i used to read the main articles in every issue but let most of my 2010 issues pile up without reading anything.
if you read something good in a new issue of the New Yorker, post about it here.
― gr8080, Friday, 31 December 2010 20:24 (2 years ago) Permalink
The review of the new Mao biographies.
Denby's Joan Crawford essay.
― Gus Van Sotosyn (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 31 December 2010 20:26 (2 years ago) Permalink
A trick to not letting them pile up: if you're a subscriber, read a couple of articles online at work.
― Gus Van Sotosyn (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 31 December 2010 20:27 (2 years ago) Permalink
Man I've thought abt starting this thread a few times
― just sayin, Friday, 31 December 2010 20:27 (2 years ago) Permalink
this is why i don't have a subscription
― ullr saves (gbx), Friday, 31 December 2010 20:30 (2 years ago) Permalink
Subscription to the print version: $39.95 Subscription to the iPad version: $234.53
― Katstack Katstack! (Whiney G. Weingarten), Friday, 31 December 2010 21:13 (2 years ago) Permalink
AYYYY WE MAKING INTERNET MONEY
― Katstack Katstack! (Whiney G. Weingarten), Friday, 31 December 2010 21:14 (2 years ago) Permalink
alright enough
― J0rdan S., Friday, 31 December 2010 21:15 (2 years ago) Permalink
Anything related to Mexico in the past year's issues has been pretty compelling, mostly by William Finnegan and Alec Wilkinson. The Jane Mayer article about the Koch brothers and the discreet establishment of the tea party is definitely worth reading. This week's Gopnik piece on postmodern desserts is a good read, too.
― would like a calmer set (Eazy), Friday, 31 December 2010 21:39 (2 years ago) Permalink
Date and month/description of the cover of the issues you're referring to would be helpful!
― gr8080, Friday, 31 December 2010 21:49 (2 years ago) Permalink
George Packer's essay on the decadence of the Senate was illuminating.
― Gus Van Sotosyn (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 31 December 2010 21:51 (2 years ago) Permalink
Oh, and, both from around August, the profiles of Gil-Scott Heron and John Lurie.
― would like a calmer set (Eazy), Friday, 31 December 2010 21:54 (2 years ago) Permalink
― Gus Van Sotosyn (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, December 31, 2010 3:27 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
^otm
― johnny crunch, Friday, 31 December 2010 21:56 (2 years ago) Permalink
links would be nice too
― Ismael Klata, Friday, 31 December 2010 21:58 (2 years ago) Permalink
recent fire:
Joyce Carol Oates, Personal History, “A Widow’s Story,” The New Yorker, December 13, 2010, p. 70
David Owen, Annals of Environmentalism, “The Efficiency Dilemma,” The New Yorker, December 20, 2010, p. 78
― johnny crunch, Friday, 31 December 2010 22:00 (2 years ago) Permalink
only abstracts are online for nonsubscribers for those i think
Some articles are popular enough to remain accessible to all (e.g. the Packer article on the Senate to which I linked above).
― Gus Van Sotosyn (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 31 December 2010 22:01 (2 years ago) Permalink
here's the one abt the koch bros - http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer
― just sayin, Friday, 31 December 2010 22:01 (2 years ago) Permalink
A thread like this for all (literary/current event) magazines would be pretty cool.
― Mordy, Friday, 31 December 2010 22:31 (2 years ago) Permalink
Joyce Carol Oates article devastated me.
John Lurie article blew my mind.
― dan selzer, Friday, 31 December 2010 23:09 (2 years ago) Permalink
dessert article was excellent, thanks for the recc
― Mordy, Saturday, 1 January 2011 04:14 (2 years ago) Permalink
so john lurie is insane huh
― mookieproof, Saturday, 1 January 2011 04:16 (2 years ago) Permalink
seconded
― I can take a youtube that's seldom seen, flip it, now it's a meme (Hurting 2), Saturday, 1 January 2011 08:09 (2 years ago) Permalink
Gopnik's desserts article was like a magazine version of the No Reservations episode in Spain.
― Zsa Zsa Gay Bar (jaymc), Saturday, 1 January 2011 09:49 (2 years ago) Permalink
Which is not meant as a negative at all! They make good companion pieces.
― Zsa Zsa Gay Bar (jaymc), Saturday, 1 January 2011 09:50 (2 years ago) Permalink
dessert article was good but gtf outta here w/ this
Finally, the server arrives with the Messi dessert, as Jordi fusses anxiously in the background. He presents half of a soccer ball, covered with artificial grass; the smell of grass perfumes the air. On the “grass” is a kind of delicately balanced, S-shaped, transparent plastic teeter-totter—like a French curve—with three small meringues on it, and a larger white-chocolate soccer ball balancing them on a protruding platform at the very end. A white candy netting lies on the grass near the white-chocolate ball.
Then, with a cat-that-swallowed-the-canary smile, the server puts a small MP3 player with a speaker on the table. He turns it on and nods.
An announcer’s voice, excited and frantic, explodes. Messi is on the move. “Messi turns and spins!” the announcer cries, and the roar of the crowd at the Bernabéu stadium, in Madrid, fills the table. The server nods, eyes intent. At the signal, you eat the first meringue.
“Messi is alone on goal!” the announcer cries. Another nod, you eat the next scented meringue. “Messi shoots!” A third nod, you eat the last meringue, and, as you do, the entire plastic S-curve, now unbalanced, flips up and over, like a spring, and the white-chocolate soccer ball at the end is released and propelled into the air, high above the white-candy netting.
“MESSI! GOOOOOAL!” The announcer’s voice reaches a hysterical peak and, as it does, the white-chocolate soccer ball drops, strikes, and breaks through the candy netting into the goal beneath it, and, as the ball hits the bottom of a little pit below, a fierce jet of passion-fruit cream and powdered mint leaves is released into your mouth, with a trail of small chocolate pop rocks rising in its wake. Then the passion-fruit cream settles, and you eat it all, with the white-chocolate ball, now broken, in bits within it.
You feel . . . something of what Messi must feel: first, the overwhelming presence of the grass beneath his feet (he’s a short player); then the tentative elegance of acquired skill, represented by the stepladder of the perfumed meringues; and, finally, the infantile joy, the childlike release, of scoring, represented by the passion-fruit cream and the candy-store pop rocks. I saw Jordi watching us from the kitchen entrance. He had the anxious-shading-into-delighted look that marks the artist.
― johnny crunch, Saturday, 1 January 2011 21:22 (2 years ago) Permalink
Would not recommend this one! People have been arguing about Jevon's Paradox for a century now, and the article doesn't really advance any significant new ideas. As a primer on the "debate" around energy efficiency, however, it's alright.
― hot lava hair (Z S), Saturday, 1 January 2011 23:35 (2 years ago) Permalink
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/12/13/101213fa_fact_lehrer?currentPage=all
― dayo, Monday, 3 January 2011 06:42 (2 years ago) Permalink
^ totally recommend that
― markers, Monday, 3 January 2011 17:15 (2 years ago) Permalink
yeah i read that one the other day, great stuff
― ciderpress, Monday, 3 January 2011 17:16 (2 years ago) Permalink
it was interesting, lol scientists
― ice cr?m, Monday, 3 January 2011 17:20 (2 years ago) Permalink
i liked this one, seemed like a great premise for movie: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/11/29/101129fa_fact_collins
― gr8080, Monday, 3 January 2011 20:43 (2 years ago) Permalink
Haven't finished it yet, but I'm digging the Freud, psychiatry, and mental health in China article (subscription needed): http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/01/10/110110fa_fact_osnos
― Mordy, Monday, 3 January 2011 21:20 (2 years ago) Permalink
The Patel story was amazing.
― dan selzer, Monday, 3 January 2011 21:28 (2 years ago) Permalink
yeah needs a good 3rd act tho.
― gr8080, Monday, 3 January 2011 21:34 (2 years ago) Permalink
he only contributed a couple of articles this year but i always enjoy atul gawande's stuff: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/02/100802fa_fact_gawande is probably his best piece this year
― they fund ph.d studies, don't they? (Lamp), Tuesday, 4 January 2011 00:11 (2 years ago) Permalink
if anyone subscribes then feel free to webmail me the china/freud article kthx
― max bro'd (nakhchivan), Tuesday, 4 January 2011 00:14 (2 years ago) Permalink
I would, but I can't figure out how to turn it into a pdf or another webmail suitable file.
― Mordy, Tuesday, 4 January 2011 00:24 (2 years ago) Permalink
just copy and paste the text? or is it a different viewer thing.....no worries if that's the case
― max bro'd (nakhchivan), Tuesday, 4 January 2011 00:27 (2 years ago) Permalink
the lehrer article is indeed pretty good and supplies ~evidence~ for my distrust of falsificationism and the inability of some ppl to think of scienctific 'knowledge' subjunctively, tho it does show science self-correcting so i don't read it as a total excoriation of the method
The decline effect is troubling because it reminds us how difficult it is to prove anything. We like to pretend that our experiments define the truth for us. But that’s often not the case. Just because an idea is true doesn’t mean it can be proved. And just because an idea can be proved doesn’t mean it’s true. When the experiments are done, we still have to choose what to believe.
The recent one on the Vatican Library was pretty sweet: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/01/03/110103fa_fact_mendelsohn
I really like Toobin's diptych on JP Stevens and... the other guy.
nakhchivan, FYI, digital subscription gives you access to this weird applet-y, un-C&P text.
― nomar little (Leee), Tuesday, 4 January 2011 01:26 (2 years ago) Permalink
Oh, and that review of the new biography on Sergei Diaghilev was A+++++++ and really wish it was available to all humans: http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2010/09/20/100920crbo_books_acocella
― nomar little (Leee), Tuesday, 4 January 2011 01:37 (2 years ago) Permalink
you can c+p articles from an library institutional subscription, but the evan osnos china thing is from the jan 10 issue which is not on the library wires yet. if you can't get it nakh, bump this thread in a week or two and i'm sure someone from what the fuck am i getting myself into with this grad school stuff will help you out.
― caek, Tuesday, 4 January 2011 01:46 (2 years ago) Permalink
Lamp, thanks for the Gawande link.
― Kip Squashbeef (pixel farmer), Tuesday, 4 January 2011 01:54 (2 years ago) Permalink
ive been using a friends login for the subscriber stuff for a while and the interface is just so poor i dont usually bother to fuck w/it - seems theyd much rather you read the actual magazine - lol
― ice cr?m, Tuesday, 4 January 2011 02:09 (2 years ago) Permalink
^agreed. kind of why i started this thread so i knew which actual magazine to pick up and start reading.
― gr8080, Tuesday, 4 January 2011 02:13 (2 years ago) Permalink
p interesting follow-up of sorts on the recent duchenne muscular dystrophy activism article -- they just had a spot f/ clay matthews sponsored by cadillac during the orange bowl
― johnny crunch, Tuesday, 4 January 2011 03:13 (2 years ago) Permalink
OK a TA I had in college had a poem published a few issues ago, woah.
― nomar little (Leee), Tuesday, 4 January 2011 05:57 (2 years ago) Permalink
the whole Jan. 11 issue is worth picking up, the aforementioned freud in china article is amazing and hilarious, and it also has decent articles about belgium and why stieg larsson is so fucking popular
― symsymsym, Monday, 10 January 2011 03:53 (2 years ago) Permalink
i know the concept of 'worth picking up' is still valid, even for subscribers, in translating to 'worth retrieving from the well-intentioned pile of unread NYers', BUT in general it's still worth remembering how insanely valuable subscribing to the magazine is when compared to buying a newsstand copy. like forty bucks, for a year, for it to be mailed to your house, which is the cost of like seven newsstand issues.
― schlump, Monday, 10 January 2011 11:53 (2 years ago) Permalink
what is the point of an article like this? - http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2011/01/17/110117ta_talk_surowiecki
surowiecki doesn't have a single interesting thing to say here
― progressive cuts (Tracer Hand), Monday, 10 January 2011 12:03 (2 years ago) Permalink
He's just summarizing the various memes on this now that are being mentioned in newspapers and blogs without asking anyone where things could go from here--what is the future for unionized government employees, will there ever be more unionized private sector employees, how would this help in regards to the inequality differences that have grown since union membership has declined...)
― curmudgeon, Monday, 10 January 2011 17:08 (2 years ago) Permalink
His column is like a monthly crib-sheet of conventional wisdom so you can sound like you know what you're talking about when you get invited to a garden party in Stonington
― progressive cuts (Tracer Hand), Monday, 10 January 2011 17:14 (2 years ago) Permalink
what is the point of an article like this?
to summarize and provide some context to a current event or idea its not really about 'saying interesting things' its just a primer? like i know being 1000x smarter than anyone else ever is your thing but i mean the section is called 'talk of the town' so yeah, it exists so the mag's readers can get a vague grip on an issue - the column (which john cassidy also writes some weeks) is supposed to be a gloss? & thats not really all that terrible???
― ⊚ ⓪ ㉧ ☉ ๏ ʘ ◉ ◎ ⓞ Ⓞ (Lamp), Monday, 10 January 2011 17:19 (2 years ago) Permalink
honestly tracer maybe u wld get more out of the articles u read if u didnt spend all ur energy snarkily coming up w/ reasons why u wld have done it better
― ⊚ ⓪ ㉧ ☉ ๏ ʘ ◉ ◎ ⓞ Ⓞ (Lamp), Monday, 10 January 2011 17:21 (2 years ago) Permalink
dude there are a zillion interesting things happening with unions at the moment (the biggest of which imo is the belated but hugely important efforts to hook up with undocumented immigrants). i'm not sorry for wanting more out of a column called "the financial page"! this article could have been written at any time in the last 15 years - there is zero content to it!
― progressive cuts (Tracer Hand), Monday, 10 January 2011 17:37 (2 years ago) Permalink
i'll also admit that i am rankled by his terminology - "cadillac health plans" etc - and his conclusion that ultimately the reason that lots of people "resent" unions now is because unions have been successful at negotiating good contracts
― progressive cuts (Tracer Hand), Monday, 10 January 2011 17:39 (2 years ago) Permalink
like, if i want economist-lite i'll read newsweek
snark on that one for size
there is a cover story public sector unions in the economist this week. dunno why i'm bringing it up though because i haven't read it.
― caek, Monday, 10 January 2011 17:40 (2 years ago) Permalink
i'll be interested in reading that, in an "oppo research" kind of way.
i should probably just recuse myself from talking about surowiecki - everything about his steez rankles me and i'm finding it hard to put into words - the "primer" aspect is part of it, but there are people who write primer-type stuff who i love. i dunno!
― progressive cuts (Tracer Hand), Monday, 10 January 2011 17:44 (2 years ago) Permalink
yah i can see finding the article glib and too-neat "The Great Depression invigorated the modern American labor movement. The Great Recession has crippled it" both oversimplifies and maybe misses the point - i was just sort of baffled that you didnt seem to understand why an article like this gets written
― ⊚ ⓪ ㉧ ☉ ๏ ʘ ◉ ◎ ⓞ Ⓞ (Lamp), Monday, 10 January 2011 18:02 (2 years ago) Permalink
i guess i still don't! the avg new yorker reader could have dictated this article in their sleep 15 years ago
― progressive cuts (Tracer Hand), Monday, 10 January 2011 18:08 (2 years ago) Permalink
so did anyone else read the all of the "20 under 40" pieces? thought it was pretty disappointing. vaguely remember liking one about a guy working on a boat in florida that catches on fire, but not much else.
― Moreno, Monday, 10 January 2011 19:04 (2 years ago) Permalink
t-pain?
― gr8080, Monday, 10 January 2011 21:33 (2 years ago) Permalink
The psychoanalysis in China article is kind of disappointing imo, mostly because it seems to say that it'll explain why a) psychoanalysis fell out of a favor in the US and most other Western nations, and b) why China then picked it up. The article gets at b) at a certain superficial level, but really doesn't go into a) (which I'm sure has been the subject of a lot of other articles, just would've liked discussion here). Anyway, one of my prof is mentioned in the article, easily the best part of it.
― nomar little (Leee), Tuesday, 11 January 2011 00:21 (2 years ago) Permalink
really tapping into the slang here
The teens were from a variety of backgrounds—public and private schools, Manhattan and the outer boroughs—and they wore jeans, collared shirts, and leather jackets. They seemed like normal teen-agers, although they all had the faintly glamorous, knowing aura of city kids. They were discussing slang expressions. “ ‘Calm your tits,’ ” Yasha, an eighteen-year-old from Crown Heights, said, citing an expression that means “Calm down.”
“ ‘Good looks,’ ” said Kyjah, a sixteen-year-old fencer from the Upper West Side, who was wearing lime-green nail polish.
“It means ‘Thanks for looking out,’ ” Alexandria, from Yonkers, said. “Somebody’s like, ‘Oh, you dropped money.’ ‘Oh, good looks.’ ”
“ ‘Gucci’ is the same as ‘Good money,’ ” Yasha said.
“You can say, ‘What’s Gucci?’ ” Kyjah said. “ ‘What’s up?’ ”
Matteo, a sixteen-year-old from Park Slope, said, “ ‘What’s poppin’?’ ”
The teens hesitated. “That’s, like, a retro saying.”
Yasha added, “It’s gang-related.”
Read more http://www.newyorker.com/talk/2011/01/10/110110ta_talk_widdicombe#ixzz1AgfxnnHS
― johnny crunch, Tuesday, 11 January 2011 01:53 (2 years ago) Permalink
Does a print subscription also give access to the full digital edition + archives? Their website is suspiciously vague about that.
― earnest goes to camp, ironic goes to ilm (pixel farmer), Tuesday, 11 January 2011 18:20 (2 years ago) Permalink
Yes it does - my international one does anyway.
― The baby boomers have defined everything once and for all (Dorianlynskey), Tuesday, 11 January 2011 18:31 (2 years ago) Permalink
yes, you can look at literally every single page of every single issue going back to 1921 or something.
the applet viewer thing is kinda stupid, but functional
― gr8080, Tuesday, 11 January 2011 18:40 (2 years ago) Permalink
the david brooks article is so terrible i cant remember the last time i read something that managed to be so offensive w/o actually saying or meaning anything
― Lamp, Friday, 14 January 2011 17:09 (2 years ago) Permalink
Yes, that was ugh.
― Zsa Zsa Gay Bar (jaymc), Friday, 14 January 2011 17:09 (2 years ago) Permalink
i am considering writing a disappointed email, is how disappointed i am, right now
I know right! I couldn't even get through it.
I did enjoy the unintentional irony of describing what would commonly be thought of as "people skills" or "intuition" or "emotional intelligence" in ridiculously labored and aspergerian terms.
― hey boys, suppers on me, our video just went bacterial (Hurting 2), Friday, 14 January 2011 17:14 (2 years ago) Permalink
― nomar little (Leee), Monday, January 10, 2011 7:21 PM Bookmark
Agree with this. Started to raise some interesting implications about what psychoanalysis could mean for China as well, but then wastes way too much ink on here-and-now descriptions of various conferences and meetings, which new yorker writers love to bore us with.
― hey boys, suppers on me, our video just went bacterial (Hurting 2), Friday, 14 January 2011 17:17 (2 years ago) Permalink
freud/china piece nakh http://pastie.org/1460821
― caek, Friday, 14 January 2011 17:59 (2 years ago) Permalink
The David Brooks article was so poor that I kept double checking to see if it was in fact fiction and supposed to be ironic. Or, failing that, if it was nonfiction and supposed to be a parody.
― Virginia Plain, Friday, 14 January 2011 18:19 (2 years ago) Permalink
I knew the Brooks article would settle the argument.
― Gus Van Sotosyn (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 14 January 2011 18:28 (2 years ago) Permalink
I had trouble just imagining people named Harold and Erica being the same age.
― Zsa Zsa Gay Bar (jaymc), Friday, 14 January 2011 18:30 (2 years ago) Permalink
that article was not about people it was abt the Composure Class (or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Empty Factoids)
― Lamp, Friday, 14 January 2011 18:41 (2 years ago) Permalink
omg that brooks article guys
― horseshoe, Friday, 14 January 2011 22:39 (2 years ago) Permalink
unacceptable
i saw the name and sort of hoped it was a different david brooks and after about two sentences i was like DX
― max, Friday, 14 January 2011 23:07 (2 years ago) Permalink
Page 1 of 6?
forget it
― progressive cuts (Tracer Hand), Friday, 14 January 2011 23:11 (2 years ago) Permalink
Reading Jon Lee Anderson's recent article about Sri Lanka. I'm so curious what his personality is like, as far as how he behaves in a room with dictators and drug lords and everyone else he commiserates with as a reporter. (His article on Rio gangs from last year is terrific, too.)
― like launch the globs and strands (Eazy), Wednesday, 19 January 2011 17:28 (2 years ago) Permalink
I'm sure he tries really hard not to say anything offensive.
― Mordy, Wednesday, 19 January 2011 17:31 (2 years ago) Permalink
JL Anderson is great.
― Le mépris vient de la tête, la haine vient du cœur (Michael White), Wednesday, 19 January 2011 17:34 (2 years ago) Permalink
That's the thing -- I'm just really curious about what his manners and body language are like when he's sitting with legitimately paranoid, genuine killers.
― like launch the globs and strands (Eazy), Wednesday, 19 January 2011 17:34 (2 years ago) Permalink
(His article on Rio gangs from last year is terrific, too.)
loved this^^. favorite thing I read last year aside from maybe the Sibera travelogue (or was that 09?)
― gr8080, Wednesday, 19 January 2011 19:36 (2 years ago) Permalink
International subscriber so always about a week behind. That Brooks piece was such a bore, and added up to nothing as far as I could tell. Seemed like the editors took the day off when that made it onto the page.
― The baby boomers have defined everything once and for all (Dorianlynskey), Wednesday, 19 January 2011 20:03 (2 years ago) Permalink
I would like to add my ire about the piece of shit that was that Brooks thing.
― quincie, Wednesday, 19 January 2011 20:09 (2 years ago) Permalink
All the action's over on the Brooks thread, it seems. Cloudberry!
― The baby boomers have defined everything once and for all (Dorianlynskey), Wednesday, 19 January 2011 20:55 (2 years ago) Permalink
New Yorker evidently messed up the John Lurie article. Have a look at the blog:http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2010/08/video-john-lurie-the-drawing-show.html
― katharine, Thursday, 20 January 2011 02:10 (2 years ago) Permalink
Well, clearly Lurie's close friends and supporters didn't like it!
― Josh in Chicago, Thursday, 20 January 2011 02:17 (2 years ago) Permalink
I got one par into the David Brooks article before I flipped to the Sri Lanka one.
Anyway, Jill Lepore on constitutional "originalism" is must-read: http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/atlarge/2011/01/17/110117crat_atlarge_lepore
― Fairport Dinkum Convention (Leee), Saturday, 22 January 2011 19:37 (2 years ago) Permalink
just got her book, whites of their eyes.
― dan selzer, Sunday, 23 January 2011 05:40 (2 years ago) Permalink
Dan, have you read the Lepore book yet? What do you think?
Another great one:http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/01/24/110124fa_fact_gawande
I've only read three of Atul Gawande's pieces, but they are all so uniformly excellent. Does he ever write anything not worth reading?
― Cobra Laser-Face (Leee), Saturday, 29 January 2011 21:50 (2 years ago) Permalink
Haven't read it. Have a backlog of books I'll never read from the holidays.
The Gawande articles are getting so much attention. This last one is getting picked up on all the political/progressive blogs as well general interest blogs.
― dan selzer, Sunday, 30 January 2011 00:07 (2 years ago) Permalink
yeah atul's stuff is regularly great
― الله basedأكبر (forksclovetofu), Sunday, 30 January 2011 21:24 (2 years ago) Permalink
if you are a(n american) sports fan, it's def worth reading ben mcgrath on concussions in football
― mookieproof, Sunday, 30 January 2011 22:21 (2 years ago) Permalink
gawande article on health care is so good, so inspiring in content and as journalism. wow
― obliquity of the ecliptic (rrrobyn), Monday, 31 January 2011 03:05 (2 years ago) Permalink
Definitely, that Gawande article was fantastic. I'm playing catch up on the last few issues and just read that one last night.
― one pretty obvious guy in the obvious (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Monday, 31 January 2011 03:07 (2 years ago) Permalink
btw http://gawande.com/
― الله basedأكبر (forksclovetofu), Monday, 31 January 2011 03:36 (2 years ago) Permalink
he is awesome
― obliquity of the ecliptic (rrrobyn), Monday, 31 January 2011 03:42 (2 years ago) Permalink
if you are a(n american) sports fan, it's def worth reading ben mcgrath on concussions in football― mookieproof, Sunday, January 30, 2011 12:21 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark
― mookieproof, Sunday, January 30, 2011 12:21 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark
this one from 2009 is a great read too: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/10/19/091019fa_fact_gladwell
― gr8080, Tuesday, 1 February 2011 22:11 (2 years ago) Permalink
finally got my copy of the Jan 10 issue (i run about 3 weeks behind cover dates, being in the middle of the ocean and all. i'll see them on the news stand before my mailbox)
the freud in china thing was awesome but the story about banana scientists and the story about the sadaam statue were even better. gr8 issue
― gr8080, Tuesday, 1 February 2011 22:18 (2 years ago) Permalink
i always run about a month and a half late on the mag.
― الله basedأكبر (forksclovetofu), Tuesday, 1 February 2011 22:21 (2 years ago) Permalink
I used to be great at keeping totally up to date, but lately I've been reading a bunch of random books I got over the holidays so I'm losing my place.
― dan selzer, Tuesday, 1 February 2011 22:33 (2 years ago) Permalink
oh i'm basically a year behind on reading.
i just mean when they actually arrive in my mailbox.
― gr8080, Tuesday, 1 February 2011 22:37 (2 years ago) Permalink
is the new yorker better than the NYRB or LRB?
― smanghetti bollocknaked (cozen), Tuesday, 1 February 2011 22:43 (2 years ago) Permalink
woof!
US: 1 year (47 issues) of The New Yorker for $39.95UK: 47 issues (one year) for $120
― smanghetti bollocknaked (cozen), Tuesday, 1 February 2011 22:45 (2 years ago) Permalink
$40 is insane value
― smanghetti bollocknaked (cozen), Tuesday, 1 February 2011 22:46 (2 years ago) Permalink
NYer is great for original reportage, but the criticism pales next to NY- or LRB
x-ps
― C0L1N B..., Tuesday, 1 February 2011 22:47 (2 years ago) Permalink
it's a totally different kind of thing to either. not really a ranking decision if you want to subscribe to one.
― caek, Tuesday, 1 February 2011 22:47 (2 years ago) Permalink
lrb is £12 per year in the uk, but it's monthly.
― caek, Tuesday, 1 February 2011 22:48 (2 years ago) Permalink
ta
thought the LRB was fortnightly, tho it might've changed since my sub lapsed
― smanghetti bollocknaked (cozen), Tuesday, 1 February 2011 22:50 (2 years ago) Permalink
oh you are right, it is fortnightly. £12 is for six months.
i get nyrb, which is $109 for european addresses. if you want a mag with short fiction or plenty of up to date criticism of stuff other than academic books and literary fiction then it is not for you. i just like it's very slow style.
― caek, Tuesday, 1 February 2011 22:52 (2 years ago) Permalink
its
i got my first 2 years of NYer for $25/year /braggin
― gr8080, Tuesday, 1 February 2011 23:28 (2 years ago) Permalink
My mother pays for mine!
― dan selzer, Tuesday, 1 February 2011 23:43 (2 years ago) Permalink
lol my subscription was also a gift from my mother
― Lamp, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 00:19 (2 years ago) Permalink
ha, now I know what to ask my dad for as a birthday present
― ljubljana, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 00:56 (2 years ago) Permalink
When I was married we maintained two subscriptions so we'd not have to share. Marriage would no doubt have ended sooner had we tried to make due with just one sub.
― quincie, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 00:58 (2 years ago) Permalink
^me three
― johnny crunch, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 01:47 (2 years ago) Permalink
tho i asked for it originally & would pay myself
me four. her mom did the same for her so it's a family tradition now.
― Moreno, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 03:30 (2 years ago) Permalink
the reporter who profiled guillermo del toro in this weeks issue seems a little over obsessed with his weight. like, comically so.
― Moreno, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 03:33 (2 years ago) Permalink
i think i've had a new yorker subscription for a decade nowlol old
― الله basedأكبر (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 03:37 (2 years ago) Permalink
xp i agree there were several descriptor details (not just weight stuff, cant remember off hand) that made me cringe
― johnny crunch, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 03:43 (2 years ago) Permalink
It'll be a decade for me this summer. One of the first issues I got featured that Alex Ross article on Radiohead.
― Tyler/Perry's "Dude (Looks Like a Lady)" (jaymc), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 03:44 (2 years ago) Permalink
o one was not eye candy but "eye protein"i guess that might'ev been str8 reportage tho
― johnny crunch, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 03:44 (2 years ago) Permalink
yeah just the constant status updates on his weight like it must be a sign of his anxiousness!!!
― Moreno, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 03:49 (2 years ago) Permalink
when my mom visits she always asks why i read the new yorker when i no longer live in new york.
:-/
― Z S, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 05:03 (2 years ago) Permalink
no answer will satisfy her
I'm on a $20-something subscription for one year, I randomly got a solicitation letter one day and was all, woah nice deal.
― Cobra Laser-Face (Leee), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 05:54 (2 years ago) Permalink
― Z S, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 05:03 (4 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
lol my friends do this too, it is annoying
― just sayin, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 09:27 (2 years ago) Permalink
what, ask? or read it?
― Mark G, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 09:58 (2 years ago) Permalink
ask
― just sayin, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 10:00 (2 years ago) Permalink
"why do you read entertainment weekly if you're not an entertainer"
― الله basedأكبر (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 16:19 (2 years ago) Permalink
"why do you read the atlantic monthly if you're not a large body of water"
― Lamp, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 16:21 (2 years ago) Permalink
Well, then she'll thumb through the first 20 pages or so and see a bunch of listings for upcoming local NY events, so I guess I can sort of see it. I'm trying to give my mam the benefit of the doubt, dudes
― Z S, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 16:31 (2 years ago) Permalink
when people ask me that i just tell them the nyer has hilarious cartoons and that's why i subscribe
― gr8080, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 19:31 (2 years ago) Permalink
i tell them it's for nancy franklins incisive tv criticism
― just sayin, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 19:41 (2 years ago) Permalink
i need to know consumer goods prices from patricia marx
― johnny crunch, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 19:49 (2 years ago) Permalink
what is up with patricia marx anyway?
― horseshoe, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 19:51 (2 years ago) Permalink
she's working it on the avenue
― Prom Dressantino 2011 (Lamp), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 19:51 (2 years ago) Permalink
partricia marx stuff is just crazy. how long has she been writing for the magazine?
― just sayin, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 19:52 (2 years ago) Permalink
sometimes it's funny, but most of the time I start reading it without paying attention and start thinking, when is this interesting article about shopping going to get to the point? Then I notice it's her article and I realize it's just going to be 3 more pages of gift prices and snarky comments.
― dan selzer, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 20:13 (2 years ago) Permalink
ugh fuckin hate patricia marx
― congratulations (n/a), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 20:14 (2 years ago) Permalink
feel like shes been writing the xmas issue 'upper west siders buy shit' article since i started reading the mag in high school but google says 1989
sometimes i half enjoy the ivy league legacy types @ the new yorker but marx is p worthless & unfunny
― Prom Dressantino 2011 (Lamp), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 20:17 (2 years ago) Permalink
yeah but as bad as she is, even she isn't as unfunny and uninteresting as shouts and murmurs routinely is.
― الله basedأكبر (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 20:31 (2 years ago) Permalink
do people find the woody allen shouts & murmurs funny? i can barley get through those and they're only like a page long.
and patricia marx articles are the only ones i skip by byline alone.
― Moreno, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 20:41 (2 years ago) Permalink
i wonder why i don't spend more time being enraged by patricia marx, the way i do with nancy franklin? it's like i forget she exists as soon as i see her byline and think "wtf?"
― horseshoe, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 20:43 (2 years ago) Permalink
I don't mind Nancy Franklin.
I loved Woody Allen growing up, but his S + M stuff is terrible. Maybe it's no different and I'm the one who changed. I love Jack Handey and a few others. Every few issues there's a S + M that I think is pretty funny.
― dan selzer, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 20:55 (2 years ago) Permalink
Did not know that Ben McGrath was only 34.
