“The choice between total perfectionnand total self-destruction is not ours;ncares without end, incompletenessnwithout end, these are our lot.”nFar from deploring his destiny awaynfrom his native Poland (having beennexiled in 1968, he divides his teachingncareer between Oxford and the Universitynof Chicago), Kolakowski valuesnexile as an existential manner of being.nIn fact, he considers it to be thendefining predicament of our time,nwhich he views as “the age of refugees,nof migrants, vagrants, nomads, roamingnabout the continents and warmingntheir souls with the memory of their—nspiritual or ethnic, divine or geographical,nreal or imaginary—homes.” Henknows that absolute homelessness isnimpossible. And yet there are entirenpeoples who — while remaining inntheir ancestral homes — have been exilednwithin, estranged from their ownncultures, histories, and personal realities.nIn 1985, Kolakowski could still asknwhether the entire world might bendriven into internal half-exile. He findsnthe root of that condition in “the splitnbetween the State, which people feel isnnot theirs, though it claims to be theirnowner, and the motherland of whichnthey are guardians.” Today, there isnhope for recentiy liberated Eastern andnCentral Europe. And yet the destructionnof the nearly five decades thatnpreceded liberation has left an indeliblenscar. Kolakowski asks: “Does God trynto remind us, somewhat brutally, thatnexile is the permanent human condition?nA ruthless reminder, indeed,neven if deserved.”nKolakowski ultimately reveals himselfnto be romantic, one who dares tonquestion God’s motives, who even suspectsnthem of “brutality.” Yet he believesnman needs to remember that hisnearthly existence is temporary and thatnhe has been placed here for reasons henis not meant to understand. Whatnmakes these essays worth reading is ansense they create of their author’sngenuine love for mankind, with all itsnterrible foibles and its desire to emulatenits Creator. Kolakowski reminds us ofnour limitations. Which is, of course, anwell-deserved reminder.nJuliana Geran Pilon is vicenpresident of the NationalnForum Foundation innWashington.nSanity Begins atnHomenby John C. ChalbergnGentleman Rebelnby H. Stuart HughesnNew York:nTicknor and Fields;n362 pp., $24.95nTo begin on a positive note: anyonenwho shuddered at the prospect ofna barely thirty-something Edward Kennedynin the U.S. Senate cannot benwholly without redeeming social value.nThe year was 1962, and H. StuartnHughes, grandson of the 1916 Republicannpresidential nominee of the samensurname and devotee of a SANE foreignnpolicy, offered himself to the votersnof Massachusetts as an alternative to annadditional dose of Kennedy liberalism.nHughes, of course, lost by an embarrassinglynwide margin. All of this andnmore is chronicled in a memoir thatncontains embarrassments apolitical.nHenry Adams this author is not.nUnlike Adams’, Hughes’ grandfathernlost his bid for the presidency. UnlikenAdams, Hughes did dirty his hands bynseeking elective office on his own. Andnunlike Adams, Hughes has written anmemoir that tells us more than we neednto know about the prolonged (and repressed)nsexual adolescence of his “unspent”nyouth. Parental “scmples” regardingnsexual matters have apparentlyn”haunted” not only his childhood, butnhis adulthood as well. From his mothernHughes learned two lessons: avoid playingnwith one’s “precious organs” andnthe “wicked prosper, so why try.” Anconvert to atheism and socialism at thenhardly spent age of 16, Hughes at leastnhad the good sense not to try overlynhard to make the world over into hisnunrepressed adolescent vision of thengood society.nSpurning family traditions of politicsnand the law, the youthful Hughes preferrednto remain within the cloister ofnacademe. Then came World War II. AtnAmherst, Hughes had taken the OxfordnPledge. But the fall of France promptednhim to vote for Wendell Wilkie andnintervention in 1940. Then came thendraft. Terrified at the prospect, Hughesnsoon discovered army life to be surprisinglyntolerable.nnnActually, Hughes’ wartime experiencesnmake for interesting reading —nprobably they constituted the high pointnof his life, though he would no doubt benloathe to admit as much. In fact, thisnmemoir could be advanced as Exhibit Anby advocates of compulsory nationalnservice. A secret admirer of an “orderednexistence,” Hughes “easily adapted” tonmilitary service. A “marginal member”nof the upper class, he learned what itnwas like to be a “second class citizen.”nNonetheless, within the military bullyingnwas nonexistent, and one H. StuartnHughes became “less a prig.”nImpatient to become an officer,nHughes signed on with the OSS. Admirationnfor the Red Army was immediatenand unrestrained, but Hughesninsists that he was never “blindly pro-nSoviet.” Still, his self-defined wartimenmission was to encourage the democraticnleft and reinvigorate the PopularnFront. Nearly a half century after WorldnWar II and better than a year after thenend of the Cold War, H. Stuart Hughesnis still looking to revive the PopularnFront.nFancying himself to be the “only realnAmerican social democrat,” Hughes setnout to establish himself as a youngnHenry Adams in early Cold War Washington.nBetween visits with his agingngrandfather (who at 85 ate his hatednbroccoli, because it had never occurrednto him that it was within his power tonban the “offending vegetable” from hisnplate), Hughes read and reread ThenF^ucation of Henry Adams, frettednover the decline of the once “sensualncity,” and objected to the Cold Warnpolicies of an “inadequate” Harry Truman.nBut the real enemy was lessnTruman than the “national interest.”nDisdainful of this “meaningless” concept,nHughes grew increasingly agitatednat the developing prominence withinnWashington of George F. Kennan,nwho provided the intellectual undergirdingnfor the Truman-inspired ColdnWar, and whose 1946 “Long Telegram”nwas little more than an “intemperaten. . . outburst of frustration.”nThe same could be said of thensecond half of this memoir. ThoughnHughes claims to have discovered happinessnin a southern California-basednsecond marriage, he remains an unreconstructednanti-Cold Warrior. Inn1991 he thinks what he thought inn1946, specifically that the Cold WarnSEPTEMBER 1991/41n