political thought, speaker, and Civil Rights activist but rather because he was Black. In my opinion, it is the ‘liberal’ who cannot get beyond ‘Black’ and it is the ‘Black’ who keeps accommodating this sophisticated fickleness (but I digress into my own excursion but it is Buccola’s handling of the subject and Buccola’s own speculation which prompted me to do so. This is how well-written “Fire” is. This is the flip side of a self-righteous liberal bias which in my opinion has yet to be fully examined either then or now.). Ironically, it is George Wills who has a more realistic grasp of the event which is depicted when Buccola describes Buckley’s state of mind as: “The standing ovation for Baldwin must have felt like an eternity to Buckley. He remained seated, leaning back, with his legs crossed and a pen to his mouth. In part because the ovation was lasting so long…” If you have ever watched the old “Firing Line” series on PBS, you can capture this picture of Buckley even better.
What Wills’ realistic grasp is, as Buccola writes: “Intellectuals, Wills had contended, were actually showing Baldwin a great deal of disrespect by greeting him with such uncritical adulation. This was disrespectful because his arguments did not merit such treatment, and he was being paid such deference because he was black.” I concur. All I can add to this, observing from the history of my own life, is to put in brackets the word ‘White’ in front of ‘Intellectuals’ in the above paragraph. Thus, why I give kudos to Buccola for having the guts to even put in such a paragraph regarding Wills.
Sometimes, there is this proclivity to place a collegiate debate held at an upscale university such as Cambridge out of the realm of the general public or rather common folk, but on the contrary this debate between Buckley and Baldwin was produced – or rather birthed from— what was going on among the masses which was a civil rights movement which stemmed from the “Negro Question” which had been asked since slavery which led up to the Civil War to the Civil Rights Movement to now. However, to be politically correct, one would label it “The African American Question” or “the Black American Question.” Will it ever be answered? (Also, keep in mind that the “Negro Question” was being asked internationally as well because of the unrest going on in the African colonial nations held by Great Britain.).
There is so much depth to this book that I doubt that even Buccola himself realizes that he pulled off a controversial masterpiece—in black and white—like a pencil drawing which needs to filled in perhaps with another passage of time. Buccola’s interjecting his own observations, interpretations, and commentary in portraying two strong-willed activist-intellectuals is just as (perhaps more so) dynamistic and dramatic as the warriors themselves inside the Cambridge arena. This is what makes a good book great.
“The Fire Is Upon Us” (Princeton University Press) is now available in bookstores, online, and in other retail outlets.
January 29, 2024
Interesting depictions of two vastly different intellectuals of the 1950s and 1960s. A dialogue on privilege, upbringing, life experience, and what it wrought on their perspectives and priorities of belief. Gives a lot of context to what was going on in America, in regards with racism and the developing civil rights movement, while the two were comin up.
Dated, but reflects on conflicts and arguments that are still occurring or being used today. Many conservatives parrot logic and arguments that Buckley and others used back then. This breaks it down nicely to show the round about ways conservative talking heads fight against progress and shines light on the thinly veiled fear of losing the privilege or control they’ve been accustomed to for so very long.
Highly recommend watching the debate between Baldwin and Buckley on YouTube before reading this book, if you haven’t already, but also the book includes an unedited transcript (or recording if you’re listening to the audiobook) in the epilogue. The book doesn’t fully center around it per se, but it’s helpful. The entire book builds a mountain of context regarding what was happening in America in regards the struggle for civil rights, violence committed against people of color, and how events effected the two subjects of the book. Couldn’t recommend this book more. Should be required reading for all Americans at least.
Dated, but reflects on conflicts and arguments that are still occurring or being used today. Many conservatives parrot logic and arguments that Buckley and others used back then. This breaks it down nicely to show the round about ways conservative talking heads fight against progress and shines light on the thinly veiled fear of losing the privilege or control they’ve been accustomed to for so very long.