― Tyler/Perry's "Dude (Looks Like a Lady)" (jaymc), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 21:04 (2 years ago) Permalink
I'm not sure that I've ever laughed, even internally, at Shouts + Murmurs. Not even Woody Allen, and I love that guy.
― Z S, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 21:05 (2 years ago) Permalink
this was good - What I imagined the people around me were saying when I was...
― just sayin, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 21:09 (2 years ago) Permalink
sad to see bob odenkirk being unfunny in last weeks S&M.
― Moreno, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 21:29 (2 years ago) Permalink
it's like trying to be funny at a funeral; the location makes things more difficult.
― الله basedأكبر (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 21:29 (2 years ago) Permalink
Simon Rich has a lot of funny ones:
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/bios/simon_rich/search?contributorName=simon%20rich
― dan selzer, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 21:30 (2 years ago) Permalink
I don't care for any of those really.
― الله basedأكبر (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 21:33 (2 years ago) Permalink
but that's me i guess.
i don't even bother w/ "shouts & murmurs" anymore
― gr8080, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 21:37 (2 years ago) Permalink
I like a enough of them. Maybe you guys aren't "new yorker" enough. Maybe Hawaii and New Jersey have their own funny magazines for your sensibilities.
― dan selzer, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 21:45 (2 years ago) Permalink
lol, dude i am posting from 53rd and 5th. i was mugged on the way in by the statue of liberty.
― الله basedأكبر (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 21:50 (2 years ago) Permalink
I AM NY
― الله basedأكبر (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 21:51 (2 years ago) Permalink
simon rich and jack handey are the only shouts and murmurs authors worth reading
― max, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 21:51 (2 years ago) Permalink
patricia marx sucks but its harder to be mad about her than nancy franklin b/c theres no reason for them to have only one, terrible tv reviewer, instead of one terrible one and one p good one, the way they do with all the rest of their critics
― max, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 21:52 (2 years ago) Permalink
name names
― الله basedأكبر (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 2 February 2011 21:53 (2 years ago) Permalink
lane - gooddenby - terrible
alex ross - goodsfj - hit or miss
james wood and some of the other bros - okadam gopnik - f this dude
― max, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 21:59 (2 years ago) Permalink
poor joan acocella
― mookieproof, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 22:02 (2 years ago) Permalink
"some of the other bros"
― max, Wednesday, 2 February 2011 22:02 (2 years ago) Permalink
if you are a(n american) sports fan, it's def worth reading ben mcgrath on concussions in football ― mookieproof, Sunday, January 30, 2011 12:21 PM (2 days ago) Bookmarkthis one from 2009 is a great read too: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/10/19/091019fa_fact_gladwell― gr8080, Tuesday, February 1, 2011 2:11 PM Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
― gr8080, Tuesday, February 1, 2011 2:11 PM Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
I was like wtf big-upping a Gladwell piece, but after I read it, it's actually a little bit better on both the medical side and the moral side (though I can imagine people thinking that MG is stretching the analogy).
― Cobra Laser-Face (Leee), Thursday, 3 February 2011 00:10 (2 years ago) Permalink
lol malcom gladwell hating is such an ILX cliche
― gr8080, Thursday, 3 February 2011 02:11 (2 years ago) Permalink
lol so is ur face. ^_^
― Cobra Laser-Face (Leee), Thursday, 3 February 2011 02:28 (2 years ago) Permalink
i'm a big peter schjalujkojahl fan. forget who the other art critic is.
― Moreno, Thursday, 3 February 2011 02:57 (2 years ago) Permalink
i dont think they have a second art critic. not in the back of the book.
and yea i like schjeldahl too. dont always agree with him but hes a great writer.
― max, Thursday, 3 February 2011 03:06 (2 years ago) Permalink
I can see that Gopnik is incredibly intelligent and a deft, original prose writer but something about him aggravates the hell out of me. It's self-conscious "fine writing" of the kind that James Wood is always slamming in fiction.
I saw that Ben McGrath was 34 and that he'd first contributed in 2002. I don't know how anyone gets to be a New Yorker contributor but certainly not a 25/26-year-old. Do you just get the call one day? Do you hang around the office until they get tired of telling you no? Do you have to make your bones, mob-style?
― I've been dancing since 9 and I'm tired and hungry (Dorianlynskey), Thursday, 3 February 2011 12:52 (2 years ago) Permalink
WS James Surowiecki any day of the week.
No really, he's hot.
― quincie, Thursday, 3 February 2011 15:29 (2 years ago) Permalink
he used to live on my block
― mookieproof, Thursday, 3 February 2011 15:31 (2 years ago) Permalink
Where does he live now, I will run to him
― quincie, Thursday, 3 February 2011 15:32 (2 years ago) Permalink
he and his poetess wife moved elsewhere, sorry
john seabrook on crowds/stampedes is v. interesting
― mookieproof, Thursday, 3 February 2011 15:49 (2 years ago) Permalink
ben mcgraths dad used to be the magazines fiction editor
― max, Thursday, 3 February 2011 16:01 (2 years ago) Permalink
had never heard of that hillsborough soccer disaster, that photo is srsly something -
― johnny crunch, Thursday, 3 February 2011 20:25 (2 years ago) Permalink
Mystery solved. Not to say he's not a good writer.
― I've been dancing since 9 and I'm tired and hungry (Dorianlynskey), Thursday, 3 February 2011 20:50 (2 years ago) Permalink
hey someone just posted this to facebook
ahem cobble hill was NOT rough when you moved there in 2002 . . honky please . . i know its the new yorker but still
whats it abt, seems like a good topic to discuss here
― ice cr?m, Friday, 4 February 2011 00:56 (2 years ago) Permalink
true, but the dude wrote that in a piece about his wife dying, so maybe it should slide
― mookieproof, Friday, 4 February 2011 01:26 (2 years ago) Permalink
What article is that? I don't remember and I have opinions, as somebody who lived in Cobble Hill in 2002.
― dan selzer, Friday, 4 February 2011 02:18 (2 years ago) Permalink
yeah, jesus, it's like the saddest story ever.
it's the personal history one from this weeks issue. xp
― Moreno, Friday, 4 February 2011 02:20 (2 years ago) Permalink
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/02/07/110207fa_fact_goldman
― mookieproof, Friday, 4 February 2011 02:21 (2 years ago) Permalink
my cousin lived in cobble hill in 2002, someone got murdered in the house next to hers
― max, Friday, 4 February 2011 03:55 (2 years ago) Permalink
There really isn't many parts of any big city, especially one that's this diverse, that isn't a stone's throw from some less safe neighborhood. Cobble Hill and Boerum Hill and Carroll Gardens are some of the most desirable streets in Brooklyn and are filled with wealthy, wealthy people, living 1 block from a relatively bad housing project. I haven't read the story yet, but while I'd certainly say that by 2002 most of Cobble Hill was gentrified, doesn't mean you wouldn't find yourself in a rough area if you walk 1 block in the wrong direction. And it's still that way.
― dan selzer, Friday, 4 February 2011 04:31 (2 years ago) Permalink
lots of mafiabros iirc
― max, Friday, 4 February 2011 04:41 (2 years ago) Permalink
True, but they never mugged my friend who lived a block away!
John Lurie discussing his questionable New Yorker profile:
http://www.jambands.com/features/2011/02/01/john-lurie-sustains/
― dan selzer, Friday, 4 February 2011 04:47 (2 years ago) Permalink
ruth franklin's article on h.g. adler is really good (01/31/11 issue)
― cowboys_defeats_magic_earth2.jpg (Lamp), Sunday, 6 February 2011 20:18 (2 years ago) Permalink
Working my way through the Guillermo del Toro, and actually my biggest gripe is how the reporter renders del Toro's speech into stilted sound bites, when I remember him speaking a lot more expansively and dynamically.
― Cobra Laser-Face (Leee), Sunday, 6 February 2011 20:57 (2 years ago) Permalink
the funniest thing about that profile was the paragraph he devotes to giving clueless new yoker readers a little background on who this h.p. lovecraft fellow is
― cowboys_defeats_magic_earth2.jpg (Lamp), Sunday, 6 February 2011 21:05 (2 years ago) Permalink
I seem to recall Oliver Sacks' last two articles being pretty great, and I'm surprised they hadn't been mentioned yet (since he was mentioned in the NPR or Radiolab thread). Anyway, they're both behind the pay wall. :(
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_sacks (2010/08/30)http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/06/28/100628fa_fact_sacks (2010/06/28)
― Cobra Laser-Face (Leee), Monday, 7 February 2011 04:56 (2 years ago) Permalink
i was like ok i dont have much 2 do this morning, ill print out this paul haggis/scientology article....it's 49 pages!
― johnny crunch, Monday, 7 February 2011 12:41 (2 years ago) Permalink
And it's a tease of a forthcoming book, no?
The best bits of the Haggis piece come at the end, btw, with the revelation of some brazen church-contradicting forgeries. Not that you should skip to the end of anything.
The biggest (so to speak) revelation of the del Toro piece is how ... hefty the guy is. 300 pounds! But dude is clearly smart and knows his nerd stuff.
― Josh in Chicago, Monday, 7 February 2011 17:21 (2 years ago) Permalink
man do i hate paul haggis
― الله basedأكبر (forksclovetofu), Monday, 7 February 2011 17:24 (2 years ago) Permalink
oh i read the whole thing. but yeah, that stuff abt hubbards war records was prob the most damning
― johnny crunch, Monday, 7 February 2011 17:27 (2 years ago) Permalink
the whole thing was just like parenthetical denials of every claim idk scientologys tenets seem like ideas a bratty little kid would come up with - ie. it's sacrilidge & damaging to us for non members to read our scriptures, etc
― johnny crunch, Monday, 7 February 2011 17:37 (2 years ago) Permalink
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/2011/02/07/110207ta_talk_paumgarten
Enjoyed this quick profile of The Man Who Plays The Most Interesting Man In The World
also liking Gopnik's roundup of all manner of writings on how the internet is making our life better or worse
― hey boys, suppers on me, our video just went bacterial (Hurting 2), Thursday, 10 February 2011 03:05 (2 years ago) Permalink
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/02/14/110214fa_fact_fey
The writing is pretty terrible, but: Ball of Fingers.
― Asparagus Peee (Leee), Saturday, 19 February 2011 20:55 (2 years ago) Permalink
dressed like i am here to repair your aquarium
― your LiveJournal experience (schlump), Saturday, 19 February 2011 23:50 (2 years ago) Permalink
the article about near-earth-objects/NEOs in this week's is good; i'm only half way through. affectionate portraits of ex-austronaut guys, ex-astronaut probably being the best ex-thing you can be. hearing about them all sat around a conference table at a best western makes me want to watch mission to mars (should i watch mission to mars y/n)
there are some sciency types on ilx so this primer for dilettantes about a relatively underrepresented issue might be too basic if you're really into NEOs and stuff
― your LiveJournal experience (schlump), Tuesday, 22 February 2011 12:53 (2 years ago) Permalink
that is either the 2nd or 3rd said sayrafiezadeh story ive liked quite a bit, has anyone read his memoir?
― johnny crunch, Tuesday, 22 February 2011 18:48 (2 years ago) Permalink
nick paumgarten is one of my favorite staff writers...he had that narrative of the days surrounding the collapse of the economy a while back that was amazing/made me want to kill myself
― horseshoe, Tuesday, 22 February 2011 19:19 (2 years ago) Permalink
YES that was crazy
― just sayin, Tuesday, 22 February 2011 19:27 (2 years ago) Permalink
i had a quick google around and couldn't work out which one that was - any clues?
― your LiveJournal experience (schlump), Wednesday, 23 February 2011 16:35 (2 years ago) Permalink
i think it was this one - http://www.scribd.com/doc/15483403/Nick-Paumgarten-Annals-of-Finance-The-Death-of-Kings-The-New-Yorker-May-18-2009-p-40
― just sayin, Wednesday, 23 February 2011 16:41 (2 years ago) Permalink
hey thank you. made me want to kill myself should not be such a ringing endorsement but i've loved some other stuff that's ticked the same boxes
― your LiveJournal experience (schlump), Wednesday, 23 February 2011 16:46 (2 years ago) Permalink
Jeffrey Goldberg piece about Haaretz and the Israeli left is amazing. Not done with it yet -- it be long.
― The Corner Stander, The Suggest Ban Hammer (Hurting 2), Thursday, 24 February 2011 19:27 (2 years ago) Permalink
David Remnick
― Mordy, Thursday, 24 February 2011 20:23 (2 years ago) Permalink
Tho I'd be really curious to read a similar article by Goldberg
― Mordy, Thursday, 24 February 2011 20:24 (2 years ago) Permalink
ha, whoops
― The Corner Stander, The Suggest Ban Hammer (Hurting 2), Thursday, 24 February 2011 20:25 (2 years ago) Permalink
That actually makes sense -- I tend to like Remnick's writing a lot and Goldberg's less.
Goldberg did that one about the white guy who poached African poachers, right?
― My Urine No Longer Smells Like Asparagus (Leee), Friday, 25 February 2011 00:06 (2 years ago) Permalink
paumgarten wrote the elevator article, that was dope
― johnny crunch, Friday, 25 February 2011 00:42 (2 years ago) Permalink
^^^loved the elevator article! But it totally messed with me when years later I was stuck on an elevator after hours at my office.
― quincie, Friday, 25 February 2011 01:07 (2 years ago) Permalink
what happened??
― Neu! romancer (dayo), Friday, 25 February 2011 01:12 (2 years ago) Permalink
Only in there for about half an hour (I think--didn't have watch, phone, or reading material, so it felt like a long time!), but the elevator emergency phone guy did have to call my husband and explain that I'd be home later than planned. I had plenty of time to contemplate tht fact that being stuck for the weekend (like that guy in the NYer article) was entirely possible.
― quincie, Friday, 25 February 2011 18:11 (2 years ago) Permalink
Evidently The New Yorker screwed up John Lurie. You should check out Lurie’s comments about the article and stalker situation. so sad…:http://www.jambands.com/features/2011/02/01/john-lurie-sustains/
― karen65, Friday, 25 February 2011 20:41 (2 years ago) Permalink
do we have a general rolling thread for long-form articles/journalism worth reading or am I misremembering
― in odd we trust (cozen), Sunday, 27 February 2011 13:32 (2 years ago) Permalink
its in 77
― Neu! romancer (dayo), Sunday, 27 February 2011 13:34 (2 years ago) Permalink
(what's the procedure for getting on 77? sounds like a good thread.)
― toby, Sunday, 27 February 2011 14:07 (2 years ago) Permalink
can't find it :/
― in odd we trust (cozen), Sunday, 27 February 2011 14:20 (2 years ago) Permalink
http://www.ilxor.com/ILX/ThreadSelectedControllerServlet?boardid=77&threadid=78720
― Neu! romancer (dayo), Sunday, 27 February 2011 14:21 (2 years ago) Permalink
: ) thanks
― in odd we trust (cozen), Sunday, 27 February 2011 14:28 (2 years ago) Permalink
toby you could try asking mods I think 77 requests are being handled on a case by case basis
― Neu! romancer (dayo), Sunday, 27 February 2011 14:32 (2 years ago) Permalink
Man, as always seems to happen with the New Yorker, I have no idea how I missed that elevator piece - sometimes I'm convinced the letters page is a pomo joke referencing articles that don't exist, from fabricated readers - but I just read it and it was awesome!
― Josh in Chicago, Sunday, 27 February 2011 16:20 (2 years ago) Permalink
Yeah, this was pretty fun, especially as I just finished reading Packing for Mars which was knee-deep in lolz. However, it includes this quotation from an idiot Congressman:
the stampede of people trying to get the public to move on global warming versus the tiny number on an issue that really could destroy us -- it gives me a further understanding of mankind.
― My Urine No Longer Smells Like Asparagus (Leee), Sunday, 27 February 2011 20:10 (2 years ago) Permalink
ha, yeah, i think it took a sec for me to try to square 'NEO enthusiast' with 'republican congressman' and everything else that platform must entail
― your LiveJournal experience (schlump), Sunday, 27 February 2011 20:12 (2 years ago) Permalink
Man, as always seems to happen with the New Yorker, I have no idea how I missed that elevator piece - sometimes I'm convinced the letters page is a pomo joke referencing articles that don't exist, from fabricated readers - but I just read it and it was awesome!― Josh in Chicago, Sunday, February 27, 2011 6:20 AM (4 hours ago) Bookmark
― Josh in Chicago, Sunday, February 27, 2011 6:20 AM (4 hours ago) Bookmark
This American Life did a story on this too, right? Google is failing me.
― gr8080, Sunday, 27 February 2011 20:30 (2 years ago) Permalink
read that huge thing on Paul Haggis and Scientology yesterday; i think my favorite part was the one little paragraph of Josh Brolin's A+ trolling:
One of those actors, Josh Brolin, told me that, in a “moment of real desperation,” he visited the Celebrity Centre and received “auditing”—spiritual counselling. He quickly decided that Scientology wasn’t for him. But he still wonders what the religion does for celebrities like Cruise and Travolta: “Each has a good head on his shoulders, they make great business decisions, they seem to have wonderful families. Is that because they were helped by Scientology?” This is the question that makes celebrities so crucial to the religion. And, clearly, there must be something rewarding if such notable people lend their names to a belief system that is widely scorned.Brolin says that he once witnessed John Travolta practicing Scientology. Brolin was at a dinner party in Los Angeles with Travolta and Marlon Brando. Brando arrived with a cut on his leg, and explained that he had injured himself while helping a stranded motorist on the Pacific Coast Highway. He was in pain. Travolta offered to help, saying that he had just reached a new level in Scientology. Travolta touched Brando’s leg and Brando closed his eyes. “I watched this process going on—it was very physical,” Brolin recalls. “I was thinking, This is really fucking bizarre! Then, after ten minutes, Brando opens his eyes and says, ‘That really helped. I actually feel different!’ ” (Travolta, through a lawyer, called this account “pure fabrication.”)
Brolin says that he once witnessed John Travolta practicing Scientology. Brolin was at a dinner party in Los Angeles with Travolta and Marlon Brando. Brando arrived with a cut on his leg, and explained that he had injured himself while helping a stranded motorist on the Pacific Coast Highway. He was in pain. Travolta offered to help, saying that he had just reached a new level in Scientology. Travolta touched Brando’s leg and Brando closed his eyes. “I watched this process going on—it was very physical,” Brolin recalls. “I was thinking, This is really fucking bizarre! Then, after ten minutes, Brando opens his eyes and says, ‘That really helped. I actually feel different!’ ” (Travolta, through a lawyer, called this account “pure fabrication.”)
if Josh Brolin is making all that up he is my favorite Hollywood actor of all time
― gr8080, Sunday, 27 February 2011 20:34 (2 years ago) Permalink
loved loved loved the haaretz article. i always enjoy the english language edition, any ilx israelis (ilxraelis?) who can vouch for the quality of the hebrew language haaretz?
― symsymsym, Wednesday, 2 March 2011 00:22 (2 years ago) Permalink
was gonna go with a "fuck the haaretz" one liner but perhaps too much
― bang-proof-bling-mans (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 2 March 2011 01:02 (2 years ago) Permalink
i get it, it's an anagram (almost)!
― symsymsym, Wednesday, 2 March 2011 01:08 (2 years ago) Permalink
Turkish soccer fanatics (2011/3/7): http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/03/07/110307fa_fact_batuman
― Smells Like Peen Asparagus (Leee), Saturday, 5 March 2011 19:20 (2 years ago) Permalink
yeah that one is terrific.
― max, Saturday, 5 March 2011 20:28 (2 years ago) Permalink
― symsymsym, Tuesday, March 1, 2011 7:22 PM Bookmark
Wife remembers it being good but doesn't read much Israeli news anymore -- sort of finds it too painful I guess.
― bury my heart at wounded nerd (Hurting 2), Sunday, 6 March 2011 01:43 (2 years ago) Permalink
liked the ben marcus story this wk
― johnny crunch, Sunday, 20 March 2011 20:54 (2 years ago) Permalink
Link?
― ℳℴℯ ❤＼(◕‿◕✿ (Princess TamTam), Sunday, 20 March 2011 21:07 (2 years ago) Permalink
Thought Tina Fey on comedy writing was very funny.
― for real molars who ain't got no fillings (Hurting 2), Sunday, 20 March 2011 22:34 (2 years ago) Permalink
it's subscription only i think xp
― johnny crunch, Sunday, 20 March 2011 22:37 (2 years ago) Permalink
Yeah, loads better than her first one.
― stronglo recommendington (Leee), Sunday, 20 March 2011 23:04 (2 years ago) Permalink
this is great:http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/12/20/101220fa_fact_paumgarten
― gr8080, Monday, 21 March 2011 19:59 (2 years ago) Permalink
Yes it is. Paumgarten's brilliant.
― Pop is superior to all other genres (DL), Monday, 21 March 2011 20:01 (2 years ago) Permalink
it made me nostalgic for my youth in a small new england town where i evenly devided my free time between exploring forests and playing nintendo
― gr8080, Monday, 21 March 2011 21:12 (2 years ago) Permalink
that bioessay is one of the best pieces on video games i've ever read
― I just want to give a shout-out to Buzzy Beetles (forksclovetofu), Monday, 21 March 2011 22:07 (2 years ago) Permalink
Magnus Carlsen, chess prodigy (sub required): http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/03/21/110321fa_fact_max
― stronglo recommendington (Leee), Wednesday, 23 March 2011 04:55 (2 years ago) Permalink
just finished that article on the train ride home from work. Great.
― dan selzer, Wednesday, 23 March 2011 04:59 (2 years ago) Permalink
has anyone read that super loooooooong oil spill article?
― just sayin, Wednesday, 23 March 2011 17:54 (2 years ago) Permalink
^^^Finished it yesterday. I was definitely waiting for a piece like this to appear, and was definitely surprised by the general takeaway that shit wasn't that bad and ppl were being way too alarmist.
But then, I basically couldn't follow the story back when it was unfolding that closely because it started giving me a nervous breakdown.
Would love to hear some other perspectives on the article.
― return, descender (Jon Lewis), Wednesday, 23 March 2011 18:02 (2 years ago) Permalink
what issue was it in
― gr8080, Wednesday, 23 March 2011 18:08 (2 years ago) Permalink
mar 14and yeah im half way through it + am like jon, dont know enough abt the situation to judge it, it is really interesting that the general gist of the article is that ppl were freaking out a lil too much
― just sayin, Wednesday, 23 March 2011 18:10 (2 years ago) Permalink
i mean, ppl were right to freak out, but also, everyone involved was doing a really really good job working on it (including bp)
― just sayin, Wednesday, 23 March 2011 18:11 (2 years ago) Permalink
I read this article as a bizarro companion to the Haggis/Scientology piece.
― Esteban Buttezface (Leee), Sunday, 27 March 2011 04:18 (2 years ago) Permalink
read that Haaretz piece- loved it.
― gr8080, Monday, 28 March 2011 07:22 (2 years ago) Permalink
everyone should read this rodrigo rosenberg article
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/04/04/110404fa_fact_grann?currentPage=all
― johnny crunch, Monday, 28 March 2011 13:06 (2 years ago) Permalink
david grann is the best
― max, Monday, 28 March 2011 13:23 (2 years ago) Permalink
lol that piece is some serious through the looking glass type shit
― ice cr?m, Monday, 28 March 2011 14:20 (2 years ago) Permalink
i was referring to the hollywood therapist one FYI
― ice cr?m, Monday, 28 March 2011 14:30 (2 years ago) Permalink
tho i am v much looking forward to reading the guatemalan conspiracy, i have it open in a tab all rtg
― ice cr?m, Monday, 28 March 2011 14:31 (2 years ago) Permalink
that piece is great great
― iatee, Tuesday, 29 March 2011 02:05 (2 years ago) Permalink
btw i will sendspace u nyer articles that are subscriber-only
― mookieproof, Tuesday, 29 March 2011 02:08 (2 years ago) Permalink
this is otm
― em.pty HOLD (Lamp), Tuesday, 29 March 2011 02:15 (2 years ago) Permalink
tellin you guys, david grann is the shit, i highly recommend his collection of nyer stories from last year
― max, Tuesday, 29 March 2011 02:31 (2 years ago) Permalink
http://www.amazon.com/Devil-Sherlock-Holmes-Madness-Obsession/dp/0385517920
^^ that. Top 3 Grann:
The Chameleon: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/08/11/080811fa_fact_grann?currentPage=allThe Mark of a Masterpiece: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/07/12/100712fa_fact_grannand of course Trial By Fire: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/07/090907fa_fact_grann
Also recommend Lost City of Z, which is less wow but still really interesting.
― misty sensorium (Plasmon), Tuesday, 29 March 2011 03:42 (2 years ago) Permalink
Oh yeah. I'm really bad at paying attention to who writes what, but those 3 articles were all amazing.
― dan selzer, Tuesday, 29 March 2011 04:22 (2 years ago) Permalink
I kind of love the New Yorker these days. Used to stan for Harper's but the only thing I've enjoyed reading in that recently was Vollmann's piece on the homeless people he associated with in San Diego. The New Yorker is bringing it with regularity.
― boots get knocked from here to czechoslovakier (milo z), Tuesday, 29 March 2011 05:30 (2 years ago) Permalink
er, Sacramento
― boots get knocked from here to czechoslovakier (milo z), Tuesday, 29 March 2011 05:31 (2 years ago) Permalink
which is probably a much sadder place to be homeless than San Diego
lol the art authenticator one was so R U SERIOUS sweet read xp
― ice cr?m, Tuesday, 29 March 2011 05:51 (2 years ago) Permalink
yeah i didnt realise the same dude wrote all 3 of those articles! that art one just got crazier + crazier
― just sayin, Tuesday, 29 March 2011 08:01 (2 years ago) Permalink
haven't read that one yet but "the chameleon" was pretty insane, i should check out that book
― congratulations (n/a), Tuesday, 29 March 2011 13:03 (2 years ago) Permalink
Finished the Rosenberg article -- WOW.
― farting in the shower - C/D (Leee), Tuesday, 5 April 2011 04:28 (2 years ago) Permalink
love the anna faris profile from this week
― ban drake (the rapper) (max), Tuesday, 5 April 2011 05:03 (2 years ago) Permalink
ANNA FARIS PROFILE!!!!???
― gr8080, Tuesday, 5 April 2011 05:23 (2 years ago) Permalink
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/04/11/110411fa_fact_miller
Is this piece any good?
― Fig On A Plate Cart (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 5 April 2011 16:18 (2 years ago) Permalink
i remember the one about the chameleon! these articles are amazing.
― 40% chill and 100% negative (Tracer Hand), Tuesday, 5 April 2011 16:22 (2 years ago) Permalink
yall need to hop aboard the grann-wagon with me and plasmon
― ban drake (the rapper) (max), Tuesday, 5 April 2011 16:27 (2 years ago) Permalink
i went on a grann-spree last week
ordered that book too
― gr8080, Tuesday, 5 April 2011 17:48 (2 years ago) Permalink
the texas arson thing was so :(
I remember reading the chameleon one but I forgot what happened in it
― dayo, Tuesday, 5 April 2011 23:31 (2 years ago) Permalink
anna as claire on six feet under wouldve been nuts
― johnny crunch, Tuesday, 5 April 2011 23:48 (2 years ago) Permalink
yeah texas arson thing was awesome, looking forward to re-reading it when my copy of the book comes.
learning this was a little bit of a let-down tho: http://www.crimeandconsequences.com/crimblog/2009/10/willinghams-last-words.html
― gr8080, Wednesday, 6 April 2011 02:22 (2 years ago) Permalink
i wish grann had used the whole quote but this is BS:
Now that is a way different exit picture than the one Grann painted for us. Not only were Willingham's very last words the diametric opposite of the high-toned, religious sentiments Grann led us to believe were the very last, but they bear on one of the most difficult things to comprehend about this case -- motive. Why would a father intentionally burn up his baby girls?Well, as incomprehensible as it seems, we know that some fathers do kill their young children, and anger at the mother is one common reason. If that tirade was directed at his ex-wife Stacy, as the reporter who was there believed it was, it helps fill in the motive.
Well, as incomprehensible as it seems, we know that some fathers do kill their young children, and anger at the mother is one common reason. If that tirade was directed at his ex-wife Stacy, as the reporter who was there believed it was, it helps fill in the motive.
yes all of granns meticulous reporting and evidence for innonce, proven wrong by the profane rantings of a man condemned to die
― ban drake (the rapper) (max), Wednesday, 6 April 2011 02:31 (2 years ago) Permalink
max otm
― gr8080, Wednesday, 6 April 2011 04:10 (2 years ago) Permalink
2/3rds of the way through the Rosenberg article. Holy shit. All I want to know is when is the Tony Gilroy movie version coming out?
― dan selzer, Wednesday, 6 April 2011 18:36 (2 years ago) Permalink
Yeah, that Rosenberg article was an amazing read.
― 'what are you, the Hymen Protection League of America?' (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Wednesday, 6 April 2011 19:04 (2 years ago) Permalink
yeah, again grann lives up to the cliche "stranger than fiction"!
― tylerw, Wednesday, 6 April 2011 19:10 (2 years ago) Permalink
I meant to read just a couple of pages of the Rosenberg article at lunch and wound up finishing the thing in one go. The magazine is on an incredible roll. I wonder if its circulation and subscription figures have remained steady; I'd imagine it hasn't lost much of its urban liberal base.
― Hey Look More Than Five Years Has Passed And You Have A C (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 6 April 2011 19:39 (2 years ago) Permalink
Woah, those last words. Talk about changing tack halfway through.
Yeah. The only statement I want to make is that I am an innocent man -- convicted of a crime I did not commit. I have been persecuted for 12 years for something I did not do. From God's dust I came and to dust I will return -- so the earth shall become my throne. I gotta go, road dog. I love you Gabby. I hope you rot in hell, bitch; I hope you fucking rot in hell, bitch. You bitch; I hope you fucking rot, cunt. That is it.
― Pop is superior to all other genres (DL), Wednesday, 6 April 2011 19:41 (2 years ago) Permalink
think it's noted in this thread but $50 or so for a year's subscription is a ridiculous deal. and i don't even take advantage of the online archives very much.
― tylerw, Wednesday, 6 April 2011 19:43 (2 years ago) Permalink
I got the "educator's discount" last August: $32 then.
― Hey Look More Than Five Years Has Passed And You Have A C (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 6 April 2011 19:44 (2 years ago) Permalink
you monster
― tylerw, Wednesday, 6 April 2011 19:45 (2 years ago) Permalink
lol that quote is killing me... lord, why have you forsaken me? ride or die bitch fuck cunt booger.
― ℳℴℯ ❤＼(◕‿◕✿ (Princess TamTam), Wednesday, 6 April 2011 19:49 (2 years ago) Permalink
― Hey Look More Than Five Years Has Passed And You Have A C (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, April 6, 2011 3:39 PM (30 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
im pretty sure theyve risen since remnick took over; the really amazing figure is that the mag has a resubscribe rate of near 90%
― ban drake (the rapper) (max), Wednesday, 6 April 2011 20:14 (2 years ago) Permalink
that rosenberg article is insane
had read the chameleon and the art piece before, the arson was new but had never really picked up name of author
need to renew my subscription
― H in Addis, Thursday, 7 April 2011 00:19 (2 years ago) Permalink
― Hey Look More Than Five Years Has Passed And You Have A C (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, April 6, 2011 9:44 AM (10 hours ago) Bookmark
$25/year for the last 2 years, suckers
― gr8080, Thursday, 7 April 2011 06:44 (2 years ago) Permalink
but i get them 3 or 4 weeks late, even the newstands here get them a week ahead of me somehow
― gr8080, Thursday, 7 April 2011 06:45 (2 years ago) Permalink
I get the "my mom buys me a subscription" discount.
$0/year for 8+ years
― dan selzer, Thursday, 7 April 2011 06:46 (2 years ago) Permalink
that's how to live.
― gr8080, Thursday, 7 April 2011 07:13 (2 years ago) Permalink
UK sub is something like £120 (or maybe $120, I forget which) but still worth it.
― Pop is superior to all other genres (DL), Thursday, 7 April 2011 09:23 (2 years ago) Permalink
^^^yesss
at some point during the rodrigo rosenberg article i actually wondered if it was leading up to an april fool's joke
― mookieproof, Thursday, 7 April 2011 09:43 (2 years ago) Permalink
guys, guys - let's not allow a few pieces of meticulously researched and tautly written long-form journalism obscure the reams of smug forgettable shit in this monthly publication
― 40% chill and 100% negative (Tracer Hand), Thursday, 7 April 2011 10:28 (2 years ago) Permalink
Patricia Marx to thread.
― Pop is superior to all other genres (DL), Thursday, 7 April 2011 11:04 (2 years ago) Permalink
It's weekly BTW
haha yes. which is kind of a miracle actually
― 40% chill and 100% negative (Tracer Hand), Thursday, 7 April 2011 11:05 (2 years ago) Permalink
Let's poll the subscription options.
― Hey Look More Than Five Years Has Passed And You Have A C (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 7 April 2011 12:20 (2 years ago) Permalink
I, like everyone else, accumulate daunting piles of New Yorkers, because each issue has so much I want to read. Then I wait for a vacation and bring along five or six issues. They're light and disposable, and I can discard them (or give them away, or leave them behind) wherever I happen to finish them. Perfect for airplanes, waiting rooms and hotels. Each issue is like a great little anthology.
― Josh in Chicago, Thursday, 7 April 2011 13:21 (2 years ago) Permalink
Oh, good ol' reliable ilx, always someone coming along to rain on the parade.
― 'what are you, the Hymen Protection League of America?' (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 7 April 2011 13:51 (2 years ago) Permalink
patricia marx writes what like... six articles a year?
the nyer critics are probably 3/4s unbearable but the rest of the stuff is consistently great, incl. talk of the town
― ban drake (the rapper) (max), Thursday, 7 April 2011 14:13 (2 years ago) Permalink
i've been finding the ny'er amazingly un-smug lately, i guess except for that insane david brooks article that i couldn't even finish.
― call all destroyer, Thursday, 7 April 2011 14:28 (2 years ago) Permalink
tbh & i say this as a fan i think the NYer house style w/ its long-form pieces is too straight & bland to be "smug"
― ban drake (the rapper) (max), Thursday, 7 April 2011 14:35 (2 years ago) Permalink
Adam Gopnik's pretty smug but I agree that the house style mostly avoids that pitfall.
Enjoyed the Tunisia feature in the same issue as the Grann one.
― Pop is superior to all other genres (DL), Thursday, 7 April 2011 15:03 (2 years ago) Permalink
ive given up on "shouts and murmurs"
― gr8080, Thursday, 7 April 2011 18:19 (2 years ago) Permalink
lioke even if someone who's opinion i respect tells me there's a good one i should read i refuse to on principle
oh yeah haha i forgot about shouts and murmurs in my estimation of the nyers smugness, probably because i never, ever read it
― ban drake (the rapper) (max), Thursday, 7 April 2011 18:20 (2 years ago) Permalink
basically i check to see if its jack handey and if its not i skip
I cannot face shouts & murmurs ever. I also never read the short fiction, cards on table.
What is the Rosenberg story everyone is talking abt? Starting to worry that I misplaced an issue...
― the Stars That Play with Laughing Sam's Doink (Jon Lewis), Thursday, 7 April 2011 18:29 (2 years ago) Permalink
It's in last week's issue and also online:http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/04/04/110404fa_fact_grann
― jaymc, Thursday, 7 April 2011 18:31 (2 years ago) Permalink
Oh cool, got that one already, been saving it.
George RR Martin profile in the current ish was hella depressing. Fans are not good people.
― the Stars That Play with Laughing Sam's Doink (Jon Lewis), Thursday, 7 April 2011 18:34 (2 years ago) Permalink
oh yeah shouts and murmurs blows obv
― call all destroyer, Thursday, 7 April 2011 18:36 (2 years ago) Permalink
The short fiction is hit or miss, but I liked the Murakami story they re-ran in the Japan issue.
― 'what are you, the Hymen Protection League of America?' (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 7 April 2011 18:37 (2 years ago) Permalink
yeah i read the martin profile last night -- don't know anything about the guy, but yeeesh. his fans! definitely a good book or something to be written (if it hasn't been written already) about modern fandom, and how the internet has mucked everything up.
― tylerw, Thursday, 7 April 2011 18:39 (2 years ago) Permalink
It's rly rly weird psychologically and the GRRM profile is far from the first time I have noticed it; basically, Fans with a capital F have this weird seething RAGE toward the creators of the narratives they want. Like this impotent rage. The creator(s) don't even have to be late on delivery of new work like GRRM has been, the Fans just are constantly teetering between deification and hatred of those who CONTROL "their" characters. There DOES need to be a new book abt it because the internet has exacerbated it severely.
― the Stars That Play with Laughing Sam's Doink (Jon Lewis), Thursday, 7 April 2011 19:27 (2 years ago) Permalink
i still read the fiction every week but it's kind of depressing how far its fallen off. i remember back in the early to mid 00's when they had authors like munro, edward jones, murakami, jhumpa lahiri, etc in constant rotation. there's still a quality story now and then but it's much less frequent. i do really like the fiction podcast from the website tho.
― Moreno, Thursday, 7 April 2011 20:39 (2 years ago) Permalink
http://www.slate.com/id/2290801/
― vampire weeknd (cozen), Monday, 11 April 2011 17:20 (2 years ago) Permalink
all aboard the grann wagon
― ban drake (the rapper) (max), Monday, 11 April 2011 17:29 (2 years ago) Permalink
groann
― vampire weeknd (cozen), Monday, 11 April 2011 17:34 (2 years ago) Permalink
Started Lost City of Z and seriously, crack on paper.
Did anyone else notice one of the entrants to this week's caption contest?
― Leeeter van den Hoogenband (Leee), Saturday, 16 April 2011 22:06 (2 years ago) Permalink
from the ipad edition, remnick's latest sounds like a must-read.
― joe, Tuesday, 19 April 2011 21:09 (2 years ago) Permalink
I feel like there are a few Franzen haters around here, but I'm surprised to find myself enjoying his article about the island, Robin Crusoe, and DFW.
― 'what are you, the Hymen Protection League of America?' (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Tuesday, 19 April 2011 21:11 (2 years ago) Permalink
read that malcolm x thing yesterday. it was aight.
― gr8080, Tuesday, 19 April 2011 21:28 (2 years ago) Permalink
its just a book review.
haha joe
― ban drake (the rapper) (max), Tuesday, 19 April 2011 21:28 (2 years ago) Permalink
xxxp yeah i liked it ok...i generally like franzens fiction but not really his non-fic; he def jazzed it up & had a legit point but i was v much groaning at his blackberry/Blackberry analogy
― johnny crunch, Tuesday, 19 April 2011 21:29 (2 years ago) Permalink
Did anyone else notice one of the entrants to this week's caption contest?ha, yeah. gonna assume that it's THE roger ebert?Franzen essay was excellent despite some of the cringiness.
― tylerw, Tuesday, 19 April 2011 21:29 (2 years ago) Permalink
Oh yeah, I cringed a couple of times, plus the whole conceit started out a little "oh, poor life of famous author on the road" (not at all to take away from losing a friend) for me, but it was still a good read.
― 'what are you, the Hymen Protection League of America?' (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Tuesday, 19 April 2011 21:33 (2 years ago) Permalink
only so many r eberts in chicago i'd imagine
― My bad Van Buren! (forksclovetofu), Tuesday, 19 April 2011 21:34 (2 years ago) Permalink
ipad app dece?
― thetan is cheatin (cozen), Tuesday, 19 April 2011 21:36 (2 years ago) Permalink
it is him. he posted about it on his blog: he's been trying to get into the finals round for years and years
― they call him (remy bean), Tuesday, 19 April 2011 21:37 (2 years ago) Permalink
his caption wasn't that good iirc
― tylerw, Tuesday, 19 April 2011 21:38 (2 years ago) Permalink
no it wasn't.cartoon was a pair of people standing in the middle of a wasteland under a mall parking lot sign with an "F" on it and Ebert has the woman saying "Guess which word I'm thinking of now."har harvideo games aren't art btw
― My bad Van Buren! (forksclovetofu), Tuesday, 19 April 2011 21:40 (2 years ago) Permalink
― thetan is cheatin (cozen), Tuesday, April 19, 2011 10:36 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
it's ok, pricey, would be better if you got access with a subscription. i just loaded it up to check the price of each issue when i saw that "remnick on remnick" gaffe.
― joe, Tuesday, 19 April 2011 21:45 (2 years ago) Permalink
"That might play big in Chicago, but the New Yorker has a different set of standards."
xp
― Pleasant Plains, Tuesday, 19 April 2011 21:45 (2 years ago) Permalink
"we prefer film critics with senses of humor, ebert. you know, like david denby."
― tylerw, Tuesday, 19 April 2011 21:53 (2 years ago) Permalink
lol
― 'what are you, the Hymen Protection League of America?' (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Tuesday, 19 April 2011 22:02 (2 years ago) Permalink
tbf anthony lane used to be kind of funny
― Number None, Tuesday, 19 April 2011 22:13 (2 years ago) Permalink
lane is kinda funny, but i don't think he's that great a film critic
― tylerw, Tuesday, 19 April 2011 22:52 (2 years ago) Permalink
he's very funny!
― horseshoe, Tuesday, 19 April 2011 22:53 (2 years ago) Permalink
I haven't actually read a Lane review in a while but some of his takedowns of hollywood blockbusters are classic. It can feel a little cheap though.
― Number None, Tuesday, 19 April 2011 22:55 (2 years ago) Permalink
whole travel issue was pretty enjoyable imo. the astana and chinese people touring europe articles in particular
― dblake (symsymsym), Tuesday, 19 April 2011 23:05 (2 years ago) Permalink
didnt know that that dope 2-part travelogue about siberia from summer 09 had been expanded into a book:
http://www.amazon.com/Travels-Siberia-Ian-Frazier/dp/0374278725
― gr8080, Wednesday, 20 April 2011 00:19 (2 years ago) Permalink
I loved the Franzen/Robinson Crusoe thing.
Haven't read the cover story ("Middle East of the West?") but I can tell from the subhead that it's going to be one of those UuuuuuNnnnnnngggggghhhh stories to read.
― ZERO TAXES (Z S), Wednesday, 20 April 2011 01:24 (2 years ago) Permalink
just like the story they ran on energy efficiency recently (which suggested that there's no point to pursuing efficiency measures because lol Jevon's paradox, uuuuuuuuunnnnggghhhhh). <3 new yorker but their energy stories blow. elizabeth kolbert rulez, however.
^thus concludes my new yorker minute
― ZERO TAXES (Z S), Wednesday, 20 April 2011 01:26 (2 years ago) Permalink
Kazakhstan article indeed very entertaining, and all without making a single Borat joke.
― Matt Groening's Cousin (Leee), Wednesday, 20 April 2011 04:04 (2 years ago) Permalink
wasn't the chinese people touring europe article done recently in another magazine? i feel like harper's ran an article on the same topic maybe 3 months ago.
― ZERO TAXES (Z S), Wednesday, 20 April 2011 04:10 (2 years ago) Permalink
yeah the atlantic did one too a few months ago...but the new yorker guy went UNDERCOVER, embedding himself with an actual chinese bus tour! he spoke chinese and everything!
i was really bracing myself for a borat reference the whole article too lol. The last sentence does describe men in small swimming trunks, but i guess that doesn't quite count
― dblake (symsymsym), Wednesday, 20 April 2011 06:53 (2 years ago) Permalink
"We spoke in Chinese, but when he was surprised he’d say, “Oh, my Lady Gaga!,” an English expression he’d picked up at school."
― just sayin, Wednesday, 20 April 2011 07:46 (2 years ago) Permalink
There's a remote possibility that the harpers guy ended up interviewing the new yorker guy as part of his story without even realizing it! Journalists interviewing undercover journalists, the Journalistic Centipede, pt. II
― ZERO TAXES (Z S), Wednesday, 20 April 2011 12:08 (2 years ago) Permalink
yeah texas arson thing was awesome, looking forward to re-reading it when my copy of the book comes.learning this was a little bit of a let-down tho: http://www.crimeandconsequences.com/crimblog/2009/10/willinghams-last-words.html― gr8080, Tuesday, April 5, 2011 4:22 PM (2 weeks ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
― gr8080, Tuesday, April 5, 2011 4:22 PM (2 weeks ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
just started working my way through the book and read this piece for the 2nd time since it first got published.
interesting to note that the passage that appears/appeared in the New Yorker:
Willingham had asked that his parents and family not be present in the gallery during this process, but as he looked out he could see Stacy watching. The warden pushed a remote control, and sodium thiopental, a barbiturate, was pumped into Willingham’s body.
appears in the book with an extended sentence:
Willingham had asked that his parents and family not be present in the gallery during this process, but as he looked out he could see Stacy watching; whatever calm he had obtained was lost, and with his last breaths he cursed her. The warden pushed a remote control, and sodium thiopental, a barbiturate, was pumped into Willingham’s body.
also the context being that though she divorced him she always defended him until towards the end when, having not seen the new evidence she suddenly changed it up and declared him a murderer.
well yeah i dunno after 14 years in prison for a crime i didn't commit i'd maybe lose my cool if i saw her on the other side of the glass too i guess.
― gr8080, Saturday, 23 April 2011 08:50 (2 years ago) Permalink
the closing paragraph remains the same though.
― gr8080, Saturday, 23 April 2011 08:53 (2 years ago) Permalink
Yeah and it is problematic, but I don't think it changes the strength of the piece which isn't really "look Willingham is really a great dude and therefore totally innocent" and more "the evidence that convicted Willingham is a joke and the state of Texas killed an innocent person because the safeguards that should exist to prevent that from occurring are also a joke."
― Fig On A Plate Cart (Alex in SF), Saturday, 23 April 2011 14:35 (2 years ago) Permalink
What really drove me crazy about the Chinese tourists was that they didn't try the local cuisine and went out of their way to find Chinese restaurants/McDonald's (having also experienced the exact same thing when I went on a canned tour).
― Matt Groening's Cousin (Leee), Saturday, 23 April 2011 18:59 (2 years ago) Permalink
Has anyone tried commenting on the website before? Do comments get quarantined until a moderator approves them first?
― Matt Groening's Cousin (Leee), Monday, 25 April 2011 05:16 (2 years ago) Permalink
Been reading the Eagleman brain timing article. Gets very ilx friendly when Brian Eno shows up. Also had to enjoy the reed krakoff article since I work for him.
― dan selzer, Wednesday, 27 April 2011 13:33 (2 years ago) Permalink
yeah the part with the drummers is pretty fun
I had a hard time visualizing what that amusement park ride of near death was supposed to entail?
― iatee, Wednesday, 27 April 2011 13:39 (2 years ago) Permalink
that article was pretty cool but eagleman seemed kind of annoying as a person
― congratulations (n/a), Wednesday, 27 April 2011 13:41 (2 years ago) Permalink
otm
like he had cool ideas but wnkiw
― iatee, Wednesday, 27 April 2011 13:42 (2 years ago) Permalink
*unless brian eno came
actually brian eno is probably really annoying too
― iatee, Wednesday, 27 April 2011 13:43 (2 years ago) Permalink
first clue is his radical occupation of the 99th percentile of the "food as fuel" spectrum
actually all the clues are clues
― br8080 (dayo), Wednesday, 27 April 2011 13:43 (2 years ago) Permalink
For years, Eagleman was a confirmed bachelor and “serial dater,” as one of his friends put it, with a tidy bungalow that he liked to call the Eagle’s Nest.
― Moreno, Wednesday, 27 April 2011 14:21 (2 years ago) Permalink
“I knew I had some intellectual horsepower,” he says. “But I didn’t know where my tires would catch purchase.”
― Moreno, Wednesday, 27 April 2011 14:24 (2 years ago) Permalink
Liked the Chinese tourism article a lot, although I thought there was an irony in that the article exposes all these ways in which the Chinese tourists have their views about Chinese superiority subtly reconfirmed by the tour guide's framing of everything, and yet in the end the writer seems to be pushing a view that, actually, America will remain superior because of CREATIVITY or something.
― rock rough 'n' stuff with h.r. pufnstuf (Hurting 2), Wednesday, 27 April 2011 14:26 (2 years ago) Permalink
that's the same spin some of the anti-tiger mom articles take--"Maybe our kids will write some music that your robots will perform"
― President Keyes, Wednesday, 27 April 2011 14:28 (2 years ago) Permalink
Finished the Guatemalan murder mystery; holy shit
― forks (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 27 April 2011 15:01 (2 years ago) Permalink
It doesn't seem completely surprising to me that the Chinese tourists only eat Chinese food, btw -- sounds very typical of group tours aimed at people inexperienced with travel. It's a common complaint about American tourists that they always look for the McDonalds.
― rock rough 'n' stuff with h.r. pufnstuf (Hurting 2), Wednesday, 27 April 2011 15:59 (2 years ago) Permalink
I knew Italians who travelled w/ their own pasta and can confirm that my ex-wife's French family weren't the most culinarily adventurous ppl either. Still, Chinese food in Italy, for example, is mostly food that I would avoid.
― Concatenated without abruption (Michael White), Wednesday, 27 April 2011 16:02 (2 years ago) Permalink
Man, either these guys or my postal service needs to get their shit together. I've gotten the past three issues all within the last five days.
― 'what are you, the Hymen Protection League of America?' (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Wednesday, 27 April 2011 16:04 (2 years ago) Permalink
the tour guide didn't allow them local cuisine because European meals take up to 5 hours.
― President Keyes, Wednesday, 27 April 2011 16:18 (2 years ago) Permalink
That was one of his excuses at least
― Concatenated without abruption (Michael White), Wednesday, 27 April 2011 16:19 (2 years ago) Permalink
Europeans--they eat so slowly! How can they expect their economy to grow?
― President Keyes, Wednesday, 27 April 2011 16:21 (2 years ago) Permalink
― forks (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, April 27, 2011 10:01 AM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
holy shit is right.
― adult music person (Jordan), Wednesday, 27 April 2011 18:57 (2 years ago) Permalink
i was late to work after i got hooked on the first four pages.Was that story international news while it was happening? First i had heard of it.
― forks (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 27 April 2011 18:59 (2 years ago) Permalink
I feel like I remember hearing about it after the tape came out.
― congratulations (n/a), Wednesday, 27 April 2011 19:10 (2 years ago) Permalink
I haven't read the article but how are chinese tour groups different from any other tour groups
― br8080 (dayo), Wednesday, 27 April 2011 23:10 (2 years ago) Permalink
Well, one of the highlights of their tour is Karl Marx's birthplace.
― President Keyes, Wednesday, 27 April 2011 23:20 (2 years ago) Permalink
I just reached that part of the article and it sounds like they were pretty enthused to be there
― br8080 (dayo), Wednesday, 27 April 2011 23:22 (2 years ago) Permalink
I think the message to take from that article is "tour groups are awful"
― br8080 (dayo), Wednesday, 27 April 2011 23:51 (2 years ago) Permalink
i feel like they prob have a much higher ratio of bus lecturing to actually being at places than other tour groups? but maybe not.
― call all destroyer, Wednesday, 27 April 2011 23:53 (2 years ago) Permalink
article about kazakhstan in that ish was good too.
― call all destroyer, Wednesday, 27 April 2011 23:54 (2 years ago) Permalink
if you're gonna spend half a day on a tour bus what else are you gonna do
― br8080 (dayo), Wednesday, 27 April 2011 23:54 (2 years ago) Permalink
been reading through the grann book while on holiday
so good
― (｡◕‿◕｡) (cozen), Thursday, 28 April 2011 20:26 (2 years ago) Permalink
One of dirty Roger Ebert's other caption contest entries:
― Moreno, Friday, 29 April 2011 21:36 (2 years ago) Permalink
^^^ The only one that I liked.
I had a hard time visualizing what that amusement park ride of near death was supposed to entail?― iatee, Wednesday, April 27, 2011 6:39 AM Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
― iatee, Wednesday, April 27, 2011 6:39 AM Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
I think basically you're free-falling BACKWARDS, which, like, no thanks.
― NoShoutsNoCalls (Leee), Saturday, 30 April 2011 17:48 (2 years ago) Permalink
Didn't really care for the Eagleman article because it was sort of a bait-and-switch: we're talking about time and perception thereof, no wait it's really ("really") about ("about") Deistic agnosticism and hanging out with Brian Eno.
― NoShoutsNoCalls (Leee), Saturday, 30 April 2011 17:50 (2 years ago) Permalink
One I did like was one on poverty as a cause of poor health:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/03/21/110321fa_fact_tough
Definitely read as Gawande-like (if Gawande-lite) to me.
― NoShoutsNoCalls (Leee), Saturday, 30 April 2011 17:53 (2 years ago) Permalink
Hated this article, couldn't finish it. So dull.
― NoShoutsNoCalls (Leee), Saturday, 30 April 2011 18:33 (2 years ago) Permalink
but answering the poll, prob wyoming
― iatee, Saturday, 30 April 2011 18:58 (2 years ago) Permalink
oh i liked that article! i mean it was depressing i guess but i didnt find it dull.
― ban drake (the rapper) (max), Saturday, 30 April 2011 19:02 (2 years ago) Permalink
speaking of depressing articles that FBI informant one from this week was pretty alarming.
― Moreno, Saturday, 30 April 2011 21:23 (2 years ago) Permalink
― iatee, Saturday, April 30, 2011 1:58 PM (4 hours ago) Bookmark
haha I suck at zing, meant to post this to the island-state thread
― iatee, Saturday, 30 April 2011 23:15 (2 years ago) Permalink
― NoShoutsNoCalls (Leee), Saturday, April 30, 2011 12:48 PM (5 hours ago) Bookmark
that's what it seemed like, but that doesn't even seem like a ride, it just seems like....falling into a net
― iatee, Saturday, 30 April 2011 23:16 (2 years ago) Permalink
Then you are more X-TREME than me, it sounds terrifying.
― NoShoutsNoCalls (Leee), Saturday, 30 April 2011 23:34 (2 years ago) Permalink
no no I agree it sounds terrifying, it just doesn't sound like a 'ride' more like a 'net'
― iatee, Saturday, 30 April 2011 23:35 (2 years ago) Permalink
the girl who broke her spine in 20 places
damn
― br8080 (dayo), Sunday, 1 May 2011 00:46 (2 years ago) Permalink
The New Yorker will become the first publication from the S.I. Newhouse, Jr., empire to be available via subscription on the popular tablet, and it will happen early next week, said a source familiar with the situation.
The deal means Condé will actually beat rival Hearst in the iPad subscription derby. Hearst said yesterday it was going to start selling subscriptions and single copies of Esquire, O: the Oprah Magazine and Popular Mechanics via the iPad effective with the July issues, available sometime next month.
Condé is expected to make the New Yorker available next week to capitalize on coverage of Osama bin Laden's death.
But by the end of the May, Condé will have the seven other magazines that are currently selling single-copy-only editions on the iPad available via subscriptions, including Wired, Golf Digest, Glamour, Vanity Fair, Self, Allure and GQ.
The deal will involve drastically slashing the single-copy price of the digital issue to $1.99 from the $4.99 price tag for the digital New Yorker and GQ -- the same as the newsstand price -- and from $3.99 for digital Glamour and Wired.
Annual subscriptions for each title will sell for $19.99.
― smh (cozen), Saturday, 7 May 2011 11:55 (2 years ago) Permalink
psyched for this if the UK pricing is equiv
woah yeah thatd be great, would save me quite a bit
― just sayin, Saturday, 7 May 2011 11:57 (2 years ago) Permalink
whats the point of subscribing to the new yorker if you dont get to anticipate it in your mailbox every week and let its pretty covers pile up in a stack somewhere in your house
― gr8080, Saturday, 7 May 2011 12:47 (2 years ago) Permalink
my gf just throws them away anyway ;_;
― just sayin, Saturday, 7 May 2011 12:57 (2 years ago) Permalink
i don't have room for those multiplying new yorker stacks, i reluctantly cleared them all out a couple of years ago and cancelled my subscription, but now i'm gladly going to get this digital one.
― estela, Saturday, 7 May 2011 12:57 (2 years ago) Permalink
heathens
― gr8080, Saturday, 7 May 2011 12:58 (2 years ago) Permalink
! ;)
― estela, Saturday, 7 May 2011 13:04 (2 years ago) Permalink
Last week's issue (2011-05-02) had some fierce articles:Quantum computingFBI informant (above mentioned)Obama foreign policy
― NoShoutsNoCalls (Leee), Sunday, 8 May 2011 01:18 (2 years ago) Permalink
really really psyched
― a board in which there is lively and fuiud debate? (dayo), Sunday, 8 May 2011 01:46 (2 years ago) Permalink
one thing I like about the instapaper new yorkers is that you don't really realize how long they are. (which is a good thing!)
― a board in which there is lively and fuiud debate? (dayo), Sunday, 8 May 2011 01:47 (2 years ago) Permalink
btw that stroller cover was the first actually funny one in a long, long time imo
― bin caught laden (Hurting 2), Sunday, 8 May 2011 01:48 (2 years ago) Permalink
i enjoyed the toobins thing in this week's, though maybe because it's the first law thing i've read for a while. some really distressing case details referred to in passing. the contributors panel at the start of the magazine says he's working on a follow up to the nine, too.
― sensual bathtub (group: 698) (schlump), Sunday, 8 May 2011 09:38 (2 years ago) Permalink
Who are y'all's favorite cartoonists? Haefeli had one in the last couple weeks that had me IRL LOLing.
― NoShoutsNoCalls (Leee), Sunday, 8 May 2011 20:31 (2 years ago) Permalink
Pretty good article on reality tv this (last?) week: http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/atlarge/2011/05/09/110509crat_atlarge_sanneh
Btw, I always get my print copy half a week after the online version goes up (i.e. usually around Thursday). Is it because the Pony Express has difficulty reaching me on the West coast?
― NoShoutsNoCalls (Leee), Sunday, 8 May 2011 20:34 (2 years ago) Permalink
I will definitely get the iPad version at $20. Part of the frustration with the dead tree edition was having nothing come for weeks at a time and then three mangled issues show up on the same day. Also, fuck information delivery through deforestation -- it's 2011 for the luvva god.
― Stomp! in the name of love (WmC), Sunday, 8 May 2011 20:53 (2 years ago) Permalink
ipads are made from the tears of factory workers iirc so neither delivery method is perfect
― sensual bathtub (group: 698) (schlump), Sunday, 8 May 2011 21:05 (2 years ago) Permalink
true
:: is properly chastened ::
― Stomp! in the name of love (WmC), Sunday, 8 May 2011 21:27 (2 years ago) Permalink
think i was just feeling defensive on account of just having re-subscribed to the paper edition, & gotten one through. it's an upgrade from reading online with my old login and printing at work, which was really not the best of either world
― sensual bathtub (group: 698) (schlump), Sunday, 8 May 2011 21:31 (2 years ago) Permalink
$60 a year ON IPAD, it turns out. still half the price of an international subscription.
http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/20110508/apple-brings-conde-nast-aboard-the-subscription-bandwagon-starting-with-the-new-yorker/
― joe, Monday, 9 May 2011 09:57 (2 years ago) Permalink
Still more than I've ever had to pay for a US print subscription, though.
― toby, Monday, 9 May 2011 11:20 (2 years ago) Permalink
wondering if it 'll be easier or harder to ignore ON IPAD
― a board in which there is lively and fuiud debate? (dayo), Monday, 9 May 2011 11:27 (2 years ago) Permalink
u+k: "Very important: Conde says print subscribers will get iPad access for free."
― Stone Colde Sylke Freek (forksclovetofu), Monday, 9 May 2011 12:16 (2 years ago) Permalink
^^^yeah that is awesome. thinkin baout an iPad tbh
― gr8080, Monday, 9 May 2011 23:54 (2 years ago) Permalink
pay $10 more to kill millions of trees
― a board in which there is lively and fuiud debate? (dayo), Monday, 9 May 2011 23:56 (2 years ago) Permalink
also this:
made me go back and read this 5-year old thing on the Death Metal kid who turned Al-Qaeda operative last nite:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/01/22/070122fa_fact_khatchadourian?currentPage=all
really enjoyed.
― gr8080, Monday, 9 May 2011 23:57 (2 years ago) Permalink
"Introducing Oasma to the Mortgage Crisis" ?
― Mark G, Tuesday, 10 May 2011 08:31 (2 years ago) Permalink
Enjoyed the Malcolm Gladwell article about Xerox and the Anthony Lane piece about Pixar tho both seemed (surprisingly?) poorly thought thru. Anthony Lane didn't seem to have much of a point beyond 'look at how weird/cool this company is -- maybe too cool???' which isn't really a problem since his writing is great and Pixar seems legitimately bizarre and magical. The Gladwell article's organizing theory was even more hamfisted than they normally are. You can either be incredibly inventive, build the model perfectly, or execute it perfectly but for some reason can't do all 3 -- it's not clear WHY that is tho. also apparently fighting a war in the Middle East is comparable to Steve Jobs bringing the PC to the market. still i didn't know the Xerox/Apple story and the narrative stuff was really interesting.
― Mordy, Friday, 13 May 2011 02:58 (2 years ago) Permalink
yeah you got the impression that pixar offered nyawker an exclusive and they sent lane and he didn't have shit to say but he thinks they're pretty cool
― beefaroni merchant, part-time fish tank bitch. (forksclovetofu), Friday, 13 May 2011 04:14 (2 years ago) Permalink
Last week must have been a busy one at America's leading crypto-newsweekly. The announcement of Osama bin Laden's death last Sunday hit the New Yorker at the worst possible moment in the publishing cycle, when bin Laden–free issues were already off the presses and in the mail. (Nice show of gratitude, Mr. President.) So this week's table-of-contents promotional email feels a little frantic—there was the foreign news to be caught up to and seriously grappled with, but the regular news-and-culture calendar could not wait. So: David Remnick on Osama bin Laden; Steve Coll on the making of a modern fanatic; Lawrence Wright on Pakistan; and Jon Lee Anderson on Afghanistan. Plus: Malcolm Gladwell on the mouse; Judith Thurman on Alexander McQueen; Anthony Lane on Pixar; John Seabrook on snacks in the age of obesity; James Surowiecki on Dropbox; Joan Acocella on Paula Fox; Joyce Carol Oates on Margaret Drabble; Sasha Frere-Jones on Stevie Nicks; John Lahr on "The Intelligent Homosexual's Guide to Capitalism and Socialism with a Key to the Scriptures"; Anthony Lane on "Everything Must Go" and "Thor"; fiction by Michael Ondaatje; and more. Eh, OK, that sounds resoundingly fine. Nothing wrong with falling back on muscle memory in a crisis. But how much more exciting would it be to open the mailbox if Remnick had shaken up the assignments a little? Anthony Lane on Osama bin Laden, for starters. I would read that immediately. How about:• Malcolm Gladwell on Margaret Drabble. • Sasha-Frere Jones on "Thor." • Michael Ondaatje on snacks in the age of obesity. • Jon Lee Anderson on Alexander McQueen. • Joan Acocella on the making of a modern fanatic. • James Surowiecki on Pixar. And definitely, definitely David Remnick on Stevie Nicks.
• Malcolm Gladwell on Margaret Drabble. • Sasha-Frere Jones on "Thor." • Michael Ondaatje on snacks in the age of obesity. • Jon Lee Anderson on Alexander McQueen. • Joan Acocella on the making of a modern fanatic. • James Surowiecki on Pixar.
And definitely, definitely David Remnick on Stevie Nicks.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/scocca/archive/2011/05/09/reassignment-memo-the-new-yorker-shuffle.aspx
― ban drake (the rapper) (max), Friday, 13 May 2011 12:38 (2 years ago) Permalink
Jon Lee Anderson on Alexander McQueen.
I crossed 17th Street, unescorted, to meet with Sarah Burton. As her assistant brought us bottled San Pelligrino water, she spoke of McQueen's recent death.
― more horses after the main event (Eazy), Friday, 13 May 2011 13:47 (2 years ago) Permalink
Don't you mean Judith Thurman?
― Concatenated without abruption (Michael White), Friday, 13 May 2011 14:03 (2 years ago) Permalink
michael...
― ban drake (the rapper) (max), Friday, 13 May 2011 14:12 (2 years ago) Permalink
o michael
― just sayin, Friday, 13 May 2011 14:13 (2 years ago) Permalink
Sorry, groggy...
I would love to read a JLA piece on McQueen; shit would be very informative, poignant and yet damning.