Highly recommend watching the debate between Baldwin and Buckley on YouTube before reading this book, if you haven’t already, but also the book includes an unedited transcript (or recording if you’re listening to the audiobook) in the epilogue. The book doesn’t fully center around it per se, but it’s helpful. The entire book builds a mountain of context regarding what was happening in America in regards the struggle for civil rights, violence committed against people of color, and how events effected the two subjects of the book. Couldn’t recommend this book more. Should be required reading for all Americans at least.
December 12, 2019
I don't have access to the book (it was borrowed) so my comments will be brief and general and without representative quotations. "The Fire is Upon Us" is very well-written, far more accessible that is usually the case for university press publications. Buccola does an estimable job capturing the general outlines of the times (the 1960s), the lives of the two key participants, and their respective thought processes. James Baldwin is still well-known and wifely read, Buckley less so (though my saying this might be nothing more than evidence of what I tend to read). In the 60s and 70s, he was one of the country's best known public intellectuals, as they were celebrated at the time. Buckley was the founder of National Review magazine, a key publication in Conservative politics and thinking. He intended the magazine to, as he wrote, "stand athwart history, yelling Stop, at a time when no one is inclined to do so..." This was the essence of his philosophy, that the values of Western civilization, particularly as they are evidenced in American history and culture, must be preserved and defended. To Buckley, James Baldwin and others were existential threats to these values -- not necessarily because of what they were speaking against but because of how they went about it and the words they used to frame their arguments.
The pivotal "event" of the book is, as the title suggests, a debate the two had at the Cambridge [University] Union in 1965, the topic of which was "the American dream is at the expense of the American Negro." Buccola uses the occasion of the debate to examine the arguments over race that were taking place in the United States. As an examination of the questions and challenges roiling American culture at the time -- in particular, the Civil Rights movement, federal legislation designed to realize the promise of the Reconstruction Era amendments, the assassinations of JFK, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Malcolm X, the Watts riots, etc. -- the book is insightful and covers a lot of ground. This fact alone makes it worth paying attention to. The debate pitted Buckley's 'go-slow,' liberalism (though perhaps well-meaning) is misguided and soft-headed, individualism, against Baldwin's impatience with how the issue of Race was framed in American politics and discourse, how oblivious (perhaps 'willfully resistant' might be a better way of phrasing it) White America was about what to him seemed indisputable and obvious, and the fundamental (and tragic) flaw he perceived in people speaking and thinking in terms of "Negro," etc., rather than "human." Buccola fleshes out the respective arguments and what reasoning and life experiences undergirded them.
There is much to praise about "Fire" and much to learn from reading it, but what struck me most was how little seems to have changed since the '60s with regards to race in America. I suppose this may be entirely unsurprising to many -- including myself -- but it is displaying nevertheless. The currents of "history" that Buckley's conservatism sought to "Stop" had many different manifestations, but key among them were these: the efforts being made to end segregation; to fully enfranchise Black voters throughout the country (but most especially in the South),; to recognize and address the long-term economic, political, and social consequences of slavery and racism on Black (and White, for the damage of racism goes two ways) Americans, and so on. Reading Buckley's arguments against these efforts -- that the federal government had no role in addressing racist violence in the South, deplorable though the violence was, or acting to end segregation, because the states should be the ones making those choices, and individuals should be allowed to decide for themselves who to admit into their stores and restaurants; that the Civil Rights movement has essentially anti-American, and probably directed by the Soviet Union; that Black Americans "weren't ready" to vote in large numbers (though Buckley was quick to add, as if it were somehow redemptive, that neither were most White Americans) or fully participate in politics and culture; that, in his view, the marchers at the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama, were "provoking" a strong response by the police by simple fact of their numbers, and that the police in fact demonstrated laudable restraint in holding back from responding as long as they did (roughly two minutes, in fact, though in Buckley's telling it was twenty minutes before the dogs, hoses, truncheons, were deployed and men and women were mercilessly beaten).