― Concatenated without abruption (Michael White), Friday, 13 May 2011 14:29 (2 years ago) Permalink
it's weird how one of the paragraphs in Lane's article on Pixar begins by referencing the criticism that they haven't featured enough leading female characters, and ends by wondering how Bob resists banging Helen in the Incredibles, especially given that she has elastic superpowers and wears hot thigh-highs
― Z S, Saturday, 14 May 2011 23:22 (2 years ago) Permalink
i love anthony lane but he is sometimes gross about women. maybe i'm mixing him up with denby, but i feel like he wrote a review of Baby Mama that made a huge deal of how Tina Fey wasn't pretty enough to play that role and it was pretty o_0.
― horseshoe, Saturday, 14 May 2011 23:28 (2 years ago) Permalink
"There is, of course, another skill that she could master with her natural sinuosity, but that is never mentioned. Back in 2004, some of us in the movie theatre wanted to shout, 'Bob, she's wearing a black mask and thigh-highs. What are you waiting for, man?' For the sake of the kids, though, we kept quiet. Bedrooms, in Pixar, are places where you chat to monsters, or horse around with your toys: not perspiring rumpus rooms, where Mr. and Mrs. Incredible play adults-only Twister."
ew
― Z S, Saturday, 14 May 2011 23:34 (2 years ago) Permalink
what an odd thing to say
― D40 (D-40), Saturday, 14 May 2011 23:49 (2 years ago) Permalink
like what was the purpose of even bringing that into it?
'in kids movies, there is very little talk of conception, as if children have not yet developed the ability to reproduce'
― D40 (D-40), Saturday, 14 May 2011 23:50 (2 years ago) Permalink
when will old dudes learn that they should stop writing about sex
― ban drake (the rapper) (max), Saturday, 14 May 2011 23:51 (2 years ago) Permalink
Anthony Lane didn't seem to have much of a point beyond 'look at how weird/cool this company is -- maybe too cool???' which isn't really a problem since his writing is great and Pixar seems legitimately bizarre and magical.
Still working through the Pixar piece, but there were some very awkward sections in it, syntactically, I thought.
― NoShoutsNoCalls (Leee), Saturday, 14 May 2011 23:59 (2 years ago) Permalink
It's part of the logical progression introduced at the start of the piece: Hollywood makes movies for kids, the kids company makes movies for adults, ergo, Pixar should be making adult films.
― Josh in Chicago, Saturday, 14 May 2011 23:59 (2 years ago) Permalink
The article about Libya from the week before last was pretty amazing. I almost skipped through thinking it'd be a bland news piece, but it was some serious first-hand man on the ground reporting, with a heart wrenching human angle.
― dan selzer, Tuesday, 24 May 2011 13:10 (2 years ago) Permalink
Yeah, that Libya piece was great. That Lane Pixar piece almost felt like a teaser for something more in-depth, or else it was just chopped to shit before it got published.
― 'what are you, the Hymen Protection League of America?' (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Tuesday, 24 May 2011 13:41 (2 years ago) Permalink
Anyone mind if I lower the level of discourse here by mentioning how hot Amy Davidson and Susan Orlean are?
― Dominique Strauss-Kahn, Rebel IMF (Leee), Saturday, 28 May 2011 17:19 (2 years ago) Permalink
Also, per Richard Brody, Terrence Malick once co-wrote a "Comment" for NYer (sub req'd): http://www.newyorker.com/archive/1968/04/13/1968_04_13_035_TNY_CARDS_000290020
― Doctoral Who (Leee), Sunday, 29 May 2011 00:27 (2 years ago) Permalink
ariel levy (who is also hot, if not interested in leee's glances) on silvio berlusconi's italy is pretty lol/wau/wtf
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/06/06/110606fa_fact_levy
― mookieproof, Saturday, 4 June 2011 01:18 (2 years ago) Permalink
The June 6 issue is fantastic -- the best this year. Highlights:
- Ariel Levy's batshit article on Silvio Berlesconi's pornocracy as well as a larger rumination on the culture of Italian machismo.
- Sy Hersh's latest article on Iran
- The history of Romneycare and the former governor's (and Bush administration's) enthusiasm for it in 2005 and 2006
― The Edge of Gloryhole (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Saturday, 4 June 2011 19:38 (2 years ago) Permalink
ariel levy (who is also hot, if not interested in leee's glances)
I deserved that. :I (Started the Berlusconi article, o_O indeed.)
― VagemiteBoi (Leee), Saturday, 4 June 2011 20:20 (2 years ago) Permalink
here is the ad described in the article:
― you're nobody til somebody SBs you (symsymsym), Saturday, 4 June 2011 21:19 (2 years ago) Permalink
I couldn't make it through the Iran article because of the weird imposing sense of Seymour Hersh deja vu. The Italy one I struggled with for a different reason: it's just too depressing. I mean, there's sexism, and then this brand of Italian sexism to the bunga bunga degree. It posits Berlusconi as endemic of a pretty horrible, more-than-merely-macho culture.
― Josh in Chicago, Saturday, 4 June 2011 22:53 (2 years ago) Permalink
oh nothing personal, leee -- i believe ms. levy is gay
― mookieproof, Saturday, 4 June 2011 22:59 (2 years ago) Permalink
The Bunga Bunga Degree is my favorite John Grisham novel
― When Zeester Met Koffie (forksclovetofu), Saturday, 4 June 2011 23:12 (2 years ago) Permalink
My old buddy (and Atlantic journo) Stephan Ferris (cousin of Anna Ferris, haha) is based in Italy and takes heat for calling out Italian misogyny. Fish in barrel, I know--but Euros always think USA is worse despite all evidence.
― President Keyes, Saturday, 4 June 2011 23:46 (2 years ago) Permalink
reading the acai article from a few wks back, really wanted a 'resulting paste' sighting
They eat the resulting think purple pulp with fish or game, or by itself, like soup.
― johnny crunch, Sunday, 5 June 2011 15:06 (2 years ago) Permalink
also wtf w/ analogies to miley cyrus cmon dude
― johnny crunch, Sunday, 5 June 2011 15:11 (2 years ago) Permalink
REPEATED analogies!
― When Zeester Met Koffie (forksclovetofu), Sunday, 5 June 2011 15:14 (2 years ago) Permalink
lol yes
― johnny crunch, Sunday, 5 June 2011 15:15 (2 years ago) Permalink
i thought that article was a mad stretch because i'm not really seeing the "fall" part of the rise and fall and neither was the author--still kind of interesting to learn abt acai cause i knew nothing about it.
― call all destroyer, Sunday, 5 June 2011 15:32 (2 years ago) Permalink
yeah, unnecessary framework
― When Zeester Met Koffie (forksclovetofu), Sunday, 5 June 2011 15:34 (2 years ago) Permalink
"Fall" is overstating it, but it seemed clear to me that there's been some backlash/fallout from acai's popularity.
― jaymc, Sunday, 5 June 2011 16:19 (2 years ago) Permalink
Anyway, here's a good complement to Levy's Berlusconi article, more about the inherent dysfunction of Italian political institutions that lets someone like Berlusconi dominate the government.
― VagemiteBoi (Leee), Sunday, 5 June 2011 18:19 (2 years ago) Permalink
I never knew how to pronounce acai before I read the piece, and tbh I kept forgetting how to pronounce it every paragraph or so and went back to the beginning for reference. And now I have no idea.
― Josh in Chicago, Sunday, 5 June 2011 18:40 (2 years ago) Permalink
ah-SAH-ee i believei did the same thing
― When Zeester Met Koffie (forksclovetofu), Sunday, 5 June 2011 18:47 (2 years ago) Permalink
i like to say chee-POT-uhl just to annoy people
Suddenly I am very annoyed at you, forks.
― Aimless, Sunday, 5 June 2011 19:04 (2 years ago) Permalink
ha, i thought i had this nailed & then half way through the guy's like, we even have people saying ah-sigh-ee!, it's crazy
― stately, plump bunk moreland (schlump), Sunday, 5 June 2011 20:32 (2 years ago) Permalink
ah-SAH-ee i believe
ah-sah-EE. (There's an accent on the "i.")
― jaymc, Sunday, 5 June 2011 20:37 (2 years ago) Permalink
― The Edge of Gloryhole (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Saturday, June 4, 2011 3:38 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
the article on contractors in iraq is really good & depressing too
― ☂ (max), Monday, 6 June 2011 01:21 (2 years ago) Permalink
I started reading the Romneycare one but couldn't finish it. It seems like a thousand articles have already been written about Romneycare and how Romney has to run against his own policy bc of how toxic Obamacare is in the Republican party, etc, etc and I couldn't figure out anything the NYer could add to it that would make it interesting. Does it get better?
― Mordy, Monday, 6 June 2011 01:23 (2 years ago) Permalink
i didnt read it, i dont like politics anymore, it makes me sad
― ☂ (max), Monday, 6 June 2011 01:24 (2 years ago) Permalink
the berlusconi article is a+++++++++++++++ though, skip to that one
yeah, i read that one. hilarious + insane.
― Mordy, Monday, 6 June 2011 01:24 (2 years ago) Permalink
xpost this was probably just new to me because i didn't follow the original passing of the MA legislation at all, but for me it added a bunch of useful details about how the bill was passed with a bunch of help from the bush administration, and how it was seen as a big republican victory.
― Z S, Monday, 6 June 2011 01:26 (2 years ago) Permalink
there's a trend in the article on foreign contractors, in last week's issue, of some chance of modest advancement or progress being introduced mid-paragraph, before the next paragraph begins with Yet or But or However. pretty crushing.
― stately, plump bunk moreland (schlump), Thursday, 9 June 2011 17:31 (2 years ago) Permalink
Yeah, I was pretty depressed after reading that article.
― the fey bloggers are onto the zagat tweets (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 9 June 2011 17:33 (2 years ago) Permalink
surowiecki this week: "the banks thought they were taking advantage of uninformed consumers, but they ended up playing themselves."
― mookieproof, Thursday, 9 June 2011 18:20 (2 years ago) Permalink
as one might expect, the george saunders & jeff eugenidess stories in the summer fiction issue are really good
― johnny crunch, Thursday, 9 June 2011 18:44 (2 years ago) Permalink
The Berlusconi one is Best of 2011 quality – such good reporting and insight.
― The Edge of Gloryhole (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 9 June 2011 18:46 (2 years ago) Permalink
I know an article is good when I end up getting stoned like a week later and summarizing it to someone half passed out
― puff puff post (uh oh I'm having a fantasy), Thursday, 9 June 2011 18:53 (2 years ago) Permalink
the whole situation is really as excruciating as it sounds but it keeps happening
the first half of the levy article is so full of just ... ammunition that it's almost like flipping through one of those bush-isms books. but then there's the second half, w/the vox pops with italians & silvio's cronies, pinching her cheek, etc. i'm not sure if it's because i was reading it in chunks, and had broken the momentum, but reading the last section, about the Ruby case (in which it'll be hard to prove something happened between two people who insist it didn't), i kinda almost felt sorry for Berlusconi, & could imagine his whole approach to paying crazy sums of money to young girls.
― stately, plump bunk moreland (schlump), Thursday, 9 June 2011 18:56 (2 years ago) Permalink
Has Saunders been putting out much stories recently? I could do with a new collection. Could do with a new Eugendides book for that matter
― Number None, Thursday, 9 June 2011 19:03 (2 years ago) Permalink
eugenides novel is coming in october
― stately, plump bunk moreland (schlump), Thursday, 9 June 2011 19:07 (2 years ago) Permalink
hadnt known that, good news
― johnny crunch, Thursday, 9 June 2011 19:10 (2 years ago) Permalink
Yeah just checked there. Sounds intrsting.
― Number None, Thursday, 9 June 2011 19:11 (2 years ago) Permalink
alec baldwin article makes me...kinda like him? sorta sad that one of the best comic actors of our age doesn't really like comedy.
― iatee, Thursday, 9 June 2011 19:14 (2 years ago) Permalink
aleksander hemons article in the summer fiction issue was devastating
― ☂ (max), Thursday, 9 June 2011 20:40 (2 years ago) Permalink
i was all but bawling in union square when i finished it
― ☂ (max), Thursday, 9 June 2011 20:41 (2 years ago) Permalink
what's it about?
― The Edge of Gloryhole (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 9 June 2011 20:43 (2 years ago) Permalink
i have the summer fiction issue waiting @ home for me but am considering saving it for my vacation next month
― ideas are death (Lamp), Thursday, 9 June 2011 20:43 (2 years ago) Permalink
his infant daughter getting sick with really rare cancer
― ☂ (max), Thursday, 9 June 2011 20:44 (2 years ago) Permalink
i know what it sounds like! but
oh jeez
― just sayin, Thursday, 9 June 2011 20:44 (2 years ago) Permalink
― ideas are death (Lamp), Thursday, June 9, 2011 4:43 PM (49 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
tbh there are only three stories in it, and i didnt like the last one i dont think, maybe i need to read it again, and the saunders and eugenides are good but not amazing. dont expect to be squirreling away a treat, is all.
― ☂ (max), Thursday, 9 June 2011 20:45 (2 years ago) Permalink
even one really good story would be exceed my expectations! i just dont have much to read atm
― ideas are death (Lamp), Thursday, 9 June 2011 21:04 (2 years ago) Permalink
the little one-page starting out pieces are all really nice; one'll make me dig out the last fiction thing, which had salvatore scibona's story in, which i don't think i read on account of the shitty & i guess toxic joshua ferris piece in the same issue (SS also did this what i'm reading thing on the blog that i found somehow v endearing). there's also a kind of eloquent, cathartic, gentle fuck-you piece by tea obrecht. i think maybe i just like oral histories more than i do fiction, now. the pieces also have panels of some of the only clear white space i've ever seen in the magazine.
― stately, plump bunk moreland (schlump), Friday, 10 June 2011 14:54 (2 years ago) Permalink
the scibona was my fave, definitely
― ☂ (max), Friday, 10 June 2011 15:02 (2 years ago) Permalink
i don't think i am going to struggle through something set in the '50s right now, but if my affection & admiration translated into perseverence w/reading i would pick up his book right away. apparently it is p good.
― stately, plump bunk moreland (schlump), Friday, 10 June 2011 16:11 (2 years ago) Permalink
scibona saying "I didn't know what I was doing or what I believed in, except the United States of America and the Cleveland Browns."
made me think of brownie and ilnfl <3
― johnny crunch, Monday, 13 June 2011 20:35 (2 years ago) Permalink
O_O
― brownie, Monday, 13 June 2011 21:16 (2 years ago) Permalink
― horseshoe, Monday, 13 June 2011 23:26 (2 years ago) Permalink
finished Devil and Sherlock Holmes, then tore through Lost City of Z. up next:
anything else on the NYer book club list?
― gr8080, Tuesday, 14 June 2011 08:38 (2 years ago) Permalink
I've been meaning to read The Devil and Sherlock Holmes for some time, thanks for the reminder. Interesting to see that three of the stories from that have been optioned for films. Honest question, how does that work for these kind of investigative reports? Does Grann get a decent payday from the studios? Or does it generally funnel back to the subjects?
― the fey bloggers are onto the zagat tweets (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Tuesday, 14 June 2011 13:25 (2 years ago) Permalink
Here's an article that goes into ithttp://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3065/is_n14_v25/ai_18729174/
― Number None, Tuesday, 14 June 2011 13:33 (2 years ago) Permalink
Awesome, thanks!
― the fey bloggers are onto the zagat tweets (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Tuesday, 14 June 2011 13:34 (2 years ago) Permalink
reminds me -- do we have an active ILX new books you are reading thread?
― Mordy, Tuesday, 14 June 2011 14:43 (2 years ago) Permalink
Spring will be a little late this year: what are you reading, Spring 2011?
― caek, Tuesday, 14 June 2011 14:47 (2 years ago) Permalink
yeah, i know that one. i meant more "NEW" (to the world, not u) books you're reading. like the What Albums Are Worth Listening To So Far in 2011 thread but for books
― Mordy, Tuesday, 14 June 2011 14:50 (2 years ago) Permalink
There's this
Rolling Contemporary Literary Fiction
― Number None, Tuesday, 14 June 2011 14:57 (2 years ago) Permalink
i keep reading interviews with george saunders and meaning to read him, so pleased by how articulate & effusive he seems, and i pretty much started doing so with the story in the fiction issue; i only read a couple of pages and just can not bring myself to finish it. does it transcend its clunky quirks? i know g.s. & i have a future but i do not think this is it.
― stately, plump bunk moreland (schlump), Friday, 17 June 2011 15:17 (2 years ago) Permalink
there are bigger fans of GS on this board than me, though i like him a lot, but if you dont like that story im not sure youd like any saunders. that kind of... naturalistic dialogue and narration is his thing
― ☂ (max), Friday, 17 June 2011 15:35 (2 years ago) Permalink
yeah i thought that one was actually a little understated for him
― mookieproof, Friday, 17 June 2011 15:40 (2 years ago) Permalink
i am leaving in a sec so this maybe isn't the best time to launch into a big thing but, i think i have problems with some things like that, like the dfw story that i forget the name of that's written in a v sorta reduced idiolect of this gruff laconic guy. like i love the old man and the sea & all but there's this danger of being too aware of the writer, and it getting anthropological, sometimes, i think -- or maybe there isn't, but i give up before it earns its keep. probably if you're okay with accepting the conceit of fiction you should be okay with a guy putting on a voice, but it rubbed against me the wrong way somehow. that i also am impatient with classics & stuff written in just anything that isn't a modern dialect ... maybe it is me.
with the saunders i think it seemed kinda hokey to me, the bleeping and all, the narrator himself fluttering about btw registers on top of it all. but then maybe my damning criticism of the story based on p1 & 2 is a little sharp.
he wrote that palin piece a while ago, the embrace of her dialect in which was its triumph, so i amn't giving up yet.
& max that hamon piece slays, yes.
― stately, plump bunk moreland (schlump), Friday, 17 June 2011 15:46 (2 years ago) Permalink
george saunders hasn't been very good for the last couple years i'm sorry to say but his first two collections are all-time
― it seems i am the larry (strongo hulkington's ghost dad), Friday, 17 June 2011 15:47 (2 years ago) Permalink
yeah, I liked Saunders first two books, but that recent story didn't do a lot for me. Maybe it reminded me a little too much of that great story about the male stripper with the zombie mom.
― President Keyes, Friday, 17 June 2011 16:52 (2 years ago) Permalink
the article on contractors in iraq is really good & depressing too― ☂ (max), Monday, 6 June 2011 01:21 (2 weeks ago) Permalink
― ☂ (max), Monday, 6 June 2011 01:21 (2 weeks ago) Permalink
just read this and I think it was one of the best things I've read in a few months. the burlusconi one was awesome too.
also read the Acai story and the mental health story in the May 30th issue- totally recommend both.
― gr8080, Tuesday, 21 June 2011 18:37 (1 year ago) Permalink
finally finished this ish; the bunga bunga and contractor pieces are both equally o_0
― Don't start the chain you know? (forksclovetofu), Tuesday, 21 June 2011 19:30 (1 year ago) Permalink
Mental health was brutal and sad. ;_;
― E.L. Doctorow Who (Leee), Wednesday, 22 June 2011 03:12 (1 year ago) Permalink
did you read the recent article by the man who lost his 10-month-old daughter? jesus.
― by another name (amateurist), Wednesday, 22 June 2011 03:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
rebecca mead (who i think is regularly fantastic) has an article abt alice walton's new museum thats really good but then its on a topic that fascinates me so
the article about third party contractors left me furious
― "what a great post" - some (Lamp), Wednesday, 22 June 2011 03:39 (1 year ago) Permalink
― E.L. Doctorow Who (Leee), Wednesday, 22 June 2011 03:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
oh god, i read the mental health one on my ipad on the train and there's a "bonus feature" where you can read the last six photographed pages of her journal before she died and it is just the saddest thing ever and i was kinda choking up on the train and feeling the deepest kind of despair and then it was my stop
― Don't start the chain you know? (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 22 June 2011 04:23 (1 year ago) Permalink
the contrast between the story and the army's boilerplate platitudes - any illegal offence committed on an army base is an illegal act and will be investigated as such, etc - and the ringing telephones was pretty damning.
found myself patting down some acai surveying its sugar content a couple of days after reading the article. maybe this will be the next wave.
― devoted to boats (schlump), Wednesday, 22 June 2011 08:49 (1 year ago) Permalink
is that new george saunders story sufficiently exciting that i should borrow a copy of the new yorker to read it, or should i just wait for the collection, yes this is an appropriate thread to ask this question in
― thomp, Thursday, 23 June 2011 11:54 (4 hours ago) Bookmark
― thomp, Thursday, 23 June 2011 16:11 (1 year ago) Permalink
i mean, is it 'yeah it's george saunders it's pretty good' or is it 'george saunders at the top of his game' or is it 'my god, this is the best thing george saunders has ever written'
obv if you don't like george saunders none of these answers will be revelant
relevant too
the first one, i think.
― strongo hulkington's ghost dad, Thursday, 23 June 2011 16:13 (1 year ago) Permalink
working my way through the insider trading piece, p good, or maybe its just im interested in the topic
― ice cr?m, Thursday, 23 June 2011 16:14 (1 year ago) Permalink
denby cgi thing bugged me cuz he does that thing where he basically says people other than kids might not like these kids movies too bad these kids movies aren't better for people who aren't kids. just a running complaint of mine. but in general yeah i guess cgi is outtahand or whatever.
― scott seward, Thursday, 23 June 2011 16:22 (1 year ago) Permalink
I haven't received the new issue, so I'm still struggling to dent the fiction issue, which I've found rather non-descript, even Lahiri's why-I-write thing.
― The Edge of Gloryhole (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 23 June 2011 16:25 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah the cgi thing was very unfocused
― Don't start the chain you know? (forksclovetofu), Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:14 (1 year ago) Permalink
denby is srsly no cool
― ice cr?m, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:16 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah fuck that dude
― horseshoe, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:16 (1 year ago) Permalink
i mean for real bro
i should probably always skip his stuff just cuz.
― scott seward, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:19 (1 year ago) Permalink
he's good at bugging me. would rather read andy rooney essays on film.
― scott seward, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:20 (1 year ago) Permalink
All I ever remember about Denby reviews are the times when he spoils something (i.e., Schindler's List).
― Let me tell you something about that song. (Eazy), Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:20 (1 year ago) Permalink
denby morelike NO COOL
― Lamp, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:21 (1 year ago) Permalink
"Hyper-articulate and often breathtakingly intelligent and always brazenly alive. I think it's easily the strongest American film since Clint Eastwood's "Mystic River," though it is not for the fainthearted" -- david denby on the movie crash
― ☂ (max), Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:25 (1 year ago) Permalink
"romantic comedies aren't good anymore because women have more rights than they did in the 1940s and this makes me nostalgic"--david denby on some damn romantic comedy, paraphrased by me
― horseshoe, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:26 (1 year ago) Permalink
i think that observation is sort of true, tbf, but he made it like an idiot savant, like he was completely uninterested in the implications
― horseshoe, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
"Hyper-articulate and often breathtakingly intelligent and always brazenly alive. I think it's easily the strongest American film since Clint Eastwood's "Mystic River," though it is not for the fainthearted" -- a time-traveling david denby on cronenberg's crash
― Lamp, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:30 (1 year ago) Permalink
is there a less meaningful phrase than "brazenly alive"
― horseshoe, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:31 (1 year ago) Permalink
ohhhhhhhhh i hate him
"For the most part, I stayed home in the apartment that I loved. And instead of going out, I entered in that summer of 1999 a dark and empty tunnel, an enclosure illuminated along the walls by a flash of naked men and women. I had discovered porn on the Internet. In the solitude of night, and in my little study at home, where mighty volumes of Plato, St. Augustine, Hegel, Montaigne, Nietzsche hardly my regular reading but a recent obsession loomed over the desk, the kneeling young women awkwardly turned their eyes to the camera. They often had long and beautiful hair that they must have laboriously cared for; they looked for approval not from their partners but from the camera, which I thought was the true object of their desire. They wanted to be seen. And the men, ugly and strong, sullen, tattooed some of them, thick-membered, concentrating on their erection and their orgasm, lest they lose either they were amateurs, not models, exercising the democratic art form of exhibitionism, with me as their willing audience. They all wanted to be seen, but I didn t want to be seen."
― scott seward, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:33 (1 year ago) Permalink
*barfs up entire internal organ system*
― ☂ (max), Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:33 (1 year ago) Permalink
i knew he was dim but what
― ~edgy~ (goole), Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
i wonder what david denby thinks about deathdrone.com
― Lamp, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
That's also the summer he got into day-trading, I think.
― Let me tell you something about that song. (Eazy), Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
the great thing about that crash quote is that not only is he WRONG but he is saying things that are the EXACT OPPOSITE of what is true about that movie
― ☂ (max), Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
also the summer his wife divorced him iirc yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay
― horseshoe, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
i was going to write a parody about it but now im legit curious
i think he would have some cool thoughts
like he has about women that do internet porn that he watches
― Lamp, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:36 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah "breathtakingly intelligent" as a description of Crash is hilarious
― horseshoe, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:36 (1 year ago) Permalink
BOXCAR! XP DENBY PORN
― ice cr?m, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:36 (1 year ago) Permalink
"not for the fainthearted"
― ☂ (max), Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:36 (1 year ago) Permalink
'for idiots'
― ice cr?m, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:37 (1 year ago) Permalink
"not for the fainthearted" is what really cracks me up, the meaningless descriptors are lol but i mean who did he think was walking out of the movie crash shook? i mean even the wealthy dowager could probably manage the movie w/o dropping her opera glasses
― Lamp, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:38 (1 year ago) Permalink
Where the hell is that porn thing from?
― Number None, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
the book 'snark' by david denby
― ice cr?m, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
Yikes. That outdoes even Thomson's Kidman obsession
― Number None, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:43 (1 year ago) Permalink
oh, that crash thing
― strongo hulkington's ghost dad, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
max why
why is everyone on ilx so fainthearted
― ☂ (max), Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:47 (1 year ago) Permalink
i was brazenly alive yesterday. i could have handled it then.
― strongo hulkington's ghost dad, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:48 (1 year ago) Permalink
lol brazenly alive is like madlibs it keeps cracking me up
― horseshoe, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:49 (1 year ago) Permalink
xxp delicate souls
― Mordy, Thursday, 23 June 2011 17:50 (1 year ago) Permalink
one of the reasons why i don't bother reading most movie reviews - and i've probably mentioned this before on ilx - is cuzza people like denby (and ao scott and others) who will recite the plot of a movie from beginning to end and not spend so much as a sentence on what the movie looked like. its bizarre to me. and just really boring to read too. i guess its a public service to give people a recap of an entire movie? i miss when people would describe the look of a movie. plus, reading that cgi thing i'm thinking the entire time: he doesn't know ANYTHING about this technology. if he did he might have something interesting to say.
― scott seward, Thursday, 23 June 2011 18:04 (1 year ago) Permalink
holy fuck "brazenly alive" - please stop cracking me up already
― brio, Thursday, 23 June 2011 18:04 (1 year ago) Permalink
I am brazenly posting
― dayo, Thursday, 23 June 2011 18:14 (1 year ago) Permalink
feel the braze
i am impudently conscious
― strongo hulkington's ghost dad, Thursday, 23 June 2011 18:16 (1 year ago) Permalink
his inglorious basterds review was like straight up medved. couldn't believe that thing. what a baby. porn lovin' baby.
― scott seward, Thursday, 23 June 2011 18:20 (1 year ago) Permalink
such a loud lol @ "impudently conscious"
how does this dude get to write for the new yorker i ask you is there no decency
― horseshoe, Thursday, 23 June 2011 18:21 (1 year ago) Permalink
spends half the review of IB being all offended by it and then he says that its too silly to take seriously. well which is it baby?
― scott seward, Thursday, 23 June 2011 18:22 (1 year ago) Permalink
i was seriously considering working "brazenly alive" into this review i'm writing and then realized nobody would get the joke
― strongo hulkington's ghost dad, Thursday, 23 June 2011 18:26 (1 year ago) Permalink
i might do it anyway. because i'm brazenly alive like that.
that would be an impudently conscious thing to do
― dayo, Thursday, 23 June 2011 18:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
Denby was ok when he worked for New York and was straight-up imitating Kael.
― The Edge of Gloryhole (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:02 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah but i would go so far as to say that pauline kael was flagrantly alive
― strongo hulkington's ghost dad, Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:04 (1 year ago) Permalink
he should try to emulate kael's razamataz and baggy pants pizazz more often. not to mention her hurlyburly argybargy dust-ups and folderols.
― scott seward, Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:04 (1 year ago) Permalink
Kael's brazenness.
― The Edge of Gloryhole (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:04 (1 year ago) Permalink
the naked gleaming allure of kael's flagrant prose.
― scott seward, Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:19 (1 year ago) Permalink
For the record, the porn quote is from American Sucker, not Snark.
― Don Rickles on the Dime (jaymc), Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:32 (1 year ago) Permalink
brazenly.xls
― brazenly alive (strongo hulkington's ghost dad), Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
"At my magazine, The New Yorker, no one wastes words, but no one assails his listener like a jackhammer, either. It isn't dignified. Soon after the phone conversation with my friend, I thought back over the previous few months. I remembered ranting on and on at a party. No one interrupted, but no one commented, either. They were waiting for the storm to pass. Cowed, they sighed and rolled their eyes as if I were trying to impress them, when from my point of view, I was just trying to get it all in. What was causing the rush?"
― scott seward, Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
"At my magazine, The New Yorker, no one wastes words..." (proceeds to waste words)
― chupacabra - a delicious burrito (DJP), Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
is that a real quote?
― horseshoe, Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
is that an excerpt from a Donald Barthelme story?
― The Edge of Gloryhole (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:44 (1 year ago) Permalink
― horseshoe, Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:44 (1 year ago) Permalink
man people put up with your shit if you write for the NYer
― ~edgy~ (goole), Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:44 (1 year ago) Permalink
"I didn't break down, or stop working. A shipshape magazine like The New Yorker doesn't let its writers fall into the sea. Good words must be written, and I wrote some of them. But there was a gathering heaviness in my chest and a feeling of forlornness, as if the roof had come flying off my head. Over that year of 1999, it came off piece by piece, as in a slow-motion movie of a storm, first the corners flapping and rising, and then the shingles lifting, a few at a time, then a few more, and then the whole thing violently tearing away in a gale. I was in love with my wife, novelist Cathleen Schine, and proud of the marriage, too, which seemed to me an astounding yet permanent fact in the world, like some comet that kept flying forever. It had lasted for eighteen years, and I couldn't believe it was over. I couldn't take it in; I was sure there had to be some mistake, some error, something we had forgotten, some place in the past we could go back to-a niche, a landing where we could reassemble and start again."
― scott seward, Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:50 (1 year ago) Permalink
poor novelist cathleen schine.
― scott seward, Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:52 (1 year ago) Permalink
r.i.p. catherine, too brazen for this life
― brazenly alive (strongo hulkington's ghost dad), Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:52 (1 year ago) Permalink
sorry i don't mean to make light of denby's shingles problem
― brazenly alive (strongo hulkington's ghost dad), Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:53 (1 year ago) Permalink
crash is like one of the worst movies i've almost watched a third of
― Don't start the chain you know? (forksclovetofu), Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:53 (1 year ago) Permalink
"Talk was the center; we used to talk over everything, endlessly. But in those bad years a polite silence had descended on the marriage, darkened on my side with foreboding and on hers with unhappiness. She was increasingly depressed. Dark circles appeared under her eyes, she became immobile-the bed was her home, her fortress. And then she wanted to get away. "If you really loved me, you would want me to be happy," she said on the day in 1999 when she first said she wanted to leave, a sentence that no lover ever wants to hear. She was sitting in bed, miserable. I was pacing around the bedroom, in a sweat."
in other words: OH GOD PLEASE STOP TALKING.
― scott seward, Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:53 (1 year ago) Permalink
crash was one of the last movies i've been to where i lol'd in the theater and was shushed by those around me
― brazenly alive (strongo hulkington's ghost dad), Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:54 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah, i'm still trying to figure out why he had a roof on his head.
― scott seward, Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:54 (1 year ago) Permalink
I was pacing around the bedroom, in a sweat
^^^ a dandy summation of his prose style.
― The Edge of Gloryhole (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:54 (1 year ago) Permalink
i know i saw mystic river but all i remember about it was sean penn crying
― Don't start the chain you know? (forksclovetofu), Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:54 (1 year ago) Permalink
maybe the shingles thing was an extended metaphor for male pattern baldness
― brazenly alive (strongo hulkington's ghost dad), Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:55 (1 year ago) Permalink
dude you don't remember Jack Nicholson making rat noises and Alec Baldwin telling awesome jokes?
― The Edge of Gloryhole (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:55 (1 year ago) Permalink
i must've been getting popcorn
― Don't start the chain you know? (forksclovetofu), Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:56 (1 year ago) Permalink
i was gonna say this is the most overwrought way of saying that someone broke up with you because you're a crashing bore that i've ever read but that probably isn't true
― brazenly alive (strongo hulkington's ghost dad), Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:56 (1 year ago) Permalink
seriously though, denby, get a livejournal already
― brazenly alive (strongo hulkington's ghost dad), Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:57 (1 year ago) Permalink
um
― chupacabra - a delicious burrito (DJP), Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:57 (1 year ago) Permalink
"The Internet is always spoken of as a medium of connection, but it is also a medium of isolation that surfs the user and breaks him into separate waves going nowhere. There was the movie hunger, and the lust hunger, and the early stirrings of the money hunger. But where was the core, reconciling and joining the many elements together? In the tomes above the computer? My book about the classics was devoted to Columbia's version of the "core curriculum." That's why the big boys were up there, in the shelves above the monitor. What would they have said? Plato, observing a man staring at shadows in a cave, would not have been in the least surprised. But Hegel, I imagined, would have been dismayed by the passivity of erotic contemplation, just as he was dismayed by the passivity of religious contemplation, and Nietzsche, I was sure, would have been disgusted by the absence of vigorous, joyful activity -fighting, dancing, revelry, lovemaking - even though Nietzsche, poor crazy bastard, was as terrified of women as any man who ever lived."
― scott seward, Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:57 (1 year ago) Permalink
the internet surfs the user!! wow, man, mind...is...blown.
― scott seward, Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:58 (1 year ago) Permalink
a joke, dan
xpost
― The Edge of Gloryhole (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:58 (1 year ago) Permalink
this is classic
http://wonkette.com/405905/the-wonkette-part-of-david-denbys-book-really-just-major-if-not-libelous-errors
― ☂ (max), Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:59 (1 year ago) Permalink
But Hegel, I imagined, would have been dismayed by the passivity of erotic contemplation
yes yes I imagine he would have been dismayed.
― The Edge of Gloryhole (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:59 (1 year ago) Permalink
"Nietzsche that dumb fucking idiot..."
― scott seward, Thursday, 23 June 2011 19:59 (1 year ago) Permalink
lol I was 50/50 "I think he's kidding but that is delivered really really convincingly"
― chupacabra - a delicious burrito (DJP), Thursday, 23 June 2011 20:00 (1 year ago) Permalink
"hegel that sick motherfucker..."
― scott seward, Thursday, 23 June 2011 20:00 (1 year ago) Permalink
also hegel might disapprove cause he was very religious but u kno historical context...
― Mordy, Thursday, 23 June 2011 20:08 (1 year ago) Permalink
that wonkette article--jeez! Denby is steady trollin' Coulter style.
― President Keyes, Thursday, 23 June 2011 23:37 (1 year ago) Permalink
the wonkette article about chelsea clinton is pretty shit though
― little mushroom person (abanana), Friday, 24 June 2011 03:00 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah, nobody comes off good in that arghicle
― Don't start the chain you know? (forksclovetofu), Friday, 24 June 2011 04:24 (1 year ago) Permalink
At the New Yorker, no one assails his listener like a jackhammer.
Unlike at, say, Club.
― Let me tell you something about that song. (Eazy), Friday, 24 June 2011 04:51 (1 year ago) Permalink
"The Internet is always spoken of as a medium of connection, but it is also a medium of isolation that surfs the user and breaks him into separate waves going nowhere. There was the movie hunger, and the lust hunger, and the early stirrings of the money hunger. But where was the core, reconciling and joining the many elements together? In the tomes above the computer? My book about the classics was devoted to Columbia's version of the "core curriculum." That's why the big boys were up there, in the shelves above the monitor. What would they have said? Plato, observing a man staring at shadows in a cave, would not have been in the least surprised. But Hegel, I imagined, would have been dismayed by the passivity of erotic contemplation, just as he was dismayed by the passivity of religious contemplation, and Nietzsche, I was sure, would have been disgusted by the absence of vigorous, joyful activity -fighting, dancing, revelry, lovemaking - even though Nietzsche, poor crazy bastard, was as terrified of women as any man who ever lived."― scott seward, Thursday, 23 June 2011 20:57 Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalinkthe internet surfs the user!! wow, man, mind...is...blown.― scott seward, Thursday, 23 June 2011 20:58 Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
― scott seward, Thursday, 23 June 2011 20:57 Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
― scott seward, Thursday, 23 June 2011 20:58 Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
Sounds like he's using that Soviet Russian Internet.
― some greenzo (onimo), Friday, 24 June 2011 07:32 (1 year ago) Permalink
huh? whats shit about the chelsea clinton post? jim even _explains_ it in the post on denby
― ☂ (max), Friday, 24 June 2011 11:03 (1 year ago) Permalink
it requires an explanationit is snarky without a pointit isn't funny
― little mushroom person (abanana), Friday, 24 June 2011 11:06 (1 year ago) Permalink
look at david denby over here
― ☂ (max), Friday, 24 June 2011 11:07 (1 year ago) Permalink
it doesnt require an explanation if you are vaguely familiar with the very famous film "the miracle worker"its point (as jim explains) is that the original article is shocked that an accomplished, stanford-educated 28-year-old woman is being "allowed" to speak for her mother at campaign eventsit makes that point by humorously contrasting chelsea clinton with helen keller
― ☂ (max), Friday, 24 June 2011 11:09 (1 year ago) Permalink
Just out of curiosity, what/where is the "original article" that post was responding to?
― Don Rickles on the Dime (jaymc), Friday, 24 June 2011 12:36 (1 year ago) Permalink
sorry I misread jims post there is no one specific "original article"
― ☂ (max), Friday, 24 June 2011 12:43 (1 year ago) Permalink
Rick Moody on that John Lurie profile:
http://therumpus.net/2011/06/swinging-modern-sounds-30-what-is-and-is-not-masculine/
― Let me tell you something about that song. (Eazy), Saturday, 25 June 2011 19:39 (1 year ago) Permalink
Also from DD this week:
"In regular movies, representation is obviously more intimately joined to physical reality than, say, books or paintings are."
I guess this one should be put on his editor but still...in movies, books are not as close to reality as representation is...?
― Hadrian VIII, Sunday, 26 June 2011 01:44 (1 year ago) Permalink
hmm. i'm not sure your rearranging of the original sentence is accurate. the original makes sense to me.
― Z S, Monday, 27 June 2011 02:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
no, hadrian's right... to get denby's meaning the sentence should read
"In regular movies, representation is obviously more intimately joined to physical reality than in, say, books or paintings."
or, preferably
"Representation is obviously more intimately joined to physical reality in regular movies, than in, say, books or paintings."
― ☂ (max), Monday, 27 June 2011 02:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
without the first comma tho
― ☂ (max), Monday, 27 June 2011 02:46 (1 year ago) Permalink
guys, its never gonna make sense
― ice cr?m, Monday, 27 June 2011 02:54 (1 year ago) Permalink
oh wait, yeah, i see it now. it's like a magic eye poster, but way less satisfying!
― Z S, Monday, 27 June 2011 03:15 (1 year ago) Permalink
because the satisfaction of seeing that 3D dolphin is fucking untouchable
Correction, June 28, 2011: The original article erroneously stated that 95% of Italian men had never operated a washing machine.
haha the fact too good to check
― caek, Wednesday, 29 June 2011 09:44 (1 year ago) Permalink
the aleksander henon thing was very sad
xp max you should post that to reddit/mens rights.
― caek, Wednesday, 29 June 2011 09:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
Love the piece about Rays outfielder Sam Fuld.
― mississippi delta law grad (Hurting 2), Friday, 1 July 2011 20:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
Sam Fuiud
― goole+ (dayo), Friday, 1 July 2011 20:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
Really like Joan Acocella's stuff on dance, the one from 2011/6/27 on Alexei Ratmansky is pretty good (haven't finished it yet):
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/06/27/110627fa_fact_acocella
― Matt Groening's Cousin (Leee), Saturday, 2 July 2011 18:21 (1 year ago) Permalink
xp I'm uneasy about the Lurie profile but Moody's got some serious issues with the New Yorker and a weird idea that profile-writers should only be engaged in promoting their subjects' art and praising their wonderful personalities. I wonder which interviewer or New Yorker writer pissed off Moody years back.
clever and arch in that New Yorker way, clever, condescending, self-satisfied, off-handedly cruel, lazy, elitist, devoid of bona fide literary purpose
a sprinkling of the kinds of details beloved not of artists but of media workers
if you think like a tabloid writer, or like a hack, it’s perhaps possible to understand why this would seem like the meat of the story on John Lurie (ostensible subject of the profile); it’s the meat of the story if you are a meat-and-potatoes guy, a fetishist of parodistic ideas of the masculine, but it has nothing to do with who John Lurie is among family and friends.
― Strictly vote-splitting (DL), Saturday, 2 July 2011 19:46 (1 year ago) Permalink
haha i tried to read that post and i was just like 'this is how you write'
― ice cr?m, Saturday, 2 July 2011 19:48 (1 year ago) Permalink
the nyer lurie article was awesome and salacious imho
― ice cr?m, Saturday, 2 July 2011 19:49 (1 year ago) Permalink
Moody describes it in one para as both "salacious and tawdry" and "exceedingly boring". How can it be both? I like his idea that only interviewing Lurie's friends and admirers and going on at length about his individual recordings would be some kind of thrillride.
Also, get off your fucking high horse.
It’s ugly and dull and perhaps even morally embarrassing, at least if you give a shit about art, music, literature, or the loftier aspirations of man and woman.
Makes me want to go and reread that notorious Dale Peck takedown of Moody, just for lols
― Strictly vote-splitting (DL), Saturday, 2 July 2011 19:59 (1 year ago) Permalink
i gave up early on when he started picking apart "everyone in 'downtown New York,' a.k.a., 'the known universe—basically,'"
― gr8080+ (gr8080), Sunday, 3 July 2011 00:13 (1 year ago) Permalink
this isn't a criticism, but, the larry david piece in the july 4 issue is really helped by how easy it is to summon a manic, conversational, larry-david-voice in your head while reading
― devoted to boats (schlump), Sunday, 3 July 2011 17:37 (1 year ago) Permalink
I like Larry David, but I thought that piece was dire. Jokes based around the Kubler-Ross stages of grief are pretty damn tired at this point.
― jaymc, Sunday, 3 July 2011 18:46 (1 year ago) Permalink
excited to read this! (not being sarcastic)
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/07/11/110711fa_fact_auletta?currentPage=9
― ⓢⓤⓟⓘⓕⓨⓞⓤ©ⓐⓝⓡⓔⓐⓓⓣⓗⓘⓢ (markers), Monday, 4 July 2011 04:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
wait, that's a link to page nine -- here's the whole thing: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/07/11/110711fa_fact_auletta?currentPage=all
"I like Larry David, but I thought that piece was dire."
that page is where funny often goes to die. i don't blame him. its like the bermuda triangle.
― scott seward, Monday, 4 July 2011 05:18 (1 year ago) Permalink
OTM
― mississippi delta law grad (Hurting 2), Monday, 4 July 2011 05:20 (1 year ago) Permalink
But does that excuse go for Paul Rudnick as well, or is he just unfunny?
― mississippi delta law grad (Hurting 2), Monday, 4 July 2011 05:22 (1 year ago) Permalink
probably my general uniform positivity about the main articles every week isn't going to help gr8080 pare down his pile of unread articles, but paumgarten & the han-han piece in last week's are both p engrossing. feel like the online dating thing probably has gladwell feeling like it shoulda been one of his ..?, in being in that ballpark.
i think the sole redeeming element of my print copy arriving on thursday is when it's a double issue, & the wait doesn't feel so long.
― neo-realist shit i ever wrote (schlump), Wednesday, 6 July 2011 10:38 (1 year ago) Permalink
han han was nice, online dating felt like a slightly more polished times magazine piece
― brooklyn's complicated relationship with bacon (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 6 July 2011 14:54 (1 year ago) Permalink
Seems like a swell guy, too bad about coming from Stanfurd. Also, companion podcast to the Fuld article, with McGrath and ~*sigh*~ Amy Davidson: http://www.newyorker.com/online/2011/07/04/110704on_audio_mcgrath
― Matt Groening's Cousin (Leee), Saturday, 9 July 2011 19:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
sports. it is not good. for humanity.
― President Keyes, Saturday, 9 July 2011 23:49 (1 year ago) Permalink
does amy davidson write anything longer than the comment on the ny-er blogs?, & in the magazine? she's so consistently good lately, i wondered if she had any longer pieces up in the archives.
― Genre Fiction › Men's Adventure (schlump), Wednesday, 13 July 2011 08:53 (1 year ago) Permalink
george packer making me sad again
― Aa Bb Obscure Dull Blue (#000066) (schlump), Monday, 18 July 2011 13:16 (1 year ago) Permalink
Going all the way back to Eagleman in Texas, trying to see if time slows down for real when a person senses they're in danger. I finally found video of the "ride" he uses to gauge his research subjects' fear factor with:
From Cracked.com, of course.
― Pleasant Plains, Monday, 18 July 2011 14:38 (1 year ago) Permalink
good find!watching that makes me feel. unwell.
― obliquity of the ecliptic (rrrobyn), Monday, 18 July 2011 14:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
i really want to try it. (for science.)
― obliquity of the ecliptic (rrrobyn), Monday, 18 July 2011 14:41 (1 year ago) Permalink
hoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
― max, Monday, 18 July 2011 14:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
getting the shakes just thinking about it
I'm 100% sure if I did this I would turn around mid-fall, stretch out like superman, catch a draft and fly right outside of the net and plummet to my death.
― dan selzer, Monday, 18 July 2011 14:48 (1 year ago) Permalink
That cracked article was great btw, read it this morning as well. I remember Action Park from when I was a kid. Glad I never went.
Actually I did sorta go, Action Park was part of Vernon Valley/Great Gorge, which is the only place I ever went skiing.
― dan selzer, Monday, 18 July 2011 14:49 (1 year ago) Permalink
Then, in July, a scad operator in the Wisconsin Dells triggered a drop before the net had been lifted fully into place. When the rider—a twelve-year-old girl named Teagan Marti—landed in the net, her momentum stretched it to the ground. The impact fractured her skull and broke her spine in ten places.
― dayo, Monday, 18 July 2011 14:59 (1 year ago) Permalink
I rode this once:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo_Drop
NB I am terrified of rollercoasters but was forced to by peer pressure. luckily my friend next to me was even more scared and I distracted myself by telling him everything was gonna be alright.
― dayo, Monday, 18 July 2011 15:00 (1 year ago) Permalink
according to the web it takes you up 62 meters or 200 feet. O_o
― dayo, Monday, 18 July 2011 15:01 (1 year ago) Permalink
okay this one is scarier! as commenters have noted the worst part is the rise to the top, you keep on going and going and going and when you think there's no way you can go up anymore, you go up another 10 meters. and then when you're at the top you look down and around at the park and think 'holy fuck this is high.' and all you can do is wait for the plunge.
― dayo, Monday, 18 July 2011 15:06 (1 year ago) Permalink
And of course, leave it to the Japanese to come up with a ride that offers a 120º drop
"A 120-degree…. wha, how doest that work?" you ask.
― Pleasant Plains, Monday, 18 July 2011 15:25 (1 year ago) Permalink
(Anyway, sorry for the derail.)
― Pleasant Plains, Monday, 18 July 2011 15:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
you guys, nothing is as fucked up as the Tower of Terror
well okay the freefall into the cargo net is more fucked up
― Spotify, Spotify me (DJP), Monday, 18 July 2011 15:33 (1 year ago) Permalink
My little sister – who has her "in's" with the Disney folks and worked for MGM for like three years – claims she rode the Tower of Terror shortly after it opened.
Before the fun starts and the car drops, like every other fricking ride in the Kingdom, there's an announcement made that there's been a problem detected in the ride and that it might go haywire (or take you into the Twilight Zone.)
There's comes a point where the doors open (like an elevator) and there's a dark room with ghosts and shit and Rod Serling comes out to say something to the riders. Except, as my sister says when she first rode it, the interior fluorescent lights were turned on in that level, so you saw this utility room with wooden beams and sawdust with this pane of glass in front of the car that the ghostly apparitions were being projected on.
So my sister really believed there was a problem with the ride and then WHOOOOSH.
― Pleasant Plains, Monday, 18 July 2011 15:37 (1 year ago) Permalink
holy shit, that would scar me for life
― Spotify, Spotify me (DJP), Monday, 18 July 2011 15:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
I mean, the ride itself was bad enough (curse you stealth drop), having trappings malfunctions on top of it would be yeargh
AAAAAUGH!
― generous doler out of lollies (forksclovetofu), Monday, 18 July 2011 15:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
I have spent entire afternoons looking at Disney rides that have gone wrong, freaking myself out for days afterward. Even when I was 12, that Snow White ride gave me nightmares.
― Pleasant Plains, Monday, 18 July 2011 15:50 (1 year ago) Permalink
Sunny's taking Beeps out to D-Land this fall, so at least one more generation will have the opportunity for black-velvet nightmares of robotic amphibians.
― Pleasant Plains, Monday, 18 July 2011 15:53 (1 year ago) Permalink
holy shit at the pause before the 120 degree drop. rollercoaster designers are dicks.
― dayo, Monday, 18 July 2011 16:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
wanna ride that coaster so bad
terrifying
― a variable (sic) "League of Nations" (DJP), Monday, 18 July 2011 16:23 (1 year ago) Permalink
We got my mom on Space Mountain by successfully fooling her that the ride was 'educational'. It certainly was!
― natalie imbroglio (suzy), Monday, 18 July 2011 16:26 (1 year ago) Permalink
The hedge-fund article in the new issue is good, especially if you're curious about someone who makes more than a billion a year and has a strange/successful organization.
― bernerrrrr! berrrrrnowwww.... (Eazy), Monday, 18 July 2011 16:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
One of my earliest memories is riding the conveyor belt/escalator out of that ride and toward the exit, holding my dad's hand and trying to dry my tears, watching on the side these anthropomorphic robots act out scenes of the future (a kid holding a frog up to his mom.)
― Pleasant Plains, Monday, 18 July 2011 16:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
haha i went on space mountain sometime shortly after it opened. i was not into rollercoasters at that age, and it was dark, and i was unhappy. and then my dad unbuckled my belt a smidge too early and i hit my head on the bar as the car jerked one more time. he still feels bad about it.
― mookieproof, Monday, 18 July 2011 23:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
Free fall rides are the worst rides. Just watching those videos gave me unpleasant anxiety and nausea. Also, and I don't want to look it up because it really upsets me, but somewhere in North Carolina a girl lost a foot on one of those rides in a really gruesome way and I hate being the kind of person who disregards statistics in favor of irrational terror due to one aberrant event, but I am totally being that kind of person here.
― ilx poster and keen dairy observer (Jenny), Monday, 18 July 2011 23:47 (1 year ago) Permalink
ughhhhh supreme scream, i think that's the most afraid i've been on a ride ever. like the actual falling part is pretty awesome, but they hold you at the top for SO LONG that you start thinking "oh god, this motherfucker is going to break down with me up here, i am beyond the reach of human assistance, i am going to die."
even worse was when my high school held its winter formal at knotts berry farm, so you were up there in the dead of night in fancy dress, except barefoot so you didn't accidentally drop a heel and kill the ride operator.
― reddening, Tuesday, 19 July 2011 06:15 (1 year ago) Permalink
Still making my way through the article (no paywall!) on Rwandan cyclists. It's not without some cringe-worthy white man's burden segments, but it's really fascinating all the same.
― Matt Groening's Cousin (Leee), Wednesday, 20 July 2011 05:03 (1 year ago) Permalink
*unreads this revive*
― youmadin therapy (k3vin k.), Wednesday, 20 July 2011 05:13 (1 year ago) Permalink
Actually, roller coasters have fewer injuries a year than merry-go-rounds, mostly because very few people try to jump off of roller coasters.
― Christine Green Leafy Dragon Indigo, Friday, 22 July 2011 00:15 (1 year ago) Permalink
this probably belongs in a putin thread, but just as an interesting counterpart to the video posted after ariel levy's burlusconi article:
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/07/new-weapon-in-putins-army-flashed-boobs/
― radioactive computer (schlump), Monday, 25 July 2011 14:11 (1 year ago) Permalink
"pop a boner for 'bama"
― generous doler out of lollies (forksclovetofu), Monday, 25 July 2011 15:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
after noticing i hadn't really touched last week's i just started & was finding v interesting the thing about asylum in the us, but now i just want to skip to 2/3 of the way through the bin laden thing
― sitcom neighbor (schlump), Monday, 1 August 2011 09:24 (1 year ago) Permalink
this is popcorn-eatingly fascinating btw
― sitcom neighbor (schlump), Monday, 1 August 2011 10:07 (1 year ago) Permalink
halfway through Bin Laden article. Great stuff.
― dan selzer, Thursday, 4 August 2011 14:23 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah, i enjoyed it too. it mostly steers clear of anything except for a walkthrough of the operation itself, and is pretty fascinating.
― future events are now current events (Z S), Thursday, 4 August 2011 17:19 (1 year ago) Permalink
it mostly steers clear of anything except for a walkthrough of the operation itself
so neatly arranged, though; the CLIFFHANGERish section that ends with the helicopter crashing was really effective
― (oboe interlude) (schlump), Thursday, 4 August 2011 17:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
Haven't read the OBL article yet, but it's getting some pushback: http://www.registan.net/index.php/2011/08/04/the-schmidle-muddle-of-the-osama-bin-laden-take-down/
― his loser, bum of a son, named Jesus Christ (Leee), Sunday, 7 August 2011 00:21 (1 year ago) Permalink
damn that piece owns him pretty hard
I thought the nyer was pretty famous for its factchecking
― 我爱你 G. Weingarten (dayo), Sunday, 7 August 2011 01:52 (1 year ago) Permalink
I finished that piece today just as I heard about the helicopter crash in Afghanistan on the radio, early reports of which made it sound like some of the SEALs from the bin Laden mission had been killed.
In hindsight it does seem unlikely that they would have had the time or inclination to be interviewed at great length, which you'd need for the level of detail in the article.
― boxall, Sunday, 7 August 2011 01:56 (1 year ago) Permalink
That's a serious slapdown of the article in question.
― I'm a nerd and nerdy things happened (forksclovetofu), Sunday, 7 August 2011 14:02 (1 year ago) Permalink
I love how indignant and self righteous professors can get sometimes
― dayo, Sunday, 7 August 2011 14:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
the bin laden assignation piece was p weak regardless
― ice cr?m, Sunday, 7 August 2011 14:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
wow who was his lover
― dayo, Sunday, 7 August 2011 14:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah honestly i got this issue + thought it was p much garbage mb cuz i dont really care about 'how it all went down' but also just like 'oh, great, a piece by patricia marx about shopping and look! adam gopnik on owning dogs as pets!'
blech
― Lamp, Sunday, 7 August 2011 17:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah it was just sort of a weird military play by play, tho maybe the fact that its fake had something to do w/it not grabbing me
― ice cr?m, Sunday, 7 August 2011 17:52 (1 year ago) Permalink
I liked the fact that it was laid out so plainly. Not liking the fact that it's fake so much.
― dan selzer, Sunday, 7 August 2011 18:19 (1 year ago) Permalink
did anyone read the ben marcus story/does anyone want to talk about it. it felt so wholly like 'contemporary' 'american' 'new yorker' 'fiction' that i thought it might be innaresting to discuss.
― (oboe interlude) (schlump), Monday, 8 August 2011 21:14 (1 year ago) Permalink
Thought Alex Ross on Oscar Wilde was pretty great.
― Ned Raggett, Monday, 8 August 2011 21:15 (1 year ago) Permalink
^^^ was gonna post it last Thursday. He's right about the Ellmann biography too -- one of my favorites.
― livin in my own private Biden hole (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 8 August 2011 21:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
Yeah, Ross' piece was great.
Read it last night, wasn't terribly impressed. I think your 'contemporary' 'american' 'new yorker' 'fiction' description was perfectly otm, as in it was like paint-by-numbers. Dysfunctional family issues? Check. Barely hinted at buried personal issues for the narrator? Check. Sexual edginess through gently poking taboos? Check. Technology-laden ennui? Check.
― jon /via/ chi 2.0, Monday, 8 August 2011 21:20 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah. i actually, totally in isolation from the rest of the piece, loved one of the sexual edginess through gently poking taboos (gently poking taboos) sentences, the one including 'hand sex'. but i don't know that i didn't like it, because parts were good, and well observed - the guy who couldn't be described as handsome, only serious, &c - but it was more that it was totally reaching for that stuff, and spoken in the same voice as so much other stuff - like such an unchallenging franzen, eugenides, laugh at the end of the paragraph tone (calling this 'laff-a-graf' from now on). & with that i wondered, is that just because it's plainly spoken?, in the parlance of our times?, and that's how modern thought is best represented?, but i don't know that it is - think it's more an appealing and popular schematic voice. and the territory, though kinda more disdainful - it's a long time since i've read the corrections, to the point that i might be getting his name wrong, but chip, the errant son self-loathing and self-destructively sharp - it's him, right? like not that franzen should get the monopoly on depressed guy territory, lest fiction crumble and die, and nor should people feel compelled to do something new or anything, but you sorta feel like it wrote itself in those parts. a franzen family kind uncomplicatedly counterbalanced by true, redemptive, intimate and small-scale love.
i read part of the marcus notable american book a while ago & then stopped & i guess i was slightly surprised by this for being so straightforward.
― (oboe interlude) (schlump), Monday, 8 August 2011 21:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
marcus had another short, straightfwd piece in the nyer back in march. i dont recall anything abt it tbh but upthread i said i liked it. do ppl know if they are excerpts of his forthcoming novel?
i also liked the recent one. enjoyed how w/e had previously transpired w/ his fam was kept as subtext & unexplained, the reader somewhat has the perspective his wife would have if she came along...i almost hope it's not part of a longer thing cuz i feel like explaining it wld be hard 2 do well
― johnny crunch, Monday, 8 August 2011 23:13 (1 year ago) Permalink
apparently they are not part of the novel -
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2011/08/this-week-in-fiction-ben-marcus-1.html
― johnny crunch, Monday, 8 August 2011 23:43 (1 year ago) Permalink
re. the New Yorker article on Bin Laden, I would argue that the response linked to upthread isn't really that much of a slapdown. It reads like the peevish critical comments made by an academic reviewer when someone else has got their work published first.
― badg, Tuesday, 9 August 2011 01:02 (1 year ago) Permalink
Having read both the original article and the supposed takedown, I mostly agree with badg. Although I'll grant that Schmidle baldly misrepresenting his linguistic abilities and the fact that the article gave the impression that he had interview access with the SEALs are both red flags and enough to give me pause, the response doesn't bring up anything substantive enough to dismiss the article outright. She mentions those two things to try to undermine his credibility, then starts in with innuendo and circumstantial evidence, before adding some cheap polemics.
― his loser, bum of a son, named Jesus Christ (Leee), Tuesday, 9 August 2011 04:15 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah i think that's true, that some of the criticism indicts the author but not the piece, such as the bragging about understanding urdu elsewhere. i don't think that there's a huge clash between what the guy reported and the fact of his limited access, provided that there isn't subsequently a rebuttal to those claims - ie that he might have heard it through a secondary source is okay provided that source is reliable; i guess a disclaimer on his limited contact might have been appropriate?, idk, but i don't know how strong an impression of close contact or him being embedded i actually got while reading. the main impression i got, at least just from remembering the article, is that the analysis of the operation having mainly been contextual, relative to other seal team six or covert operations or w/e, rather than specifically about this one operation. so talking to high-up guys who do this kind of thing elsewhere and understanding how it fits with that line of work, rather than specifically looking at how this one was treated by people on the ground.
i guess maybe this part would be controversial if it's accrediting opinions to the actual team involved rather than gauging general policy:
“There was never any question of detaining or capturing him,” an unnamed Special Operations officer told him. “It wasn’t a split-second decision. No one wanted detainees.”
― bruce actual springsteen (schlump), Tuesday, 9 August 2011 13:49 (1 year ago) Permalink
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/08/08/110808fa_fact_greenblatt
This article on Lucretius’ poem “On the Nature of Things” is excellent.
― Mr. Que, Saturday, 13 August 2011 16:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/08/15/110815fa_fact_lizza
Marcus Bachmann plopped down on the seat next to me, in the back of the plane. He pointed at my laptop and asked if he could take a look. “All I want to know is what they’re saying about me,” he said. “Newsweek came up with the word ‘silver fox.’ Tell me what ‘silver fox’ means.”“Do you want me to tell you honestly?” I asked.“Oh, don’t tell me it’s something gay!” he said. “Because I’ve been called that before.”
“Do you want me to tell you honestly?” I asked.
“Oh, don’t tell me it’s something gay!” he said. “Because I’ve been called that before.”
― his loser, bum of a son, named Jesus Christ (Leee), Saturday, 13 August 2011 16:48 (1 year ago) Permalink
love elizabeth kolbert, loved her article on neanderthals and DNA
― the guy who is too intense about the bean toss game (Z S), Saturday, 13 August 2011 19:57 (1 year ago) Permalink
reading & loving this right now ^^, fascinating.the bachmann piece is good, too - pretty dogged but so much shit to get through.
― bruce actual springsteen (schlump), Monday, 15 August 2011 11:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
i love the ipad app-- wish they'd make one for iPhone
― (gr8080), Monday, 15 August 2011 23:36 (1 year ago) Permalink
Neanderthal article is so readable, loved it. (By comparison, the Bachmann felt haphazard and ultimately depressing, but hey, I'm blaming the subject.)
― his loser, bum of a son, named Jesus Christ (Leee), Sunday, 21 August 2011 19:13 (1 year ago) Permalink
(By comparison, the Bachmann felt haphazard and ultimately depressing, but hey, I'm blaming the subject.)
i thought it was good; i think i'm always slightly surprised when something has a pre-agreed-upon countering tone, so is forwardly correcting facts & inventorying ammunition, etc, rather than ostensibly playing it levelly, but it was still fascinating and pretty efficient. but yeah SUPER depressing, or more worrying, really.
― sexual union prayerbook slam (schlump), Sunday, 21 August 2011 21:47 (1 year ago) Permalink
Hah, worrying indeed. Although I wouldn't call the Bachmann piece slight by absolute measures, it did feel slight compared to other similar profiles, e.g. Lizza's article on Darrell Issa, which is more in-depth and comprehensive, and Lizza's awesome article on Obama's foreign policy, which I found a very thoughtful and analytic corrective on more popular journo tropes.
I do love the bit where Lizza trolls Marcus Bachmann though, that is a keeper.
― c("c) (Leee), Sunday, 21 August 2011 22:26 (1 year ago) Permalink
i'm a few weeks behind everyone per usual but holy shit that piece on Neanderthals-- I could read a book about that dude/ his work/ideas
def kind of left it hanging
― (gr8080), Tuesday, 30 August 2011 01:12 (1 year ago) Permalink
lane's reviews this week are particularly bad
― Reddit Me Bro (forksclovetofu), Tuesday, 30 August 2011 01:46 (1 year ago) Permalink
after 2 years of scrounging & sucking old issues i kept from before my dad moved & reading free articles online i'm finally resubscribed, read everything this issue with such gusto lol
― back in a .gif ;) (flopson), Tuesday, 30 August 2011 01:50 (1 year ago) Permalink
Dana Goodyear's article on eating bugs is great, and funnier than any "Shouts & Murmurs" I've ever read, which admittedly is not a high number nor a high bar, but you get the picture.
― c("c) (Leee), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 02:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
Good piece on Clarence Thomas in last week's
― Helping 3 (Hurting 2), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 03:20 (1 year ago) Permalink
it was kind of disappointingly uncritical but i enjoyed the law history aspect of it a lot
― frogsb (k3vin k.), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 03:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
I thought it was critical enough without coming across as an overly targeted piece on him. I mean, it was enough to depress me for quite a bit after finishing the article.