I know I'm not in any sense "reviewing" the book (though I will take this occasion to say that the book's editors left some pretty egregious errors and typos sneak through). Rather, I'm merely venting, and I may cut much of this "review" after further reflection. Doubtless my strong emotional reaction to the book is largely shaped by our toxic politics and venomous discourse. In a quieter, saner time, I might have had a more thoughtful response to "The Fire is Upon Us." But I wonder whether the book would have been written -- or written in the same way -- if our time was more quiet and sane. So take or dismiss these comments as you like. I'll stop here.
The pivotal "event" of the book is, as the title suggests, a debate the two had at the Cambridge [University] Union in 1965, the topic of which was "the American dream is at the expense of the American Negro." Buccola uses the occasion of the debate to examine the arguments over race that were taking place in the United States. As an examination of the questions and challenges roiling American culture at the time -- in particular, the Civil Rights movement, federal legislation designed to realize the promise of the Reconstruction Era amendments, the assassinations of JFK, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Malcolm X, the Watts riots, etc. -- the book is insightful and covers a lot of ground. This fact alone makes it worth paying attention to. The debate pitted Buckley's 'go-slow,' liberalism (though perhaps well-meaning) is misguided and soft-headed, individualism, against Baldwin's impatience with how the issue of Race was framed in American politics and discourse, how oblivious (perhaps 'willfully resistant' might be a better way of phrasing it) White America was about what to him seemed indisputable and obvious, and the fundamental (and tragic) flaw he perceived in people speaking and thinking in terms of "Negro," etc., rather than "human." Buccola fleshes out the respective arguments and what reasoning and life experiences undergirded them.
There is much to praise about "Fire" and much to learn from reading it, but what struck me most was how little seems to have changed since the '60s with regards to race in America. I suppose this may be entirely unsurprising to many -- including myself -- but it is displaying nevertheless. The currents of "history" that Buckley's conservatism sought to "Stop" had many different manifestations, but key among them were these: the efforts being made to end segregation; to fully enfranchise Black voters throughout the country (but most especially in the South),; to recognize and address the long-term economic, political, and social consequences of slavery and racism on Black (and White, for the damage of racism goes two ways) Americans, and so on. Reading Buckley's arguments against these efforts -- that the federal government had no role in addressing racist violence in the South, deplorable though the violence was, or acting to end segregation, because the states should be the ones making those choices, and individuals should be allowed to decide for themselves who to admit into their stores and restaurants; that the Civil Rights movement has essentially anti-American, and probably directed by the Soviet Union; that Black Americans "weren't ready" to vote in large numbers (though Buckley was quick to add, as if it were somehow redemptive, that neither were most White Americans) or fully participate in politics and culture; that, in his view, the marchers at the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama, were "provoking" a strong response by the police by simple fact of their numbers, and that the police in fact demonstrated laudable restraint in holding back from responding as long as they did (roughly two minutes, in fact, though in Buckley's telling it was twenty minutes before the dogs, hoses, truncheons, were deployed and men and women were mercilessly beaten).
I know I'm not in any sense "reviewing" the book (though I will take this occasion to say that the book's editors left some pretty egregious errors and typos sneak through). Rather, I'm merely venting, and I may cut much of this "review" after further reflection. Doubtless my strong emotional reaction to the book is largely shaped by our toxic politics and venomous discourse. In a quieter, saner time, I might have had a more thoughtful response to "The Fire is Upon Us." But I wonder whether the book would have been written -- or written in the same way -- if our time was more quiet and sane. So take or dismiss these comments as you like. I'll stop here.
February 5, 2023
as someone who hasn’t read much on the civil rights movement since probably high school, this book provides the perfect background and context needed to fully appreciate the buckley baldwin debate and aftermath.
takes some time to get there but certainly worth it
takes some time to get there but certainly worth it
February 18, 2020
I had been looking forward to this book eagerly ever since I heard the author interviewed on The New York Times Book Review podcast, and it did not disappoint.