― jon /via/ chi 2.0, Wednesday, 31 August 2011 03:36 (1 year ago) Permalink
There were a lot of subtle digs in there that were pretty artfully done I thought. Besides, I think the point of the piece was partly that maybe people ought to take him a bit more seriously, even if as an enemy.
― Helping 3 (Hurting 2), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 03:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
― jon /via/ chi 2.0, Wednesday, 31 August 2011 03:41 (1 year ago) Permalink
i did gain a grudging appreciation for the influence his nonsense has had on the direction of the court - particularly wrt the second amendment, i'll have to go back and read a couple of those cases - but toobin repeatedly referring to him as the right-wing's "intellectual leader" (esp compared to scalia!) was a bit much for me to take
xps
― frogsb (k3vin k.), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 03:41 (1 year ago) Permalink
I think that part that shocked me the most was when they described how he often leaned way back in his chair and acted as if he was dozing off during arguments sometimes. Like, fuck you dude.
that rin tin tin orlean piece made me wanna read the book.
― Reddit Me Bro (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 04:03 (1 year ago) Permalink
but toobin repeatedly referring to him as the right-wing's "intellectual leader" (esp compared to scalia!) was a bit much for me to take
I've only just started the article, but doesn't Toobin qualify near the beginning that it's Thomas's intellectual rigor and adherence to a very specific philosophy that makes him more of a *principled* intellect than e.g. Scalia?
― c("c) (Leee), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 04:36 (1 year ago) Permalink
the rin tin tin piece was good, but i have to admit that i was way more excited when i thought it was a piece about Tin Tin.
― IT IS EXECUTION (Z S), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 13:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
Yeah, I really want to know more about Rinty's owner. Like, to compeltely omit your wife from your memoirs? There has to be something really interesting going on underneath the surface that would be fascinating to know more about.
― jon /via/ chi 2.0, Wednesday, 31 August 2011 13:53 (1 year ago) Permalink
i just re-skimmed it to see whether it was worth posting the arm-shoulder-and-neck verses out of context - and i think it kinda isn't/doesn't do it justice - but i liked reading the dickmore poem in last week's. & am working on the clarence thomas one too, which is great through in which i got a lil fuzzy amid the second amendment stuff.
nice to hear you like the rin tin tin thing, i had flipped by it thinking it was another in their new series of generic articles on dogs.
― (Chris Isaak Cover) (schlump), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 13:55 (1 year ago) Permalink
the Thomas article was terrific, and an extension of the thesis Toobin advanced in The Nine: stop underrating this man's jurisprudence. The article was good enough to inspire a response on my part.
― a 'catch-all', almost humorous, 'Jeez' quality (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 14:12 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah, i imagine the RTT book is gonna delve a lot deeper. I could see buying that.
― Reddit Me Bro (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 17:38 (1 year ago) Permalink
the rin tin tin article was good but i already knew a lot of that stuff thanks to this novel, which includes RTT and the owner as major characters:
― congratulations (n/a), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 17:46 (1 year ago) Permalink
who put pubic hair on my jurisprudence
i think i say this every time toobins writes something, but: iirc he's writing a follow up to the nine. i forget where exactly that took us up to (def roberts iirc), so i assume it's from a different angle.
― (Chris Isaak Cover) (schlump), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 19:07 (1 year ago) Permalink
i can't stand toobin's writing style--didn't think much of the article either. couldn't decide if it wanted to be about clarence or virginia.
― Mr. Que, Wednesday, 31 August 2011 19:10 (1 year ago) Permalink
Well, Toobin, like lots of practicing lawyers, is bound by their honor code; he can't get as critical as we'd like. I accept his toothless prose cuz he's the only one offering these insights.
― a 'catch-all', almost humorous, 'Jeez' quality (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 19:12 (1 year ago) Permalink
i know a layman's opinion isn't going to transform anyone's opinion but, i picked up the nine thinking that i'd skim & then abandon it, being the fairly flighty reader that i am & having had, at the time, only a fairly cursory familiarity with/interest in the workings of the court. and i zipped through it. so just a vote for readability, here.
& i think it was purposefully about clarence and virginia and clarence-and-virginia!
― (Chris Isaak Cover) (schlump), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 19:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
it could have been me this week though--i thought the rin tin tin story was kinda boring :/
― Mr. Que, Wednesday, 31 August 2011 19:18 (1 year ago) Permalink
http://animalnewyork.com/2011/08/scientologists-defile-eustace-tilley-for-new-yorker-parody-mag/
― max, Wednesday, 31 August 2011 19:18 (1 year ago) Permalink
x-post
Ethics requirements or not, I do not buy Toobin's take that Thomas is the intellectual heavyweight that he's suggesting.
think that part that shocked me the most was when they described how he often leaned way back in his chair and acted as if he was dozing off during arguments sometimes
I have been to Supreme Court sessions twice and both times it sure looked like he was dozing.
― curmudgeon, Wednesday, 31 August 2011 19:21 (1 year ago) Permalink
insofar as originalism is a rigorous intellectual position.
― a 'catch-all', almost humorous, 'Jeez' quality (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 19:22 (1 year ago) Permalink
is the 'publication of record' a ny-er thing? it just seems like a confused nyt-zing. i know you shouldn't try to bring logic to this gunfight. maybe it's satirising the caption competition being ... shitty and slightly confused?
― (Chris Isaak Cover) (schlump), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 19:23 (1 year ago) Permalink
Ethics requirements or not, I do not buy Toobin's take that Thomas is the intellectual heavyweight that he's suggesting
yup. like citing colonial child rearing methods for that video game case is kind of insane
― Mr. Que, Wednesday, 31 August 2011 19:23 (1 year ago) Permalink
Really?
― Somewhat caliginous but not altogether inspissated (Michael White), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 19:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
I'm no lawyer but I wrote my own response to Toobin's article last week.
― a 'catch-all', almost humorous, 'Jeez' quality (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 19:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
I think the quicksand one gets in wrt originalism is that there are Framers (drafters of the law/bill/amendment/Constitution) and then there are the legislators that voted and then there are the standards (however varying) of the times in which the vote happened. It makes perfect sense to me that a Justice should wish to know the particulars of the debate leading to the vote - that is a signal reason why such debates are entered into the record - but do you look more to the debate in the Cosntitutional Convention, to the Federalist Papers, to the newspaper accounts of what went down, to the auto- and other biographies of the pppl present? How do you weigh the importance of such sources?
― Somewhat caliginous but not altogether inspissated (Michael White), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 19:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
By using your prejudices as a mediator, silly!
― a 'catch-all', almost humorous, 'Jeez' quality (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 19:36 (1 year ago) Permalink
And what weight to stare decisis? Thomas makes a compelling argument wrt Brown vs Bd of Education inasmuch as blind adherence to stare decisis can be a terrible and destructive form of tyranny and misjustice. Otoh, pretending like many of these issues haven't been covered ad nauseum and that it's not a waste of valuable time to revisit them not to mention a form of instability and a kind of un-democratic 'activism' is unbecoming to the grandeur of the last resort that is the High Court. Thomas' willingness to revisit any and all past decisions based on his own reading of history is just as activist as anything decided by 'living document' liberals.
― Somewhat caliginous but not altogether inspissated (Michael White), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 19:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
C'mon, Alfred, everyone not only has prejudices but it's the prerogative of the President to nominate candidates s/he thinks share them.
― Somewhat caliginous but not altogether inspissated (Michael White), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 19:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
You know I was being silly, right? I'm making fun of the originalist fetish for poring over the Constituton – like Prego, it's all in there.
― a 'catch-all', almost humorous, 'Jeez' quality (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 19:43 (1 year ago) Permalink
Btw, his originalism wrt to Corporations is bewildering to me since, such as they exist today, they were almost entirely unkown then, consisting of limited liability partnerships, mostly of even unlimited ones such as Lloyds.
― Somewhat caliginous but not altogether inspissated (Michael White), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 19:44 (1 year ago) Permalink
I'm making fun of the originalist fetish for poring over the Constituton
I would love to read a good study that parallels the fetish wrt the Constitution and the Bible; there is such an overlap amongst a certain kind of Protestant, esp evangelical, American and I find it both stupid and pernicious, not to mention presumptuous.
― Somewhat caliginous but not altogether inspissated (Michael White), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 19:46 (1 year ago) Permalink
His bitterness about being perceived as an unemployable token out of Yale also leaves me quizzical. Does he think his job prospects would have been any better from some other school? Does he think he'd be on the SCOTUS?!
― Somewhat caliginous but not altogether inspissated (Michael White), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 19:48 (1 year ago) Permalink
He thinks he wouldn't and he's resentful about it!
― Fig On A Plate Cart (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 19:49 (1 year ago) Permalink
That's the part that hurts my brane. He's all BTWashington (and Douglass) self-reliance, blah, blah about leaving black folk to themselves but then bitter that he was a 'token' who accepted a place at one of the best schools in the country and succeeded about as fantastically as a lawyer can (in the public sector). Is it self-loathing? I just don't get it.
― Somewhat caliginous but not altogether inspissated (Michael White), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 19:58 (1 year ago) Permalink
he is an idiot but i can't pretend to understand the feelings he has because of that, as a white btw; i just dislike that it's influenced his jurisprudence as it has. i actually came out of reading that piece liking thomas a bit more than i had before, and i think i resented toobin for that
great response, alfred
― frogsb (k3vin k.), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 20:01 (1 year ago) Permalink
In re Thomas's appearance of snoozing -- to give him the benefit of the doubt here, the fact is that by oral argument justices have already received extensive briefing on each side's arguments -- more extensive than anything you can cover in oral argument. A significant number of jurists actually consider oral argument to be either a waste of time or a kind of beneficial "show" that helps people to understand and believe in the judicial process. Obviously it's still a dick move to be so contemptuous (although he's hardly the first justice to do so, there are lots of stories about past SCOTUS justices obnoxious oral argument habits). Even proponents of oral argument admit that it might only be a chance to clarify some sticking points, and that most of the meat of the argument will come from the briefs.
― Helping 3 (Hurting 2), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 23:01 (1 year ago) Permalink
I don't mind that Thomas never speaks and looks bored during oral argument -- it's a dumb argument that liberals make when they don't want to engage the man's opinions.
― a 'catch-all', almost humorous, 'Jeez' quality (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 23:07 (1 year ago) Permalink
Obviously it's still a dick move to be so contemptuous (although he's hardly the first justice to do so, there are lots of stories about past SCOTUS justices obnoxious oral argument habits).
The justice who consistently ranks at the bottom of polls:
Taft wrote that although he considered McReynolds an "able man", he found him to be "selfish to the last degree... fuller of prejudice than any man I have ever known ... one who delights in making others uncomfortable. He has no sense of duty ... really seems to have less of a loyal spirit to the Court than anybody".[12] Addicted to vacations, in 1929, McReynolds asked Taft to announce opinions assigned to him (McReynolds), explaining that "an imperious voice has called me out of town. I don't think my sudden illness will prove fatal, but strange things some time [sic] happen around Thanksgiving".[13] Duck hunting season had opened and McReynolds was off to Maryland for some shooting. In 1925, he left so suddenly on a similar errand that he had no opportunity to notify the Chief Justice of his departure. Taft was infuriated as two important decisions he wanted to deliver were held up because McReynolds had not handed in a dissent before leaving.[14]
McReynolds would not accept "Jews, drinkers, blacks, women, smokers, married or engaged individuals as law clerks".[15] A blatant anti-Semite,[16][17] "Time [magazine] called him 'Puritanical', 'intolerably rude', 'savagely sarcastic', 'incredibly reactionary', and 'anti-Semitic'".[18][19][20] McReynolds refused to speak to Louis Brandeis, the first Jew on the Court, for three years following Brandeis's appointment and, when Brandeis retired in 1939, did not sign the customary dedicatory letter sent to justices on their retirement.[19][21] He habitually left the conference room whenever Brandeis spoke.[19] When Benjamin Cardozo's appointment was being pressed on President Herbert C. Hoover, McReynolds joined with fellow justices Butler and Van Devanter in urging the White House not to "afflict the Court with another Jew".[22] When news of Cardozo's appointment was announced, McReynolds is claimed to have said "Huh, it seems that the only way you can get on the Supreme Court these days is to be either the son of a criminal or a Jew, or both."[23][24] During Cardozo's swearing-in ceremony, McReynolds pointedly read a newspaper,[
― a 'catch-all', almost humorous, 'Jeez' quality (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 31 August 2011 23:09 (1 year ago) Permalink
I thought Toobin missed at least one chance to criticize a blatant intellectual INconsistency -- Thomas's appeal to the supposedly racist origins of restrictions on corporate speech is actually not originalist at all, and it makes about as much sense as the "Hitler was a vegetarian" smear. Maybe it was out of context; I haven't actually read Thomas's opinions in the relevant cases. No justice is 100% intellectually consistent, but Thomas does a pretty good job of appearing that way, or at least appearing to have very strong convictions that he sticks to. The power of "originalism" comes largely from its fundamentalist nature -- in this way it's a LOT like protestantism, i.e. throw out all the interpretation, go back to the text. "That's what it says in the constitution" is strong because it tends to put the other side on the defensive. A lot of liberal jurisprudence does most likely go beyond what the framers intended, even if conservative claims about original intent are nonsense. I wouldn't really want it any other way -- the framers didn't live in our time and I don't want to be governed by their dead hands.
― Helping 3 (Hurting 2), Thursday, 1 September 2011 00:21 (1 year ago) Permalink
I don't mind that he doesn't ask questions, honestly, and it has nothing to do with my politics, but I think its incredibly disrespectful for someone named to such a high position to not even bother to try and appear interested.
― jon /via/ chi 2.0, Thursday, 1 September 2011 02:14 (1 year ago) Permalink
McReynolds sounds like a douchebag of a truly entertaining variety; wish he'd been around during a 24 hour news cycle periodthat article made me wonder what it would take for someone to be forcibly removed from the supreme court. i'm not a legal wonk; has that ever happened?
― Reddit Me Bro (forksclovetofu), Thursday, 1 September 2011 02:38 (1 year ago) Permalink
Jefferson tried (and failed) impeach Samuel Chase. Gerald Ford and other Congressional leaders tried to do the same to William O. Douglas.
― a 'catch-all', almost humorous, 'Jeez' quality (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 1 September 2011 02:47 (1 year ago) Permalink
actually, Chase WAS impeached, but later acquitted. Vice President Burr presided. I would have LOVED a ring side seat.
i think only one justice, samuel chase back in the early 1800s, was ever impeached - the senate aquitted him. same process as with presidents (and per the constitution w/ all officials in high office): house brings charges of impeachment, senate conducts the trial
― frogsb (k3vin k.), Thursday, 1 September 2011 02:50 (1 year ago) Permalink
samuel chase signed the declaration of independence, damn! that's like a lifetime hood pass, you gotta really fuck up to get impeached
― frogsb (k3vin k.), Thursday, 1 September 2011 02:51 (1 year ago) Permalink
holy shit that rin tin tin article is great esp when he's describing rtt's acting in that one movie with the wolves
― Mordy, Thursday, 1 September 2011 03:00 (1 year ago) Permalink
unfortunately not on netflix
― Reddit Me Bro (forksclovetofu), Thursday, 1 September 2011 03:03 (1 year ago) Permalink
not watch instantly or to order?
― Mordy, Thursday, 1 September 2011 03:04 (1 year ago) Permalink
it looks like the whole thing is on youtube tho
ooo, link?
― Reddit Me Bro (forksclovetofu), Thursday, 1 September 2011 03:11 (1 year ago) Permalink
feel like nyer is pandering to me w/ the dog stories of late, simultaneously pandering to me and humiliating me 'we can make you read gopnik'.
― balls, Thursday, 1 September 2011 03:14 (1 year ago) Permalink
oops
Clash of the Wolves - 1..."This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by National Film Preservation Foundation.
― Mordy, Thursday, 1 September 2011 03:18 (1 year ago) Permalink
'originalism' always strikes me as more of a way for right-wingers to justify their less popular beliefs than a coherent belief system. judicial review isn't in the constitution either -- john marshall essentially invented the power for the court in marbury v. madison -- but i don't think most originalists are eager to get rid of that one.
― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Thursday, 1 September 2011 08:13 (1 year ago) Permalink
I love that Warner Bros savior and first American dog star was a German dog found in France!
I have a grudging respect for Thomas based on his politeness to other justices, albeit distant, and his silence, while troubling, is at least purportedly based on his desire to hear the attorneys w/o interruption. I too have listened to teachers w/eyes closed though in my case that may have had more to do w/fatigue than anything else.
― Kreayshawnism should be taught alongside evolushawn (Michael White), Thursday, 1 September 2011 14:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
OPTIMIFIC
― Hadrian VIII, Thursday, 1 September 2011 17:12 (1 year ago) Permalink
That's a word.
― Hadrian VIII, Thursday, 1 September 2011 17:13 (1 year ago) Permalink
Re Clarence Thomas: I feel like people are getting hung up on descriptions like "intellectual heavyweight" -- regardless of how sharp or profound his insights or analyses are, he has rigorously staked out positions and judicial philosophies that, if nothing else, seem to be influential on the current court.
― jaymc, Thursday, 1 September 2011 17:22 (1 year ago) Permalink
"I have a cunning plan"
― Kreayshawnism should be taught alongside evolushawn (Michael White), Thursday, 1 September 2011 17:22 (1 year ago) Permalink
the problem is it's not just "nothing else"; it's also a ton of what seems to me to be utterly wrongheaded thinking
― Reddit Me Bro (forksclovetofu), Thursday, 1 September 2011 17:47 (1 year ago) Permalink
Emotional baggage
― Ohkneeswakeymaleeponce (Michael White), Thursday, 1 September 2011 17:48 (1 year ago) Permalink
Well, sure, but that's why I wouldn't personally use the word "heavyweight."
― jaymc, Thursday, 1 September 2011 18:00 (1 year ago) Permalink
well, Toobin did say he's gained sixty pounds since 1991.
― Anakin Ska Walker (AKA Skarth Vader) (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 1 September 2011 18:01 (1 year ago) Permalink
dude does not seem that intellectual at all, or at least not smart enough to have any sort of self-awareness at how bizarre his behavior is (i'm talking price tag on his yale degree bizarre).
― Mr. Que, Thursday, 1 September 2011 18:04 (1 year ago) Permalink
i mean sure he's smart but he's not. . . you know
― Mr. Que, Thursday, 1 September 2011 18:05 (1 year ago) Permalink
― jaymc, Thursday, September
I do not think he has influenced anyone else on the court to a significant degree tbh. He is staking out the same well-trodden turf as numerous other conservative justices, or going even further to the right than others in separate opinions that are not signed off on by even the other conservatives on the bench.
I also think that many of the questions other justices ask in oral argument are pretty sharp, and his reasoning for not asking them is a bit lazy intellectually.
― curmudgeon, Thursday, 1 September 2011 18:07 (1 year ago) Permalink
He doesn't need to ask! He knows his own mind! He's a heavyweight!
― Anakin Ska Walker (AKA Skarth Vader) (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 1 September 2011 18:08 (1 year ago) Permalink
Kidding aside, Toobin said Thomas' influence extends more towards conservative legal scholars than, say, Scalia and Alito (who don't need suasion).
― Anakin Ska Walker (AKA Skarth Vader) (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 1 September 2011 18:09 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah, i mean Hurting was right, a lot of times they already know their positions when it gets to oral argument, plus i think Alfred mentioned there are other justices in the past who didn't ask a lot of questions
― Mr. Que, Thursday, 1 September 2011 18:09 (1 year ago) Permalink
When sharp interlocutors like Scalia and Breyer (the two yappiest guy on the bench) are at their peak, they look more interested in steering counsel away from acknowledging contradictory positions or, if they're on the other side, to trip them; they're not at all trying to convince their fellow justices.
― Anakin Ska Walker (AKA Skarth Vader) (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 1 September 2011 18:16 (1 year ago) Permalink
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/02/16/does-clarence-thomass-silence-matter/a-matter-of-personal-style
this is a pretty great little debate on the NYT website
― Mr. Que, Thursday, 1 September 2011 18:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
― curmudgeon, Thursday, 1 September 2011 18:07 (33 minutes ago) Permalink
I don't think the point is really his influence on SCOTUS (I mean, he already has a vote on that which is a lot of influence in itself) so much as influence on lower courts, legal challenges, etc. SCOTUS dissents provide a blueprint for attorneys and justices at lower levels as to how a compelling argument can be made for the minority side. They get cited often, and even though they're not supposed to be precedential, the weight that they carry influences courts.
― Helping 3 (Hurting 2), Thursday, 1 September 2011 18:44 (1 year ago) Permalink
I'm sure this'll make me sound terrible but I'm really bummed that this thread has become another discussion about politics + SCOTUS and not a long discourse on the merits of Rin Tin Tin.
― Mordy, Thursday, 1 September 2011 19:02 (1 year ago) Permalink
I can't get that Rin Tin Tin article on line! Otherwise I would talk about it!
― Fig On A Plate Cart (Alex in SF), Thursday, 1 September 2011 19:10 (1 year ago) Permalink
im bummed no one wanted to talk about the scientology new yorker i posted upthread
― max, Thursday, 1 September 2011 19:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
x-post-
Jaymc suggested that Thomas was "influential on the current court" so I was responding in disagreement to that. Jaymc may have been echoing Toobin a bit who in the article suggests that:
In several of the most important areas of constitutional law, Thomas has emerged as an intellectual leader of the Supreme Court. Since the arrival of Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., in 2005, and Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., in 2006, the Court has moved to the right when it comes to the free-speech rights of corporations, the rights of gun owners, and, potentially, the powers of the federal government; in each of these areas, the majority has followed where Thomas has been leading for a decade or more.
While it is correct that a Thomas opinion did subsequently inspire the folks who brought the Heller gun case, I still think the change at the Supreme Court largely occurred because of the change in membership (Roberts and Alito joining) and not because of anything Thomas has been saying(I don't see him as a "leader" or "leading"). I am curious if law reviews and others have researched how much Thomas opinions are getting cited by federal appeals court and district court judges. I would like to see the facts on that. Also, Thomas I believe like most conservative judges is a Federalist Society member, an organization that some law students join, so there is a general familiarity with some of the ideas Thomas is supporting within the legal community and it has been there for quite some time.
― curmudgeon, Thursday, 1 September 2011 19:31 (1 year ago) Permalink
"im bummed no one wanted to talk about the scientology new yorker i posted upthread"
The original Haggis one? Or the Scientology response article?
― Fig On A Plate Cart (Alex in SF), Thursday, 1 September 2011 19:33 (1 year ago) Permalink
I have several friends convinced a Scientologist mailman took their issue.
I liked how pithy and workmanlike the Rin Tin Tin piece was. Almost read like a digest or something. What was America's last animal star, a la RTT, Benji, Flipper, Mr. Ed, etc?
For that matter, when was the last time Orlean popped up in the New Yorker? I just read our kids her kids book, which was impressively wordy/worded.
― Josh in Chicago, Thursday, 1 September 2011 19:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
I thought the CoS actually published an entire parody issue of The New Yorker in response/revenge? Max that's what yr talking about no?
― Axolotl with an Atlatl (Jon Lewis), Thursday, 1 September 2011 19:37 (1 year ago) Permalink
the scientology response with the fake cartoon captions i posted upthread!! its hilarious!!!!
― max, Thursday, 1 September 2011 19:37 (1 year ago) Permalink
yes god i posted it on this thread until all you bozos wanted to talk about "the supreme court" which btw we have a thread for
― max, Thursday, 1 September 2011 19:38 (1 year ago) Permalink
sorry max
― Mr. Que, Thursday, 1 September 2011 19:39 (1 year ago) Permalink
thank you, apology accepted
― max, Thursday, 1 September 2011 19:46 (1 year ago) Permalink
no bozos(that's my soul up there)
― Axolotl with an Atlatl (Jon Lewis), Thursday, 1 September 2011 19:50 (1 year ago) Permalink
― brownie, Thursday, 1 September 2011 19:53 (1 year ago) Permalink
"the scientology response with the fake cartoon captions i posted upthread!! its hilarious!!!!"
But it's just hard to read scans!
― Fig On A Plate Cart (Alex in SF), Thursday, 1 September 2011 20:00 (1 year ago) Permalink
last genuine american animal star was maybe spuds mackenzie? Or Benji if you mean non-ad based?
― Reddit Me Bro (forksclovetofu), Thursday, 1 September 2011 20:30 (1 year ago) Permalink
Free Willy
― jon /via/ chi 2.0, Thursday, 1 September 2011 20:31 (1 year ago) Permalink
Socks the Cat
― Fig On A Plate Cart (Alex in SF), Thursday, 1 September 2011 20:31 (1 year ago) Permalink
For that matter, when was the last time Orlean popped up in the New Yorker?
From what I recall from Max's classic "you guys new yorker writers are fighting on twitter" thread, she's basically been working on this Rin Tin Tin book for the last few years and has some sort of cozy deal with the magazine where she only has to write like one article a year and they still keep her on staff.
― jaymc, Thursday, 1 September 2011 20:32 (1 year ago) Permalink
― Reddit Me Bro (forksclovetofu), Thursday, September 1, 2011 4:30 PM (15 minutes ago) Bookmark
Fuckin' Winston, yo.
― Axolotl with an Atlatl (Jon Lewis), Thursday, 1 September 2011 20:46 (1 year ago) Permalink
I won't apologize for being American, either (had nothing to do with that), only for shit that's worthy of an apology ffs. Man, the whiny, puerile, CO2 emitting annoyances that call themselves humans sometimes...
Nice crop, tho
― Ohkneeswakeymaleeponce (Michael White), Thursday, 1 September 2011 21:06 (1 year ago) Permalink
what about Eddie from Frasier?
― beemer, I mean BIMMER douchebag (DJP), Thursday, 1 September 2011 21:09 (1 year ago) Permalink
― Reddit Me Bro (forksclovetofu), Thursday, September 1, 2011 4:30 PM (28 minutes ago)
AIR BUD
― frogsb (k3vin k.), Thursday, 1 September 2011 21:19 (1 year ago) Permalink
i think the question is like, an animal who could carry a movie or a tv show as the lead? and not just as a one off novelty, but an animal that people paid to see the same way they go to see clooney in movies
― Reddit Me Bro (forksclovetofu), Thursday, 1 September 2011 21:21 (1 year ago) Permalink
So i'm going with benji.
― Reddit Me Bro (forksclovetofu), Thursday, 1 September 2011 21:22 (1 year ago) Permalink
there were like 5 air buds! i watched at least 2 of them!
― frogsb (k3vin k.), Thursday, 1 September 2011 21:24 (1 year ago) Permalink
channing tatum
― congratulations (n/a), Thursday, 1 September 2011 21:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
Pretty sure people are paying their monthly broadband bills almost solely to watch Winston on YouTube.
― Axolotl with an Atlatl (Jon Lewis), Thursday, 1 September 2011 21:32 (1 year ago) Permalink
Well, Toobin, like lots of practicing lawyers, is bound by their honor code; he can't get as critical as we'd like. I accept his toothless prose cuz he's the only one offering these insights.― a 'catch-all', almost humorous, 'Jeez' quality (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn)
― a 'catch-all', almost humorous, 'Jeez' quality (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn)
Didn't stop him from airing thos eunsourced comments about how Sotomayor was supposed to be stupid.
― c("c) (Leee), Friday, 2 September 2011 04:52 (1 year ago) Permalink
In fact, wasn't there an implication that she only reached her pre-SCOTUS status because of affirmative action? Maybe the source was Clarence Thomas?
― c("c) (Leee), Friday, 2 September 2011 04:55 (1 year ago) Permalink
You're thinking of Jeffrey Rosen.
― Anakin Ska Walker (AKA Skarth Vader) (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 2 September 2011 11:07 (1 year ago) Permalink
Here: http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/the-case-against-sotomayor
― Anakin Ska Walker (AKA Skarth Vader) (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 2 September 2011 11:08 (1 year ago) Permalink
Snap, I've been beefing on the wrong law-talking guy named Jeff all this time.
― c("c) (Leee), Saturday, 3 September 2011 18:51 (1 year ago) Permalink
The Parfait profile is great!
― Mordy, Saturday, 3 September 2011 21:26 (1 year ago) Permalink
Enjoyed the Louis Menand piece on Dwight MacDonald and middlebrow. He's such a sleek, wry writer - he doesn't bulldoze MacDonald with his own opinions.
― Science, you guys. Science. (DL), Wednesday, 7 September 2011 09:49 (1 year ago) Permalink
Especially love his Thornton Wilder review: "I agree with everything Mr. Wilder says, but I will fight to the death his right to say it this way."
― Science, you guys. Science. (DL), Wednesday, 7 September 2011 09:56 (1 year ago) Permalink
― Mordy, Saturday, September 3, 2011 5:26 PM (1 week ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
^^
― johnny crunch, Monday, 12 September 2011 17:06 (1 year ago) Permalink
(is "parfait" some kind of nickname for the dude, i am not that into philosophy)
― comes correct with his gameboy (k3vin k.), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 04:44 (1 year ago) Permalink
lol it was just a typo when i wrote that
― Mordy, Tuesday, 13 September 2011 12:18 (1 year ago) Permalink
(an auto-correct typo)
Good news for Nancy Franklin haters (I think she's OK but I seem to be in the minority)
http://www.observer.com/2011/09/new-yorker-television-critic-nancy-franklin-taking-a-break-from-writing/
― Science, you guys. Science. (DL), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 18:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
lol i was about to post that
― max, Tuesday, 13 September 2011 18:46 (1 year ago) Permalink
PEACE OUT NANCE
max! didn't he want that job????
― quit stalking me shithead (Mr. Que), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 18:46 (1 year ago) Permalink
gonna email remnick right now, would really appreciate a letter of recommendation que
― max, Tuesday, 13 September 2011 18:47 (1 year ago) Permalink
on it
― quit stalking me shithead (Mr. Que), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 18:48 (1 year ago) Permalink
all joking aside though dude, you should do it. get a pitch together.
― quit stalking me shithead (Mr. Que), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 18:49 (1 year ago) Permalink
i nominate the ilx tv krew to collaboratively write the new tv column for the new yorker
― Mordy, Tuesday, 13 September 2011 18:57 (1 year ago) Permalink
last couple of issues have been snoozy. did not really need 20 columns from different authors/columnists/whoever about how 9/11 impacted them. the long piece in the newest issue about the murdered pakistani journalist was pretty good but the rest was boring.
― congratulations (n/a), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 19:43 (1 year ago) Permalink
every time this thread gets bumped i hope it's for a new david grann article
― hardcore oatmeal (Jordan), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 19:46 (1 year ago) Permalink
i would welcome anyone over herfor real, i can think of at least six people on ilx that could do better
― thank got forks showed up (forksclovetofu), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 19:51 (1 year ago) Permalink
i havent gotten an issue since the friday the 2nd :(
― stalk me shithead (from the makers of tickle me elmo) (k3vin k.), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 20:20 (1 year ago) Permalink
i feel bad but i didnt even crack the cover of the 9/11 issue
― Lamp, Tuesday, 13 September 2011 20:23 (1 year ago) Permalink
i feel a lot less bad about nancy franklin not having a job as a tv critic
i skipped all the 9/11 pieces, felt ok about it
― congratulations (n/a), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 20:25 (1 year ago) Permalink
ha i liked a lot of the 9/11 pieces (zadie's, remnick's, mccann's), & that's where i'm up to in that issue, having fallen behind, etc. idk, i read those from the issue after 9/11, not so long ago (mainly for the poem on the back) & thought they were v memorable & insightful, even/particularly franzen's, someone probably people don't give so much of a shit about the political insight of, but who talked p presciently about the change in tone between the boom of the 90s & the different mood of the next decade, which, i don't know, might or might not have been excellent foresight on his part but which proved correct, iirc.
it's not so long since i re-subscribed, so i am maybe in my own ny-er golden age, but i've thought the last few issues good, the one with the neanderthal piece a pick-up from a quieter spell (the ones with dogs &c). there's always some small nick paumgarten/staffer piece i like, of the thing about the bus driver in the 9/11 one that's enough to chew on for awhile.
― and my soul said you can't go there (schlump), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 21:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
Nancy's okay.
― em vee equals pea queue (Michael White), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 21:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
I liked it (not as much as the NY magazine 9/11) but if it's worthy, it will last. Good NYer stuff generally does.