The focal point of the book is the 1965 debate between Baldwin and Buckley at Cambridge University, but Buccola spends 225 pages setting the stage for the main event through a patient and scholarly look at trajectories of both of the book's subjects, giving an air of inevitability and climax to the meeting. And indeed, while it wasn't entirely clear how much time each one devoted to thinking about the other prior to the Cambridge debate, it seems fair to say that they haunted one another's thoughts for many years afterward. It seems clear from Buccola's account that Buckley devoted more of his thinking, writing, and public speaking to Baldwin, and certainly was motivated by a clearer animus. But it was also clear that Baldwin stewed for years over his own tactics during their second debate on the set of the talk show Open End.
In the end, the book is less about a single evening than it is an intellectual biography of two of the leading voices of the era, Baldwin, the poet-laureate of the civil rights movement, and Buckley, a leading intellectual author of the modern conservative movement.
I was continually struck by Buccola's restraint in editorializing throughout, mostly in response to ideas and statements by Buckley on issues of race and white supremacy that ranged from merely unenlightened to utterly unconscionable. This because Buccola himself writes in a footnote to the Prologue, "I go beyond mere description of the ideas of Baldwin and Buckley to offer some analysis of moral status of those ideas.” By my reckoning, Buccola left plenty of room to spare here, and might have done more to show how poorly Buckley’s ideas have aged.
I had never read anything by Buckley, but knew of his reputation as a patrician elitist and leading light in modern conservative thought. I came away impressed with him more as a political strategist than an intellect and appalled by his nakedly white supremacist views and the elaborate sophistry with which he tried to shroud his persistent racism behind arguments around states' rights and Constitutionalism.
I had read some of Baldwin's fiction and knew him to be part of the group of artists including Harry Belafonte and Lorraine Hansberry that lobbied the Kennedys for more progressive policies on racial equality and inclusion, but did not fully appreciate his prominence in arts and letters or his protagonism on issues of race. I was inspired by the book to seek out collections of Baldwin's essays, but only in part because of of the power of his thinking and originality of his expression. I was inspired to read the original text also because Buccola "quoted" for "attribution" so "selectively" from the "original sources" he consulted that it was "distracting” to the “flow” of the “reading,” and left me wondering about the original texts.
There were a number of distracting typos, too, including the misspelling of the "intelligentisia" to which both Baldwin and Buckley belonged, and my favorite, "raisin d'etre." (It seems Lorraine Hansberry got under the author's skin.)
But these are lower-case critiques. This one is a keeper, the debate a clever pretext for delving into the intellectual histories of two of the most influential voices of the era. But beyond the intrinsic value of the book as a work of modern intellectual history, Buccola's book is frighteningly relevant to the current state of affairs on race in America. Here again, I was surprised Buccola didn't lean more into drawing out the parallels and the relevance of the Baldwin-Buckley debates today's discussions of race. Perhaps that is because it was so painfully evident throughout that it would have been superfluous of him to call it out. And perhaps because in two searing lines in the Epilogue, Buccola synthesizes the lessons of Buckley and Baldwin for 2020.
Of Buckley's legacy, Buccola writes, "For the American Right, the price of power has been a deal with the devil of white supremacy." Of Baldwin's, "moral righteousness is often not sufficient to gain political power."
The focal point of the book is the 1965 debate between Baldwin and Buckley at Cambridge University, but Buccola spends 225 pages setting the stage for the main event through a patient and scholarly look at trajectories of both of the book's subjects, giving an air of inevitability and climax to the meeting. And indeed, while it wasn't entirely clear how much time each one devoted to thinking about the other prior to the Cambridge debate, it seems fair to say that they haunted one another's thoughts for many years afterward. It seems clear from Buccola's account that Buckley devoted more of his thinking, writing, and public speaking to Baldwin, and certainly was motivated by a clearer animus. But it was also clear that Baldwin stewed for years over his own tactics during their second debate on the set of the talk show Open End.