― em vee equals pea queue (Michael White), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 21:41 (1 year ago) Permalink
i am reading janet malcolm on the journalist & the murderer out of the archives at the moment, it is great.
― and my soul said you can't go there (schlump), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 21:47 (1 year ago) Permalink
did anyone make a thread to compile the worst/best/o_O 9/11 10 year anniversary pieces?
i thought abt it but then decided not to mostly cause i didn't want to spend an afternoon looking for one worthy of an opening post :(
― (gr8080), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 21:59 (1 year ago) Permalink
Not to mention the fact that we were fcuking inundated w/9-11 anniversary pieces...
― em vee equals pea queue (Michael White), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 22:12 (1 year ago) Permalink
janet malcolm is a national treasure, love her so much.
― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 22:38 (1 year ago) Permalink
this is the first thing i've read by her, stirred by her paris review interview cropping up elsewhere. i have been meaning to for awhile, half on the rep of the journalism piece, half thinking that i could probably manage another cold-as-ice dissection journalist in the mould of didion. really good so far. had wondered whether to pick up the iirc extended but still short journalist/murderer book? let me know if i am making a mistake & should switch.
― and my soul said you can't go there (schlump), Tuesday, 13 September 2011 22:44 (1 year ago) Permalink
Book is great but I don't know how much it adds to the New Yorker piece so not sure if it's worth the extra $$$.
― Science, you guys. Science. (DL), Wednesday, 14 September 2011 08:44 (1 year ago) Permalink
thanks; will maybe slip onto something else of hers (the psychotherapy one?) after.
― and my soul said you can't go there (schlump), Wednesday, 14 September 2011 09:09 (1 year ago) Permalink
I'd check out the book version, actually -- it's considerably longer, but still short (and not at all padded out).
If you want a detour from the investigative stuff, her book on Gertrude Stein and Alice Toklas is also pretty terrific and (just about) doesn't really require any prior Stein reading.
― Chuck_Tatum, Wednesday, 14 September 2011 11:16 (1 year ago) Permalink
― Science, you guys. Science. (DL), Wednesday, September 7, 2011 5:49 AM (1 week ago)
^^yeah this is excellent!
― stalk me shithead (from the makers of tickle me elmo) (k3vin k.), Thursday, 15 September 2011 00:19 (1 year ago) Permalink
wait you like louis menand, kevin? this does ... does not sync with what i know about you.
― remy bean, Thursday, 15 September 2011 00:23 (1 year ago) Permalink
this sentence seems posed to give you hives:
But judging from my recent conversations with a handful of literary and intellectual types -- the heirs, you could say, to the Macdonald/Greenberg tradition -- we live, today, in a pleasingly hierarchy-free, almost utopian cultural world. Most people I know share my disparate taste, enjoying "South Park" alongside Franz Schubert, the crisply plotted novels of James M. Cain as well as the philosophically searching films of Antonioni.
― remy bean, Thursday, 15 September 2011 00:24 (1 year ago) Permalink
packer's 'state of the nation after 9/11' was suitably despairing (and a nice juxtaposition to gopnik's 'what me decline' piece) but managed to conveniently avoid a couple things:
a) despite congenially tearing walter russell mead a new one, did not mention that he himself supported the iraq war
b) no doubt beyond the article's scope, but maybe make a pass at why surry county, north carolina would continue to vote against its own economic interests
― mookieproof, Thursday, 15 September 2011 00:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
i never really cared for menand. macdonald was good though.
― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Thursday, 15 September 2011 00:30 (1 year ago) Permalink
The Metaphysical Club is as good as searching "popular" criticism gets.
― Anakin Ska Walker (AKA Skarth Vader) (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 15 September 2011 00:31 (1 year ago) Permalink
I quite liked Packer's essay though but then again I often do.
the menand piece that sticks in my mind is the one about orwell, which was headlined something like 'honest, decent, wrong.' it sticks in my mind mainly because menand never seemed to get around to explaining precisely how orwell was 'wrong,' other than the fact that the world today is not literally the world of '1984.'
― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Thursday, 15 September 2011 00:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
The best Orwell essay I've read recently is James Wood's, also published in the NY, and in the 2010 Best series.
― Anakin Ska Walker (AKA Skarth Vader) (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 15 September 2011 00:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
i remember the menand orwell piece! we never got stuck with equal and opposed totalitarian empires, i think was the main point.
― anorange (abanana), Thursday, 15 September 2011 02:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
I just started Malcolm's Two Lives. I love her meta-biographies, especially the Chekhov one.
― Anakin Ska Walker (AKA Skarth Vader) (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Saturday, 17 September 2011 13:55 (1 year ago) Permalink
Couple from the vault that I read and liked this week: Ben McGrath on Tim WakefieldSusan Orlean on a lost doggy
― Leee, Lord of Wtfomgham (Leee), Saturday, 17 September 2011 19:20 (1 year ago) Permalink
menand follows up his macdonald piece with another good one on ts eliot
― k3vin k., Tuesday, 20 September 2011 22:57 (1 year ago) Permalink
btw remy i never figured out what i was supposed to dislike about that sentence you reprinted last week
Eliot is as much a part of my own formation as a writer and person as he was for his immediate successors -- I too experienced a thrilled shock unlike anything I've experienced before or since when in high school I played hooky from homework and read "The Waste Land" with Cliff Notes handy. It's hard to write something fresh about him. Menand's essay isn't fresh so much as a superb attempt to integrate what he's learned with the received wisdom.
― Anakin Ska Walker (AKA Skarth Vader) (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 20 September 2011 23:18 (1 year ago) Permalink
he also reminds us of how much the English curriculum is indebted to the New Critics; certainly when I was in college the Close Reading of the Text was still rather sacred.
― Anakin Ska Walker (AKA Skarth Vader) (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 20 September 2011 23:20 (1 year ago) Permalink
what is that in response to, alfred?
― Whiney G. Blutfarten (dayo), Tuesday, 20 September 2011 23:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
― k3vin k., Tuesday, September 20, 2011
― Anakin Ska Walker (AKA Skarth Vader) (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 20 September 2011 23:55 (1 year ago) Permalink
I need to splunk down for a subscript
― Whiney G. Blutfarten (dayo), Wednesday, 21 September 2011 00:15 (1 year ago) Permalink
newest issue is really arts-focused, with pieces touching on jean-paul gaultier, alexander mcqueen, steven sondheim and the gershwins, and some famous photographer, but the best article in the whole issue is the one about a pharmacist working in a remote area of colorado
― congratulations (n/a), Wednesday, 21 September 2011 21:49 (1 year ago) Permalink
― Mordy, Wednesday, 21 September 2011 22:19 (1 year ago) Permalink
ha i'll read that one for sure then
― k3vin k., Thursday, 22 September 2011 00:09 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah that article's great. was trying to remember if the last time, if ever, the nyer did a profile on a random guy like like that.
― Moreno, Thursday, 22 September 2011 01:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
but the best article in the whole issue is the one about a pharmacist working in a remote area of colorado
this was really fantastic
― sleep \lim: $\lim_(x\to\infty) over (Lamp), Thursday, 22 September 2011 05:20 (1 year ago) Permalink
god, that old guy w/ the unsent letters asking friends to introduce him to 'men who are like him' just killed me
― iatee, Friday, 23 September 2011 17:00 (1 year ago) Permalink
i want to go to nucla
― mizzell, Friday, 23 September 2011 22:33 (1 year ago) Permalink
lol @ this "dude court" cartoon
― k3vin k., Saturday, 24 September 2011 05:04 (1 year ago) Permalink
― k3vin k., Saturday, 24 September 2011 05:07 (1 year ago) Permalink
that's pretty good
yet i hate to see such a promising young man ruined by appreciation of nyer cartoons at such an early age
― mookieproof, Saturday, 24 September 2011 05:14 (1 year ago) Permalink
Yeah, most I thought about TOILETS since I was a lower classman.
― Leee, Lord of Wtfomgham (Leee), Saturday, 24 September 2011 17:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
mailing in a sub renewal today after about five years off
― Antonio Carlos Broheem (WmC), Saturday, 24 September 2011 17:30 (1 year ago) Permalink
btw, have decided that Gopnik is the all-purpose Gladwell: glib, reductionist.
― Leee, Lord of Wtfomgham (Leee), Saturday, 24 September 2011 17:38 (1 year ago) Permalink
Like everyone else, I have a huge stack of back issues to complete, so I was thankful for the 9/11 issue, which I just couldn't read. Though of course, if anyone is allowed to put out a 9/11 issue, it might as well be the New Yorker. I want to say I did read the Gopnik piece, though, which I found very erudite and perceptive.
― Josh in Chicago, Saturday, 24 September 2011 20:03 (1 year ago) Permalink
my 9/11 issue was delivered a week late, which was just as well
― k3vin k., Saturday, 24 September 2011 20:32 (1 year ago) Permalink
I want to say I did read the Gopnik piece, though, which I found very erudite and perceptive.
Actually, that's the article that's soured me on him; it felt very superficial.
― Leee, Lord of Wtfomgham (Leee), Saturday, 24 September 2011 21:14 (1 year ago) Permalink
Hmm, I can see that criticism. I just think he juggled lots of ideas well, even if they were superficial ideas.
― Josh in Chicago, Saturday, 24 September 2011 23:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
And, yeah, my 9/11 issue was a week late, too.
Were those late issues all about 7 WTC or what.
― Pleasant Plains, Saturday, 24 September 2011 23:52 (1 year ago) Permalink
― sleep \lim: $\lim_(x\to\infty) over (Lamp), Thursday, 22 September 2011 06:20 (3 days ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
― iatee, Friday, 23 September 2011 18:00 (2 days ago) Bookmark
god this was wonderful. i started off reading it & thinking it'd just be great like trillin's shopsin's profile, but it was so stunning, picking up the rest of the town & the few repeat themes that the guy wouldn't necessarily unify. stuff like 'it is an hour and a half from the nearest traffic light' was excellent.
― 347.239.9791 stench hotline (schlump), Sunday, 25 September 2011 21:36 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah i loved that article, and that guy, predictably
― k3vin k., Sunday, 25 September 2011 21:47 (1 year ago) Permalink
Story had this really pronounced gay subtext - his gay brother, his enthusiastic treatment of the 4 transgendered patients, the mysterious drifter at the end who also turns out to be gay. Not sure what to make of that, but it was a fascinating and beautifully written piece. Could be adapted into a TV show or movie.
― Josh in Chicago, Monday, 26 September 2011 00:53 (1 year ago) Permalink
I don't think there has to be anything made of that beyond 'sometimes people are gay, also in rural areas'
― iatee, Monday, 26 September 2011 00:54 (1 year ago) Permalink
that janet macolm thing on the photographer didnt seem v new yorkerish, the way she put herself in the article
― just sayin, Wednesday, 28 September 2011 09:12 (1 year ago) Permalink
i think it was more than this, because it was specifically exploring the fact that the people who are gay, in rural areas, are in some cases dealing with having to hide this from family or society or themselves, or whatever else. & the fact that this elicited the guy's compassion, & figured in the changing narrative of his life, having previously been cagey around his brother, made it a part of the portrait of him, too.
― mr. vertical (schlump), Wednesday, 28 September 2011 09:54 (1 year ago) Permalink
also it is one of the articles you can just read on the website in case anyone wants to send it around to friends, etc. it was really stunning.
half way through the malcolm/struth thing - narrator hasn't become intrusive yet, it is quite a 'bold', 'personal' profile of everyone involved though i think.
― mr. vertical (schlump), Wednesday, 28 September 2011 09:56 (1 year ago) Permalink
i wouldnt say she's necessarily intrusive, its just that usually they seem to sort of go out of their way to not personalise the profiles?
― just sayin, Wednesday, 28 September 2011 10:09 (1 year ago) Permalink
just hunted down the pharmacist article - it's here http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/09/26/110926fa_fact_hessler?currentPage=all and it's really beautiful
― civilisation and its discotheques (c sharp major), Wednesday, 28 September 2011 10:18 (1 year ago) Permalink
when i think of the platonic new yorker article i think of at least one paragraph where the writer describes driving through the small town, stopping at the local pharmacy/gas station/petting zoo and having an off-the-cuff conversation with the pharmacist/gas station attendant/goat wrangler about the topic of the article
― Mordy, Wednesday, 28 September 2011 12:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
Haven't read that pharmacist article yet, but its author just won a MacArthur "genius grant."
― jaymc, Wednesday, 28 September 2011 13:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
aye, & is about to move to egypt to cover it for the NYer for the next few years. going to read his 'personal history' about returning to the states from china, in the archives, as soon as i can squeeze it in between other articles.
― mr. vertical (schlump), Wednesday, 28 September 2011 13:46 (1 year ago) Permalink
oh i remember that personal history thing, it was pretty good iirc
― congratulations (n/a), Wednesday, 28 September 2011 14:20 (1 year ago) Permalink
Does anyone else subscribe to the NY on their Kindle (or other device)? I've found it easier to keep up, week by week, reading on the device.
― President Keyes, Friday, 30 September 2011 00:47 (1 year ago) Permalink
That's how I get it. Comes in so much earlier than the print version.
― congratulations (n/a), Friday, 30 September 2011 01:01 (1 year ago) Permalink
Wow, I had totally forgotten about that move from China to Colorado Personal History and didn't make the connection. I remember it being pretty entertaining. Lots of stuff involving shipping all his belongings with no way to track their arrival time, the realities of getting his stuff from a boat to his rural home, that kind of thing.
― Josh in Chicago, Friday, 30 September 2011 01:19 (1 year ago) Permalink
Theo Jansen, Strandbeest creator: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/09/05/110905fa_fact_frazier
― Come On My Teselecta (Leee), Monday, 3 October 2011 05:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
Ikea article is pretty interesting
― Disraeli Geirs (Hurting 2), Monday, 3 October 2011 05:39 (1 year ago) Permalink
― dayo, Thursday, 6 October 2011 20:57 (1 year ago) Permalink
most of the IKEA article was good but the fretting about "our generation's furniture is so disposable, our parents' generation's furniture was solid and long-lasting, what does this say about us?" was, not really dumb i guess, but pretty inessential in contrast with nazi connections and corporate brainwashing
― congratulations (n/a), Thursday, 6 October 2011 20:58 (1 year ago) Permalink
is ikea furniture really not long-lasting? igi if you have to move it, but some of the ikea stuff in our house has lasted for a decade at least
― dayo, Thursday, 6 October 2011 21:00 (1 year ago) Permalink
it's probably more the fact that it wasn't hewn from a trunk of solid oak by a bronzed carpenter using a lathe brought over from england by his forefather on the mayflower
― dayo, Thursday, 6 October 2011 21:01 (1 year ago) Permalink
did anyone read the piece on taylor swift? worth getting the magazine just for that?
― markers, Thursday, 6 October 2011 21:01 (1 year ago) Permalink
i read it. i don't really know much or care much about her, the whole point of it was basically "she's nice."
― congratulations (n/a), Thursday, 6 October 2011 21:05 (1 year ago) Permalink
lol ok thanking u
― markers, Thursday, 6 October 2011 21:39 (1 year ago) Permalink
i read it today. i learned that her superfans are called "swfties" & she likes stamps & writes a lot of thank you notes, like to tech & radio guys, even. but it was cute idk. lizzie widdicombe isnt much of a journalist
― johnny crunch, Thursday, 6 October 2011 22:44 (1 year ago) Permalink
A friend of mine told me this story about about how she was stopped -- almost vaguely accosted -- by a french guy on a subway, while she was reading the New Yorker, and he said something to the effect of -- "This magazine, do you feel that it stands for anything? I have read it and I do not think so."
When articles like that are printed I feel like he's right.
― Disraeli Geirs (Hurting 2), Thursday, 6 October 2011 23:23 (1 year ago) Permalink
"This magazine, do you feel that it stands for anything? I have read it and I do not think so."
― lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 6 October 2011 23:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
pretty sure that was just someone doing an impression of a french guy
― honest weights, square dealings (schlump), Thursday, 6 October 2011 23:33 (1 year ago) Permalink
lolll
― k3vin k., Thursday, 6 October 2011 23:54 (1 year ago) Permalink
Do we just expect excellence from Atul Gawande and that's why no one has linked to his newest one (on how doctors and other professions can benefit from coaches) yet? He totally shows how you're supposed to challenge conventional wisdom.
― Come On My Teselecta (Leee), Sunday, 9 October 2011 22:54 (1 year ago) Permalink
that 1 was alright, kind of a boring issue imo. at least in terms of my tastes in topics. the fiction was hilarious tho
― u0sd0ןɟ (flopson), Monday, 10 October 2011 02:50 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah btw i almost always skip the fiction & would appreciate fiction alerts itt too
― k3vin k., Monday, 10 October 2011 14:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
otm ^^, samei kinda liked the guy's story about tracking down his iphone? like the writing was obv p cloying but it, & its wau-@-technology 70 yr old vantage point, was quite endearing i thought.
― honest weights, square dealings (schlump), Monday, 10 October 2011 14:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
the patti smith was very true tales of american life/npr
Anyone read James Wood's masterly review of Alan Hollinghurst's The Stranger's Child? He's one of the few critics who can explain how good prose works. In addition, it's one of the most judicious mixed reviews I've read in months.
― lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 14 October 2011 17:36 (1 year ago) Permalink
Ppl on this thread will be pleased by the news that Emily Nussbaum replaces Nancy Franklin as the TV critic.
― Axolotl with an Atlatl (Jon Lewis), Friday, 14 October 2011 17:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
too bad wood's prose never reaches such heights
― 2001: a based godyssey (dayo), Friday, 14 October 2011 17:52 (1 year ago) Permalink
i might read that since i won't read the novel & so have no fear of spoilers, etc.
am still working through whichever week's issue it was that had the big NC/pope thing. couldn't believe some of the examples of attack ads - the guy who they drew a sombrero on & wrote 'mucho taxo adios senor' next to.
― interspecies smalltalk (schlump), Friday, 14 October 2011 20:50 (1 year ago) Permalink
nussbaum is a much better choice than franklin but cmon yall i wouldve KILLED IT
― max, Friday, 14 October 2011 20:52 (1 year ago) Permalink
u can't write about downton abbey every week max
― mookieproof, Friday, 14 October 2011 21:16 (1 year ago) Permalink
Wood's way of pinpointing good sentences and bad ones, and explaining how they work, is sublime.
Loved the Andrew Stanton profile - much more revealing than Anthony Lane's Pixar piece.
― Science, you guys. Science. (DL), Friday, 14 October 2011 22:07 (1 year ago) Permalink
― max, Friday, October 14, 2011 10:52 AM (1 hour ago)
can you please start sending them stuff on spec every week?
― ⚓ (gr8080), Friday, 14 October 2011 22:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
haha my mom is always like 'you're a good writer! why don't you submit something to the new yorker?'
i don't think it works that way mom . . . unless you're david brooks i guess
― mookieproof, Friday, 14 October 2011 23:22 (1 year ago) Permalink
<3 parents
― 2001: a based godyssey (dayo), Friday, 14 October 2011 23:23 (1 year ago) Permalink
"you always fix our computer! why don't you become a computer scientist?"
Jeff Foxworthy did the same routine, but when I was doing public announcements for the portrait studios inside a Coon Rapids Wal-Mart, my mother suggested that maybe some hotshot radio executive would hear me over the speakers and hire me away on the spot.
― Pleasant Plains, Friday, 14 October 2011 23:30 (1 year ago) Permalink
Couple not so current ones:Susan Orlean on Jean-Paul Gaultier (accompanying chat is pretty cute too)Dyson Vacuums (paywall; 2011/09/20)
― foxes freud (Leee), Friday, 21 October 2011 04:31 (1 year ago) Permalink
whoa this article on bitcoin is pretty fascinating, much of this had managed to pass under my radar
― MODS DID 10/11 (k3vin k.), Sunday, 23 October 2011 19:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
otm!!
― foxes freud (Leee), Sunday, 23 October 2011 23:21 (1 year ago) Permalink
Its funny how that came out, I was enthralled by it, and bitcoin immediately lost 90% of its value
― Brakhage, Sunday, 23 October 2011 23:39 (1 year ago) Permalink
link?
― iatee, Sunday, 23 October 2011 23:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
The <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/10/10/111010fa_fact_davis";>bitcoin NYer article</a> is behind paywall for the Oct 10 issue, the <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/10/bitcoin-implodes-down-more-than-90-percent-from-june-peak.ars";>drop in value</a> is all over the place <a href="http://www.google.com/search?rls=en&q=bitcoin+implodes";>on the internet</a>
I'm hoping the new Stuxnet variant is some super villain trying to corner the remaining bitcoins
― Brakhage, Sunday, 23 October 2011 23:43 (1 year ago) Permalink
guuuuh
The bitcoin NYer article is behind paywall for the Oct 10 issue, the drop in value is all over the place on the internet
― Brakhage, Sunday, 23 October 2011 23:44 (1 year ago) Permalink
aw darn kinda sad to hear that. otoh the whole thing kind of sets off a lot of libertarian alarms in my head but still
― MODS DID 10/11 (k3vin k.), Monday, 24 October 2011 01:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
otoh the whole thing kind of sets off a lot of libertarian alarms in my head but still
Yeah, in the article, the people who are ideologically all over it are the ones who are against fiat money, but, like, from my layperson's understanding, bitcoin doesn't have a fixed value/isn't backed by Ron Paul bucks??
― foxes freud (Leee), Monday, 24 October 2011 01:33 (1 year ago) Permalink
bitcoins are like, if money was backed by gold but we could magically conjure up a pound of gold every few days or so
― dayo, Monday, 24 October 2011 01:55 (1 year ago) Permalink
Enjoyed thing about Lexicon, the naming agency, although a lot of the 'insights' seemed kind of obvious and intuitive.
― pass the duchy pon the left hand side (musical duke) (Hurting 2), Monday, 24 October 2011 04:30 (1 year ago) Permalink
some1 transcribe the whole article itt
― J0rdan S., Monday, 24 October 2011 04:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
which one, bitcoin?
― mookieproof, Monday, 24 October 2011 04:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
ya
― J0rdan S., Monday, 24 October 2011 04:36 (1 year ago) Permalink
bitcoin dot pdf
― mookieproof, Monday, 24 October 2011 04:44 (1 year ago) Permalink
o wow
― J0rdan S., Monday, 24 October 2011 04:46 (1 year ago) Permalink
It took me a good two or three weeks to notice that my subscription had run out. Tsk on you, New Yorker, for being off your game!
― Josh in Chicago, Monday, 24 October 2011 17:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
not new yorker but for fans of the grann article about the guy who was executed for arson in texas
http://discovermagazine.com/2011/nov/12-spark-truth-science-bring-justice-arson-trials
― dayo, Tuesday, 25 October 2011 22:04 (1 year ago) Permalink
there was an amazing frontline or some pbs show ep years ago abt arson investigation, i wont say more for fear of spoiling it but its truly amazing
― ice cr?m, Wednesday, 26 October 2011 03:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
not the recent one abt the guy
― ice cr?m, Wednesday, 26 October 2011 03:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
ah it was actually nova
― ice cr?m, Wednesday, 26 October 2011 03:32 (1 year ago) Permalink
In the vein of Midwest pharmacist, here's an article about an Indian cow broker (paywall).
― hounds heidegger (Leee), Wednesday, 26 October 2011 03:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
NOVA: Hunt For the Serial Arsonist << recommend
― ice cr?m, Wednesday, 26 October 2011 03:37 (1 year ago) Permalink
― hounds heidegger (Leee), Tuesday, October 25, 2011 11:34 PM (7 minutes ago)
just started reading this actually, seems promising
― MODS DID 10/11 (k3vin k.), Wednesday, 26 October 2011 03:43 (1 year ago) Permalink
i liked that one - the part where his family admits they partially blame his line of work for his son's death was kind of heartbreaking
you seem to be a few weeks behind too, what's your excuse?
― MODS DID 10/11 (k3vin k.), Wednesday, 26 October 2011 04:20 (1 year ago) Permalink
my issues have been arriving hella late
― mookieproof, Wednesday, 26 October 2011 04:21 (1 year ago) Permalink
my excuse is i lost my mail key and haven't seen the inside of my mailbox in 2.5 weeks
― MODS DID 10/11 (k3vin k.), Wednesday, 26 October 2011 04:23 (1 year ago) Permalink
ipad, bro
― loads of personality, loved to chase chickens (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 26 October 2011 05:03 (1 year ago) Permalink
Some choice: do I want to pay a $400 premium to make sure I read each issue of my $40 New Yorker subscription on time?
― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 26 October 2011 12:05 (1 year ago) Permalink
yes, it is a shame there's so little you can do with an ipad except read the new yorker, but what can you do?
― loads of personality, loved to chase chickens (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 26 October 2011 12:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
in any case, my point is that it tends to release on the pad the day before they distribute by mail.
― loads of personality, loved to chase chickens (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 26 October 2011 12:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
forks takes time out from polishing his monocle and lighting cigars with hundred dollar bills to frown grumpily at those of us unable to drop $400+ on an iPad
― jon /via/ chi 2.0, Wednesday, 26 October 2011 13:21 (1 year ago) Permalink
There's a lot that you can do on your iPad ... that I can also do on my phone ... that I can also do on my computer ...
― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 26 October 2011 13:59 (1 year ago) Permalink
or you can get a kindle for $100 and pay $3 a month and get the issues the day before they mail also
― congratulations (n/a), Wednesday, 26 October 2011 14:38 (1 year ago) Permalink
That is so cart before the horse to me.
― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 26 October 2011 14:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
Or you could already own a Nook and be kinda fucked on that front, so continue reading your hard copies as they come in.
― jon /via/ chi 2.0, Wednesday, 26 October 2011 14:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
So for the cost of approximately a three year subscription to the New Yorker, you can get it a few days early?
― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 26 October 2011 14:41 (1 year ago) Permalink
FYI you're only screwed if you have a Nook Color; the New Yorker is available for the original Nook.
― he carried yellow flowers (DJP), Wednesday, 26 October 2011 14:44 (1 year ago) Permalink
I do have the Color so, yeah, still screwed. I do sometimes regret the Nook because of missing out on a few things like this, but otoh I love it because it worked out perfectly for me by being sort of a midpoint between a reader and a table - i.e. I can still access the internet and use apps with it.
― jon /via/ chi 2.0, Wednesday, 26 October 2011 14:47 (1 year ago) Permalink
or you can go work in the printing press where they actually MAKE the new yorker and read it really quickly as it comes down the line
this option actually EARNS you money
― the jazz zinger (s1ocki), Wednesday, 26 October 2011 14:50 (1 year ago) Permalink
aw nook color reminds me of game boy color /lolyoung
― MODS DID 10/11 (k3vin k.), Wednesday, 26 October 2011 14:58 (1 year ago) Permalink
I had a game boy color and a game boy pocket and a game boy advance and a DS boy nintendo really got a lot of money out of me
― dayo, Wednesday, 26 October 2011 15:04 (1 year ago) Permalink
I only ever had the original Game Boy. Played the shit out of some Mario Golf on that thing.
― jon /via/ chi 2.0, Wednesday, 26 October 2011 15:08 (1 year ago) Permalink
my ipad screen is all cracked up top from where i dropped iti
am
the
ninety
nine
percent
― loads of personality, loved to chase chickens (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 26 October 2011 22:58 (1 year ago) Permalink
anybody read that (long) piece on art pope and the influence of money in north carolina state politics?
― MODS DID 10/11 (k3vin k.), Wednesday, 26 October 2011 23:50 (1 year ago) Permalink
i think i almost finished it and then got distracted. iirc it was v depressing? i maybe mentioned it upthread bc i needed to repeat the line about "mucho taxo adios senor!" that was up on a shopped poster of a dem opponent.
― the contemporary jazz guitar gettin mad liberated (schlump), Wednesday, 26 October 2011 23:55 (1 year ago) Permalink
i read it -- was kind of curious what aero thought of it
fucken tar heels amirite
― mookieproof, Thursday, 27 October 2011 00:09 (1 year ago) Permalink
noticed him popping up in the news a bunch after that. was very happy to see that most of the wake county school board members he was backing were recently voted out:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-carmichael/populist-backlash-crushes_b_1006307.html
― Moreno, Thursday, 27 October 2011 00:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
Most of my (dwindling) free time reading has been focused (or focussed, going by TNY's style guide (blah)) on catching up on ASOIAF, which means I'm piling up my issues in my room. Also, I think my delivery is now a full week behind -- the one with the Wall Street fat cats occupying Wall Street on the cover only arrived on Monday.
Yeah, finished that last week (hah), imo vital companion piece to her article on the Kochs. But yeah, maddeningly depressing -- Pope is supposed to be wonkish and well-lettered, yet he can't resist throwing around indisputable falsities and fallacies (lol Republicans).
― hounds heidegger (Leee), Thursday, 27 October 2011 16:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
favorite part of the art pope one was where he's saying he's not an heir, he just happened to buy out his dad's equity at the company after working there for his whole adult life. clearly something anybody who was as smart and hard working as he was could have done.
― circles, Thursday, 27 October 2011 21:49 (1 year ago) Permalink
i thought the short lethem piece this week was really strong
― Mordy, Thursday, 3 November 2011 03:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
some historical dynamite in this planned parenthood piece
did anyone read the mindy kaling thing serialised a few weeks back, btw? i'm kinda behind & need an endorsement before tracking down & uncrumpling whichever issue it was in
― Abattoir Educator / Slaughterman (schlump), Monday, 7 November 2011 14:32 (1 year ago) Permalink
it was a shouts and murmurs, right? i remember enjoying it but it was pretty light and i don't remember anything about it today
― Mordy, Monday, 7 November 2011 14:43 (1 year ago) Permalink
idk, i just saw her on the daily show & realised i'd missed an issue. i'm really behind though generally, i shamefully couldn't motivate myself to engage with the money issue, which is deeply shallow of me & apparently meant i missed out on that article about maybe an indian guy, i forget
― Abattoir Educator / Slaughterman (schlump), Monday, 7 November 2011 14:50 (1 year ago) Permalink
the money issue was great! from it i'd recommend, if memory serves, the article you mentioned, the bitcoin piece, the piece on keynes, and (i think) atul gawande's piece on coaching
― MODS DID 10/11 (k3vin k.), Monday, 7 November 2011 16:00 (1 year ago) Permalink
ty man. am going away for a couple of weeks & will pack a couple to catchup, will def make a concerted effort with it. the bitcoin one sounded amusing.
the pp article i mentioned before is good, btw; better historically then on the present (which it depicts as a kind of doubly partisan gridlock, which i don't think is totally accurate). i kinda "met" c3cil3 r1chard5 once, she talked to a bunch of us in ny, she was v inspirational
― Abattoir Educator / Slaughterman (schlump), Monday, 7 November 2011 16:08 (1 year ago) Permalink
the bitcoin piece was really really good
― Mordy, Monday, 7 November 2011 16:22 (1 year ago) Permalink
kaling is super light just in general. her ny piece was wafer thin.i'll also cosign on the money issue, it was fucking great front to back. The cattle broker! Bitcoin! The Carolinian powerbroker!
― herbie mann on some gully shit (forksclovetofu), Monday, 7 November 2011 16:30 (1 year ago) Permalink
well boy is my face red
― Abattoir Educator / Slaughterman (schlump), Monday, 7 November 2011 16:31 (1 year ago) Permalink
Loving Elif Batuman's article on Turkey; it's all over the place but I love her storytelling.
― daschund derrida (Leee), Monday, 7 November 2011 19:25 (1 year ago) Permalink
― MODS DID 10/11 (k3vin k.), Monday, November 7, 2011 11:00 AM (9 hours ago)
and duh didn't this one have the art pope story too?!
― MODS DID 10/11 (k3vin k.), Tuesday, 8 November 2011 01:13 (1 year ago) Permalink
still have not seen the inside of my mailbox in 3 weeks btw
fwiw, the money issue also had the taylor swift piece!
― johnny crunch, Tuesday, 8 November 2011 14:07 (1 year ago) Permalink
ha, I must've put a dent in it if it had the Art Pope & Taylor Swift, both of which I read. I've straightened out some crumpled issues I was carrying around for awhile, anyway - kinda ashamed I haven't read the recent Batuman piece - so am all set.