In the end, the book is less about a single evening than it is an intellectual biography of two of the leading voices of the era, Baldwin, the poet-laureate of the civil rights movement, and Buckley, a leading intellectual author of the modern conservative movement.
I was continually struck by Buccola's restraint in editorializing throughout, mostly in response to ideas and statements by Buckley on issues of race and white supremacy that ranged from merely unenlightened to utterly unconscionable. This because Buccola himself writes in a footnote to the Prologue, "I go beyond mere description of the ideas of Baldwin and Buckley to offer some analysis of moral status of those ideas.” By my reckoning, Buccola left plenty of room to spare here, and might have done more to show how poorly Buckley’s ideas have aged.
I had never read anything by Buckley, but knew of his reputation as a patrician elitist and leading light in modern conservative thought. I came away impressed with him more as a political strategist than an intellect and appalled by his nakedly white supremacist views and the elaborate sophistry with which he tried to shroud his persistent racism behind arguments around states' rights and Constitutionalism.
I had read some of Baldwin's fiction and knew him to be part of the group of artists including Harry Belafonte and Lorraine Hansberry that lobbied the Kennedys for more progressive policies on racial equality and inclusion, but did not fully appreciate his prominence in arts and letters or his protagonism on issues of race. I was inspired by the book to seek out collections of Baldwin's essays, but only in part because of of the power of his thinking and originality of his expression. I was inspired to read the original text also because Buccola "quoted" for "attribution" so "selectively" from the "original sources" he consulted that it was "distracting” to the “flow” of the “reading,” and left me wondering about the original texts.
There were a number of distracting typos, too, including the misspelling of the "intelligentisia" to which both Baldwin and Buckley belonged, and my favorite, "raisin d'etre." (It seems Lorraine Hansberry got under the author's skin.)
But these are lower-case critiques. This one is a keeper, the debate a clever pretext for delving into the intellectual histories of two of the most influential voices of the era. But beyond the intrinsic value of the book as a work of modern intellectual history, Buccola's book is frighteningly relevant to the current state of affairs on race in America. Here again, I was surprised Buccola didn't lean more into drawing out the parallels and the relevance of the Baldwin-Buckley debates today's discussions of race. Perhaps that is because it was so painfully evident throughout that it would have been superfluous of him to call it out. And perhaps because in two searing lines in the Epilogue, Buccola synthesizes the lessons of Buckley and Baldwin for 2020.
Of Buckley's legacy, Buccola writes, "For the American Right, the price of power has been a deal with the devil of white supremacy." Of Baldwin's, "moral righteousness is often not sufficient to gain political power."
February 14, 2025
I’ve wanted to read something with Baldwin for years. So glad I finally did. Learned so much more about the Civil Rights Movement. An amazing book. Looking forward to watching his debate with Buckley.
February 22, 2024
excellent history of buckley and baldwin. buckley is a little twerp and baldwin is on a different, higher plane than him
January 3, 2021
This was one of the best books I read in 2020 (ok, plus 3 days in 21). Buccola's writing is smooth, clear and informative. He places the two protagonists in their time and individually unique cultures while simultaneously telling America's story - a story we all must be reminded of and apply to life today. He reminds us that history really "is now". The ebb and flow of past events make our current environment and we create a new history as we react to it. Sadly, there is also the not directly stated message that we have learned so little that we keep repeating the same mistakes. We fail to see our neighbors simply as people, to love and to respect them and instead, place them in contrived boxes of color, class and orientation. We fail to appreciate the cause of injustice and focus on the perpetrator - the equivalent of Bull Connor. Nor, have our reactions changed fundamentally - we respond with passion but little meaningful action and we allow demagogues to use our fear for their aggrandizement.
While so much today is similar to 1963 I was also struck by how much conservatism has changed in 60 years. Buckley, (who I personally find detestable) while cheering the "law and order" chants of the past few years and nodding to the "good people on both sides" response would, never the less, be aghast at how approvingly the 2020's right allows and abets the deterioration of the institutional framework of American democracy.
Buccula is an excellent writer and clearly a focused, professional academic. In The Fire is Upon Us he teaches as well and entertains and so does both without the reader feeling inadequate. I had the sense he respects enough those, of whatever political ideology, who have picked up his book to treat each as an objective and reasoning reader.
I thank him for his work.
While so much today is similar to 1963 I was also struck by how much conservatism has changed in 60 years. Buckley, (who I personally find detestable) while cheering the "law and order" chants of the past few years and nodding to the "good people on both sides" response would, never the less, be aghast at how approvingly the 2020's right allows and abets the deterioration of the institutional framework of American democracy.
Buccula is an excellent writer and clearly a focused, professional academic. In The Fire is Upon Us he teaches as well and entertains and so does both without the reader feeling inadequate. I had the sense he respects enough those, of whatever political ideology, who have picked up his book to treat each as an objective and reasoning reader.
I thank him for his work.
May 16, 2020
Focusing on James Baldwin and William F. Buckley Jr. as the iconic leaders of different parts of American cultures, Buccola uses their literal public debate at the University of Cambridge as the fulcrum to explore the biographies and ideologies of these two very different men. He traces out the way that white supremacy has dominated the discourse of Buckley's work while Baldwin's sought out an anti-racist ideal wherein healing for both victims and perpetrators of racism could create an American Dream that did not come at the cost of African American freedoms and rights. Buccola moves back and forth between both men as he explores the differences in their upbringing, their intellectual challenges, and mentors, as well as their increasingly successful receptions by different parts of the US and global audiences. In tracking both men to the Cambridge debate, he then shows not just what happened at the debate in a play-by-play kind of sportscaster but also shows how for years to come after this event, the two continued to debate one another through their writings and in their minds. Finally, one thing I would note is that if one wants the most tangible experience of this, they should check out the audiobook which includes in its appendix, recordings from the actual debate. In total, this book brings home the complex conversations about racism and white supremacy within culture and politics in the mid-20th century US by providing this rich exploration of the two figures.
April 27, 2021
I remember watching Buckley's TV show Firing Line when I was a kid. I grew up in a conservative home, so seeing an intellectual like him wield his wit like a weapon was pretty attractive.
It was only into adulthood that I began to see Buckley for who he really was. And wow, what a revealing, telling book this was!
The line from Buckley to Trump is actually pretty clear. The seeds of enabling white supremacy were right there. How familiar do these apologies sound to you, all made by Buckley in his various debates?
* "The violence by police at protests weren't as bad as the protesters claim."
* "The violence against Black Americans by Whites isn't as bad as the media claim."
* "White violence at protests was probably done by undercover Leftists/Equal Rights radicals trying to agitate a race riot."
* "Black Americans should be grateful to America for the freedoms they have. They have more freedom here than anywhere else."
* "Black Americans are inferior for the time being. Until they can raise themselves up, White Americans are entitled to the power they have."
Is there really any wonder that America hasn't "gotten over" racism?
It was only into adulthood that I began to see Buckley for who he really was. And wow, what a revealing, telling book this was!
The line from Buckley to Trump is actually pretty clear. The seeds of enabling white supremacy were right there. How familiar do these apologies sound to you, all made by Buckley in his various debates?
* "The violence by police at protests weren't as bad as the protesters claim."
* "The violence against Black Americans by Whites isn't as bad as the media claim."
* "White violence at protests was probably done by undercover Leftists/Equal Rights radicals trying to agitate a race riot."
* "Black Americans should be grateful to America for the freedoms they have. They have more freedom here than anywhere else."
* "Black Americans are inferior for the time being. Until they can raise themselves up, White Americans are entitled to the power they have."
Is there really any wonder that America hasn't "gotten over" racism?
Displaying 1 - 30 of 208 reviews