― Abattoir Educator / Slaughterman (schlump), Tuesday, 8 November 2011 14:10 (1 year ago) Permalink
also nb taylor swift's mom is weird
kinda makes me mad to think how much gladwell got paid to write that jobs piece
― ASPIE Rocky (dayo), Wednesday, 9 November 2011 03:18 (1 year ago) Permalink
i thought the mindy kaling excerpt was about exactly as funny as youd expect it to be which is at least 100x funnier than almost anything else printed in shouts & murmurs this year
― so solaris (Lamp), Wednesday, 9 November 2011 03:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
No wai I read something really funny in shouts n murmurs a while ago, don't recall what it was
― ice cr?m, Wednesday, 9 November 2011 03:36 (1 year ago) Permalink
im p sure that was my twitter you reading, you were confused because my profile pic is me wearing a monocle
― so solaris (Lamp), Wednesday, 9 November 2011 03:38 (1 year ago) Permalink
Oh right my b
― ice cr?m, Wednesday, 9 November 2011 03:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
shouts + murmurs more like hooch + turner amirite?
― Mordy, Wednesday, 9 November 2011 03:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
idrk what that means
― Mordy, Wednesday, 9 November 2011 03:43 (1 year ago) Permalink
dirk, what that means?
― MODS DID 10/11 (k3vin k.), Wednesday, 9 November 2011 03:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
― Mordy, Wednesday, 9 November 2011 03:47 (1 year ago) Permalink
The New Dirker
― herbie mann on some gully shit (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 9 November 2011 07:19 (1 year ago) Permalink
mindy kaling new yorker piece ruled fuiud
― horseshoe, Wednesday, 9 November 2011 07:21 (1 year ago) Permalink
why are people pretending mindy kaling is funny is what i wanna knowshe's cute and seems nice but she's really not funny except in a loose kind of hipster nora ephron way which is nagl imo
― herbie mann on some gully shit (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 9 November 2011 07:24 (1 year ago) Permalink
i am seriously going to kill you
― horseshoe, Wednesday, 9 November 2011 07:25 (1 year ago) Permalink
come at me bro
― herbie mann on some gully shit (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 9 November 2011 07:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
horseshoe you are arguing with someone who is well known to have the worst sense of humor on this board
― max, Wednesday, 9 November 2011 12:55 (1 year ago) Permalink
Truly, my lack of respect for a writer on that effervescent gem that is the post carrell office speaks volumes to my deeply flawed humo(u)r
― herbie mann on some gully shit (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 9 November 2011 13:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
nov. 14 issue has two really good long articles (planned parenthood + murder/DNA/court martial stories) but the sasha frere-jones piece on the fall was annoyingly simplified/condescending. i know he has to write to his audience but he keeps talking about how mark e. smith writes nonsense lyrics - even if i don't know what he's singing about, i'd never assume it's intended to be nonsense.
― congratulations (n/a), Wednesday, 9 November 2011 13:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
I'm always impressed when people decipher them. It's all got meaning, even if I'm not smart enough to parse it.
And the Mindy piece was very funny.
― dan selzer, Wednesday, 9 November 2011 13:54 (1 year ago) Permalink
food issue!
― just sayin, Monday, 14 November 2011 13:43 (1 year ago) Permalink
The Mike Bloomberg snowstorm diary was pretty funny:
http://www.newyorker.com/humor/2011/01/17/110117sh_shouts_kenney?currentPage=all
― o. nate, Monday, 14 November 2011 21:21 (1 year ago) Permalink
food issue not looking terribly appetizing (...) - i really want to read last week's issue once (1) my mail situation is sorted out and (2) my tests are over
― MODS DID 10/11 (k3vin k.), Monday, 14 November 2011 21:37 (1 year ago) Permalink
i'm not done with the food issue yet but so far the article about apples was kinda interesting and i'm a sucker for calvin trillin pieces, even when they're totally unfocused. the ones about trying to recreate medieval meals and foraging were pretty dumb.
― congratulations (n/a), Monday, 14 November 2011 21:43 (1 year ago) Permalink
The review of the George Kennan bio is terrific.
― lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Monday, 14 November 2011 21:51 (1 year ago) Permalink
i get my issues so late and then take an additional 4 - 8 weeks to get to them that i wish ppl would post "the one with the picture of ____ on the cover" when talking about issues :-[
― ⚓ (gr8080), Tuesday, 15 November 2011 18:32 (1 year ago) Permalink
food issue also has a decent shouts and murmurs from eric idle (can't tell if it's really "funny" or if it just caught my attention by at least varying from the typical S&M style) and a short story by sam lipsyte (which i haven't finished but i'm actually reading it, unlike most NYer short stories).
― congratulations (n/a), Tuesday, 15 November 2011 19:03 (1 year ago) Permalink
that bloomberg diary is awesome -- reads a bit like a more pointed barthelme.
― s.clover, Tuesday, 15 November 2011 19:04 (1 year ago) Permalink
oh hey, new-ish george saunders story?
― this is unusual for batman. (Jordan), Tuesday, 15 November 2011 19:12 (1 year ago) Permalink
I thought the Planned Parenthood and DNA/double jeopardy articles were good, but both sort of buried the lead. Like, the PP one was a solid history that concluded with a rushed bit on how abortion became the prime Republican boogeyman; I would have preferred a whole article on this. Same thing with the very entertaining/interesting DNA/murder story, which is detective fiction-fascinating, but only closes with the historic import of the double (triple?) jeopardy nature of the case. Both pieces were good, really well written - made me want to donate immediately to PP - but their stories curiously composed.
I really liked Jon Lee Anderson's Libya piece. It made me wish we could bring Qaddafi back to life just to have someone kill him in cold blood all over again. It's a shame these dictators design their rule so that the only way to take them down is in essence to destroy the country with them.
― Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 15 November 2011 19:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
how was the menand essay a couple weeks ago?
― MODS DID 10/11 (k3vin k.), Tuesday, 15 November 2011 19:48 (1 year ago) Permalink
The one about Kennan? Excellent. I put the bio on reserve at the library.
I thought the Planned Parenthood and DNA/double jeopardy articles were good, but both sort of buried the lead. Like, the PP one was a solid history that concluded with a rushed bit on how abortion became the prime Republican boogeyman; I would have preferred a whole article on this
Agreed.
― lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 15 November 2011 19:49 (1 year ago) Permalink
that libya piece is fascinating.
― Don't attack when he is black. (forksclovetofu), Tuesday, 15 November 2011 22:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
lipsyte story is really good if you're into lipsyte btw
― congratulations (n/a), Tuesday, 15 November 2011 22:41 (1 year ago) Permalink
"the PP one was a solid history that concluded with a rushed bit on how abortion became the prime Republican boogeyman"
I feel like this part of the history is really well know though, whereas the how we got to 1972 is kind lost a lot.
― Fig On A Plate Cart (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 16 November 2011 19:23 (1 year ago) Permalink
I dunno about that. I learned a lot from that little bit, not least that until relatively recently Republicans were often more or at least as pro choice as democrats. Also interested in how abortion, for a while, has suited various political agendas, and rarely aligned along the strict divide we find today. Considering the implicit theme of the piece was the reinvigorated assault on reproductive rights, it just follows that that should have been the focus.
― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 16 November 2011 19:51 (1 year ago) Permalink
"I learned a lot from that little bit, not least that until relatively recently Republicans were often more or at least as pro choice as democrats."
Uh this might be one of those age things so nevermind.
I feel like the theme of the piece was sort of how Planned Parenthood got from there to now. It covered that pretty well.
― Fig On A Plate Cart (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 16 November 2011 19:53 (1 year ago) Permalink
Reading the PP story and the Hugo Black bio I finished yesterday shed light on even the most liberal justices rolled their eyes at William O. Douglas' penumbras and emanations used to carve a right to privacy.
― lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 16 November 2011 19:57 (1 year ago) Permalink
i am literally paralyzed over whether i should re-up my print subscription or just go ipad-only
― the jazz zinger (s1ocki), Friday, 18 November 2011 15:53 (1 year ago) Permalink
print for train/bus commute and toilet; ipad for social situationshow much more expensive is dual?
― do you want me to share what i know w/ you or not? (forksclovetofu), Friday, 18 November 2011 16:12 (1 year ago) Permalink
"social situations"?
― Bon Ivoj (jaymc), Friday, 18 November 2011 16:30 (1 year ago) Permalink
responsive new yorker prayer services
― Mordy, Friday, 18 November 2011 16:30 (1 year ago) Permalink
haha ya what do you mean by that?
― the jazz zinger (s1ocki), Friday, 18 November 2011 16:32 (1 year ago) Permalink
ugh, i hate food issues
― your pain is probably equal (Z S), Friday, 18 November 2011 16:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
would rather read The Doily Issue tbh
you know, social situations where a diverse yet vibrant group of friends gathers around an ipad to read patricia maxwell's latest piece on shopping for hats in manhattan
― congratulations (n/a), Friday, 18 November 2011 16:41 (1 year ago) Permalink
hahah
― the jazz zinger (s1ocki), Friday, 18 November 2011 16:41 (1 year ago) Permalink
food issues are the best iirc
http://markslutsky.com/post/937117589/the-food-issue
― the jazz zinger (s1ocki), Friday, 18 November 2011 16:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
i'm kinda done with "food" as an "issue"
― Mr. Que, Friday, 18 November 2011 16:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
that's YOUR issue
― the jazz zinger (s1ocki), Friday, 18 November 2011 16:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
― Mr. Que, Friday, 18 November 2011 16:48 (1 year ago) Permalink
okay, lol at me i guesssocial situations like you're at a place where there's no light to read: bar, pre-concert, solar eclipse, etc
― do you want me to share what i know w/ you or not? (forksclovetofu), Friday, 18 November 2011 16:50 (1 year ago) Permalink
i would never take my ipad to a concert, i'd worry about it getting stolen or wrecked
― the jazz zinger (s1ocki), Friday, 18 November 2011 16:51 (1 year ago) Permalink
dunno if htat counts as being 'social'
― dayo, Friday, 18 November 2011 16:52 (1 year ago) Permalink
ya that too
― the jazz zinger (s1ocki), Friday, 18 November 2011 16:53 (1 year ago) Permalink
i will cop to having weird definitions of what qualifies as social.i kinda messenger bag everywhere these days, mostly so i got a pocket for my pad so the umbilicus never has to come unsocketed.
― do you want me to share what i know w/ you or not? (forksclovetofu), Friday, 18 November 2011 16:59 (1 year ago) Permalink
i want to be friends with jon huntsman's daughters after reading last weeks "talk of the town"
― mon/ seeya/ chi 2.0 (k3vin k.), Friday, 18 November 2011 22:05 (1 year ago) Permalink
"friends"
― mookieproof, Saturday, 19 November 2011 01:08 (1 year ago) Permalink
i have an ipad new yorker subscription and it crashes all the time, it's very annoying.
― estela, Saturday, 19 November 2011 01:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
I have the ipad subscription and it's been smooth, although they did promise me a free travel supplement that was not available free. I asked them twice what was going on and they didn't answer me. Yesterday they emailed me to ask whether I enjoyed my free travel supplement. I, don't, even.
― Autumn Almanac, Saturday, 19 November 2011 11:37 (1 year ago) Permalink
i read the coffee article
― ice cr?m, Saturday, 19 November 2011 17:32 (1 year ago) Permalink
Is the coffee article good? I am waiting for this ish to hit InfoTrac to read it.
― Fig On A Plate Cart (Alex in SF), Saturday, 19 November 2011 18:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
it was alright
― ice cr?m, Saturday, 19 November 2011 18:37 (1 year ago) Permalink
Just started the PP article, but re: wishing that it tracked the politicization of abortion, isn't Jill Lepore writing a book on that atm?
― daschund derrida (Leee), Saturday, 19 November 2011 21:41 (1 year ago) Permalink
rare shouts & murmurs appearance in the nyer alert thread, i liked this
http://www.newyorker.com/humor/2012/01/09/120109sh_shouts_rich?currentPage=all
― Abattoir Educator / Slaughterman (schlump), Wednesday, 4 January 2012 02:08 (1 year ago) Permalink
i liked the article abt the kid in michigan who killed his grandfather & life sentences for youths &cread it over lunch and have kinda thought abt it all day sincehm prob shouldnt have thrown that issue away!
― johnny crunch, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 02:12 (1 year ago) Permalink
nice tidbit from that article:
"Life imprisonment for juveniles is forbidden by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, a treaty ratified by every country in the world except the United States and Somalia."
― mookieproof, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 02:15 (1 year ago) Permalink
which ish, i'm all disorganised(i just read half of the packer article on the libertarian online, will finish it soon)
― Abattoir Educator / Slaughterman (schlump), Wednesday, 4 January 2012 02:21 (1 year ago) Permalink
jan 2nd issue
― johnny crunch, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 02:24 (1 year ago) Permalink
being away from school sucks, i have to read all these online. glad to hear you liked the juvenile justice one, gotta finish that
― k3vin k., Wednesday, 4 January 2012 02:41 (1 year ago) Permalink
I have to start that one, reading the one about the Indian businesswoman from that issue right now though.
Also, don't know if this should go here or the cartoon caption thread but this...
makes me unbelievably sad.
― Leee, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 04:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
ha ha, yeah that was a good one
― johnny crunch, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 02:24 (8 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
ty
― Abattoir Educator / Slaughterman (schlump), Wednesday, 4 January 2012 11:11 (1 year ago) Permalink
new issue has a really good article on the chevron lawsuit in ecuador over environmental remnants from oil pipelines (more intrigue than you'd expect) and a pretty good one on a weird american reporter who covered the yakuza for a japanese newspaper
― congratulations (n/a), Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:22 (1 year ago) Permalink
The article about Gobekli Tepe blew my mind and made me want to go back to high school and follow my dreams of being an archeologist rather then all the useless stuff I do now.
― dan selzer, Wednesday, 4 January 2012 15:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
(i just read half of the packer article on the libertarian online, will finish it soon)
^ yes this was pretty great
― quick brown fox triangle (schlump), Thursday, 5 January 2012 12:43 (1 year ago) Permalink
the article on don bosco high school football was . . . quite something
― mookieproof, Friday, 6 January 2012 03:53 (1 year ago) Permalink
something == despairing imo.
― Leee, Friday, 6 January 2012 06:22 (1 year ago) Permalink
I quite liked last week's Carrie Brownstein piece.
― lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 6 January 2012 12:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
xpost Are you talking about the Paypal guy, that libertarian?
The high school football story was great, as was the (sad) piece about the kid in Michigan.
― Josh in Chicago, Friday, 6 January 2012 13:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah the paypal guy. a few ppl on this thread (or the sandbox or w/e) were v complimentary of it, partic packer's denouement. he did seem to v subtly give the guy enough rope & be fairly unobtrusive until the very end.
really bummed my postman is kicking back with my nite jewel 7" & the last couple of issues of this, i want my elif batuman piece
― quick brown fox triangle (schlump), Friday, 6 January 2012 14:14 (1 year ago) Permalink
The Chevron lawsuit piece was really great, I thought. A little light on legal specificity/detail, but that's to be expected.
― Oh shit, that's my bone! (Hurting 2), Saturday, 7 January 2012 03:31 (1 year ago) Permalink
have liked every Saïd Sayrafiezadeh story, including the 1 this wk
― johnny crunch, Monday, 9 January 2012 16:15 (1 year ago) Permalink
chevron piece was fantastic, h8 chevron so much
― iatee, Monday, 9 January 2012 16:16 (1 year ago) Permalink
the documentary "Crude" that is referenced in there is p good if u can find it
― johnny crunch, Monday, 9 January 2012 16:23 (1 year ago) Permalink
What are you, the teen-ager, to do? You want your hip-hop, your punk rock, a sound that will build a wall between you and the hideous adults who micromanage your life. Ideally, the wall is topped with cultural barbs charged with a thousand volts of fuck-off. But here they come: grownups, with their war stories of watching Jay-Z buy a jar of pickles, of Arcade Fire playing a transcendent show in a tiny church. Your mom gives you seven-inch punk records for Christmas and takes you to an Odd Future show on your birthday. But concerts with your parents don't help to establish a cohort and choose an anthem. How do you bond with your friends, stay out late, and not get an earful about how it was so much better the first time around? Increasingly, youths choose to go dancing, with the aid of glow sticks and a few thousand friends, until 5 A.M.
uuuuurrrrrgghhhhhhh
― scream blahula scream (govern yourself accordingly), Monday, 9 January 2012 16:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
oh sashapaws
― johnny crunch, Monday, 9 January 2012 16:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
Odd Future Mom
― buzza, Monday, 9 January 2012 16:38 (1 year ago) Permalink
― scream blahula scream (govern yourself accordingly), Monday, 9 January 2012 16:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
Is that Nicki Minaj?
― Josh in Chicago, Monday, 9 January 2012 17:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
r raves srsly still a thing
― lag∞n, Monday, 9 January 2012 17:51 (1 year ago) Permalink
dubstep baby
― Thug Luftwaffle (forksclovetofu), Monday, 9 January 2012 21:19 (1 year ago) Permalink
I liked the yakuza article
― lag∞n, Monday, 9 January 2012 22:25 (1 year ago) Permalink
I hav the nyer on my ipad now, im kinda a big deal
― lag∞n, Monday, 9 January 2012 22:26 (1 year ago) Permalink
lol @it not being able to download in the background lol @ 100mb files
― lag∞n, Monday, 9 January 2012 22:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
This is great, particularly the not-waiting-for-the-post bit.
― unflushed deuce (Schlafsack), Monday, 9 January 2012 22:41 (1 year ago) Permalink
here's the chevron piece
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/01/09/120109fa_fact_keefe?currentPage=all
― the acquisition and practice of music is unfavourable to the health of (abanana), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 12:12 (1 year ago) Permalink
Man I've signed up twice now to access the digital edition and archives with my subscription, but every time I try to log in it claims my email address is not recognized. Super annoying.
― jon /via/ chi 2.0, Tuesday, 10 January 2012 14:37 (1 year ago) Permalink
If you sign up to the ipad edition, you have to sign up ~again~ to get archive access. If you are not talking about the ipad edition plz ignore.
― unflushed deuce (Schlafsack), Tuesday, 10 January 2012 21:57 (1 year ago) Permalink
archive interface is so awful its basically not worth it anyway
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 11 January 2012 17:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
i think there's one login/pw for the nyer site, then another for the archives? also, the archives only work for me on ie.
― mookieproof, Wednesday, 11 January 2012 18:07 (1 year ago) Permalink
Not sure tbh.
― lag∞n, Thursday, 12 January 2012 04:42 (2 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
On the ipad I find an article, take screenshots and read those from the camera roll.
― Autumn Almanac, Wednesday, 11 January 2012 20:06 (1 year ago) Permalink
Man, Yakuza obsessive and oil company lawsuit would both make great movies.
― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 11 January 2012 23:00 (1 year ago) Permalink
I can't remember the last NYer issue in which I read four feature articles (those two, plus the Gingrich and Rubio profiles).
― Bon Ivoj (jaymc), Wednesday, 11 January 2012 23:02 (1 year ago) Permalink
Man, I read every issue from cover to cover. Ok, well I skip Shouts and Murmurs sometimes. And the poems.
― jon /via/ chi 2.0, Wednesday, 11 January 2012 23:07 (1 year ago) Permalink
xpost I was thinking the very same thing with this issue! I mean, I want to read everything, generally, but this may be the first in a while where I actually read four articles before the next issue arrived: Gingrich, Yakuza, Chevron and Rubio. The quadfecta!
― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 11 January 2012 23:13 (1 year ago) Permalink
(I always skip the fiction)
I feel like if I read every issue cover-to-cover, I'd never read anything else.
― Bon Ivoj (jaymc), Wednesday, 11 January 2012 23:13 (1 year ago) Permalink
^^^ that's what i was doing for awhile and finally gave up. like why am i reading this joan acoella dance review rather than one of the 20 books i've bought in the past year and never read.
― Moreno, Wednesday, 11 January 2012 23:16 (1 year ago) Permalink
Lately it's rare for there to be more than one thing I really want to read.
― Oh shit, that's my bone! (Hurting 2), Wednesday, 11 January 2012 23:21 (1 year ago) Permalink
i read every issue cover to cover BUT: only in the bathroom or on iPadand I'm always about three months behindnot in the bathroomon the magazine
― Beezow Doo Doo Zopittybop-Bop Bop (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 11 January 2012 23:24 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah unless it's something i really couldn't care less about i'll pretty much read all the features, talk of the towns, critics essays, etc. i mostly skip the fiction and always skip shouts and murmurs
― rebecca blah (k3vin k.), Wednesday, 11 January 2012 23:53 (1 year ago) Permalink
― lag∞n, Wednesday, January 11, 2012 12:42 PM (6 hours ago)
i really dont get their 'deal' tbh, why do they suck at the internet so hard? their stance on iphones is basically "go fuck yourself"
― rebecca blah (k3vin k.), Wednesday, 11 January 2012 23:54 (1 year ago) Permalink
I just finished the Chevron feature -- it's Bleak House meets The Verdict.
― lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 11 January 2012 23:57 (1 year ago) Permalink
i'm usually pretty thorough, apart from the fiction and the non- book/music/film reviews. might skip some of the latter talk of the town pieces and shouts & murmurs. if i haven't finished it by the time the next one arrives, tho, i'm done.
it's bad enough letting nyrbs pile up -- and i'm better about skipping stuff -- can't do it with the nyer too
― mookieproof, Thursday, 12 January 2012 00:14 (1 year ago) Permalink
at least the NYRB publishes every few weeks and I can dispatch it at lunch.
― lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 12 January 2012 00:16 (1 year ago) Permalink
Oh god I have such a NYer pile problem, which is now being exacerbated by the spouse's Atlantic pile problem.
― quincie, Thursday, 12 January 2012 00:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
When we moved last summer (2011) I made myself throw away everything pre-2010, and it still haunts me that I had dog-earred so many articles that I will now never read :(
― quincie, Thursday, 12 January 2012 00:30 (1 year ago) Permalink
atlantic is only 10 times a year!
― mookieproof, Thursday, 12 January 2012 00:31 (1 year ago) Permalink
I made myself throw away everything pre-2010
you did the right thing (see holidays at home thread for full hoarding horror stories)
― mookieproof, Thursday, 12 January 2012 00:33 (1 year ago) Permalink
I do sigh with relief when The New Yorker publishes one of its biweekly editions.
― lumber up, limbaugh down (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 12 January 2012 00:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
This is a publisher that persists with diaereses in the 21st century so
― Autumn Almanac (Schlafsack), Thursday, 12 January 2012 00:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
i had to throw out a year's worth when i was moving once, i was mainly mad that it was just going _to waste_, because they're a good thing to just give away or leave for people to have in their bathrooms or w/e
― quick brown fox triangle (schlump), Thursday, 12 January 2012 01:06 (1 year ago) Permalink
donate New Yorker back issues to the underprivileged for xmas, leave them in their bathrooms like a highbrow santa claus
― tinker tailor soldier sb (silby), Thursday, 12 January 2012 02:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
― rebecca blah (k3vin k.), Wednesday, January 11, 2012 6:54 PM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
its because they just want u to subscribe to the print magazine
― lag∞n, Thursday, 12 January 2012 02:57 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah but i do subscribe to the print magazine maybe i can't fuckin have my issue on me at all times sorry new yorker
― rebecca blah (k3vin k.), Thursday, 12 January 2012 03:03 (1 year ago) Permalink
yah they should hav an iphone app 4 sure
― lag∞n, Thursday, 12 January 2012 03:06 (1 year ago) Permalink
they 'hope to in the future' lol gfy
― rebecca blah (k3vin k.), Thursday, 12 January 2012 03:08 (1 year ago) Permalink
sittin around looking at butterflies hopin 4 a iphone app
― lag∞n, Thursday, 12 January 2012 03:10 (1 year ago) Permalink
maybe i can't fuckin have my issue on me at all times
tbf it's a fuckin piece of paper; it folds nicely and can be dropped without harm
also get off my fuckin lawn
― mookieproof, Thursday, 12 January 2012 03:10 (1 year ago) Permalink
tbf its many pieces of paper
― lag∞n, Thursday, 12 January 2012 03:11 (1 year ago) Permalink
and staples, sorry
― mookieproof, Thursday, 12 January 2012 03:12 (1 year ago) Permalink
and ink
― lag∞n, Thursday, 12 January 2012 03:14 (1 year ago) Permalink
^overlooked point
also it's like oh i have an hour to kill randomly too bad i can't read on my mobile device said pieces of paper for which btw i paid many other green pieces of paper, but it's all good this is what 1991 now
― rebecca blah (k3vin k.), Thursday, 12 January 2012 03:14 (1 year ago) Permalink
its more of a dream really
printed on shitty stock tbh
― Autumn Almanac (Schlafsack), Thursday, 12 January 2012 03:15 (1 year ago) Permalink
btw I don't get all the complaints about the proper ipad edition, it's up there with the best available imo
the general concept is v good imo, but there are some poorly executed details
― lag∞n, Thursday, 12 January 2012 03:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
― Autumn Almanac, Wednesday, January 11, 2012 3:06 PM (7 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
lol this is amazing btw
― lag∞n, Thursday, 12 January 2012 03:21 (1 year ago) Permalink
I don't like the way it all lines up down the right-hand side of the screen (in portrait), with a giant glob of white space on the left. Other than that, mostly superb imo.
― Autumn Almanac (Schlafsack), Thursday, 12 January 2012 03:32 (1 year ago) Permalink
pretty rough maaaan
― mookieproof, Thursday, 12 January 2012 03:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
or for instance if i am away from my apt for an extended period of time and cannot read my issue in print
just get w/ the times NYer srsly
― rebecca blah (k3vin k.), Thursday, 12 January 2012 03:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
I dont like: no downloading in the background, how each poem listing section etc gets its own spot in the line up kinda clogs up the feed, how large the file sizes are I already had to archive a couple but why, i was listing to an author read a story which is a nice lil feature but when I accidentally swiped away there was no way to restart the audio from where I left off like no lil slider thing at all, feel like the drop down toc isn't descriptive enough like im never sure what the articles are abt could use sub titles, and other stuff like that that could use some refining
― lag∞n, Thursday, 12 January 2012 03:47 (1 year ago) Permalink
no downloading in the background
This might be Adobe's fault (it's built on the Adobe Digital Editions platform, and iirc no ADE apps do auto-downloads) <-- could be 100% wrong on every level
how each poem listing section etc gets its own spot in the line up kinda clogs up the feed
I'm happy to put that down to them learning how best to lay it out (same goes for the right-running text and left-running white space).
how large the file sizes are I already had to archive a couple but why
Yeah I agree, 120–150 Mb per edition is pretty piss-poor. No excuse for that when most of the edition is text and line drawings.
there was no way to restart the audio from where I left off like no lil slider thing at allfeel like the drop down toc isn't descriptive enough like im never sure what the articles are abt could use sub titles
Agreed, in fact you are making me angry with Condé Nast ffs
― Autumn Almanac (Schlafsack), Thursday, 12 January 2012 03:58 (1 year ago) Permalink
:)
― lag∞n, Thursday, 12 January 2012 04:00 (1 year ago) Permalink
Okay now I can see how much this app sucks, but I stand by my original point i.e. that it's one of the best publications on the app store. There's some absolute dross out there, most of which either crashes routinely or is just an exact replication of the print edition.
― Autumn Almanac (Schlafsack), Thursday, 12 January 2012 04:01 (1 year ago) Permalink
i think the side scroll between articles and then the vertical scrolling to dip into the articles layout concept is p ingenious, like i find myself unconsciously visualizing the whole thing, maybe other magazines use that too idk this is my only ipad subscription - and the typography is good, it v easy to read - like i said the details just need some refinement
― lag∞n, Thursday, 12 January 2012 04:07 (1 year ago) Permalink
i think the side scroll between articles and then the vertical scrolling to dip into the articles layout concept is p ingenious, like i find myself unconsciously visualizing the whole thing
Yeah, that's the Adobe Digital Editions format. Properly briliant. All the Condé Nasts use it, as well as National Geographic and a few others.
― Autumn Almanac (Schlafsack), Thursday, 12 January 2012 04:16 (1 year ago) Permalink
Did anyone else find Remnick's review of the latest Obama book sort of ... self-serving in its snide dismissals? Maybe someone who hadn't written their own premature account of the Obamas might have been a better choice?
― Josh in Chicago, Thursday, 12 January 2012 23:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
Just wanted to rep hard for Acocella's dance articles, love those. (But then, I barely know anything about dance.)
Also, I read it almost cover-to-cover -- even the lol theatre reviews -- the only things I regularly skip are the fiction, S&M, and poems. I rarely ever skip a full-on feature, the last two to my mind are IKEA and the execrable David Brooks one.
― lEEE (Leee), Friday, 13 January 2012 03:46 (1 year ago) Permalink
the latest shouts and murmurs abt romney meeting people is p funny
― lag∞n, Friday, 13 January 2012 03:47 (1 year ago) Permalink
haven't read it but it is never funny
― rebecca blah (k3vin k.), Friday, 13 January 2012 03:49 (1 year ago) Permalink
remember that like, spectrum of gayness one a month or two back? what the hell was that
ya agree re: the romney 1; it was trillin i think, & more brief than usual, i think i smirked or something, home run for s&m
― johnny crunch, Friday, 13 January 2012 03:52 (1 year ago) Permalink
haha i was reading that on the train today, it wasnt funny but it managed 'amusing'.
gopnik's piece on histories of the spanish inquisition is both bizarrely high-handed and scattershot. its somewhat of a feat to have the worst piece in an issue w/ an on and off the ave article
― 404 (Lamp), Friday, 13 January 2012 04:12 (1 year ago) Permalink
Yknow what the romney thing WAS kinda funny
― Beezow Doo Doo Zopittybop-Bop Bop (forksclovetofu), Friday, 13 January 2012 04:37 (1 year ago) Permalink
I'm not sure how amenable you all are to old article alerts but this one about North Korea:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/07/12/100712fa_fact_demick
Written by Barbara Demick, who also wrote an incredible book about North Korea a couple of years ago. This article is 18 months old, but it throws up an interesting perspective of Kim Jong-eun, and of course it's beautifully written.
― Autumn Almanac (Schlafsack), Friday, 13 January 2012 05:00 (1 year ago) Permalink
v amenable to old article alerts btw, the never particularly active 'what should i read in the nyer archives' thread was a goldmine
i have the demick book sat on my shelf, maybe i should read my way into it via the article
― quick brown fox triangle (schlump), Friday, 13 January 2012 10:53 (1 year ago) Permalink
You must. The book is more a series of narratives based on factual accounts, but every bit as absorbing.
btw this week's youtube piece is everything we already know about youtube, but packaged concisely and within the context of a changing broadcast industry. I hate the end of that last sentence but got sick of trying to reword it so
― Autumn Almanac, Saturday, 14 January 2012 06:39 (1 year ago) Permalink
utube piece was ok, can't wait to see how awful all the shows turn out
― lag∞n, Saturday, 14 January 2012 17:56 (1 year ago) Permalink
The Jay-Z lifestyle station! Shaq TV!
― this is funny u bitter dork (forksclovetofu), Saturday, 14 January 2012 18:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
― lag∞n, Sunday, 15 January 2012 04:56 (2 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
If recent Google initiatives are any indication, this is otm
― Autumn Almanac, Saturday, 14 January 2012 20:11 (1 year ago) Permalink
the shows are gonna be awful no doubt but considering what awful stuff is popular on youtube it still might 'succeed'
― iatee, Saturday, 14 January 2012 20:14 (1 year ago) Permalink
for the little chunk of change they dropped (in google terms), they just need like one annoying orange success to make this thing worthwhile
― this is funny u bitter dork (forksclovetofu), Saturday, 14 January 2012 20:37 (1 year ago) Permalink
hahahahaha yes
― Autumn Almanac, Saturday, 14 January 2012 20:48 (1 year ago) Permalink
something like the creative success of "autotune the news"
― rebecca blah (k3vin k.), Saturday, 14 January 2012 22:03 (1 year ago) Permalink
i dunno how paid the gregory brothers are but it's clearly doing well enough for them that they don't need a day job
― this is funny u bitter dork (forksclovetofu), Sunday, 15 January 2012 02:00 (1 year ago) Permalink
youtube piece really annoyed me, using "they're turning away from user-generated content!" as bait and then not really backing it up. it's not like people aren't going to be able to post cat videos.
― lukas, Sunday, 15 January 2012 23:16 (1 year ago) Permalink
cat videos are illegal under SOPA fyi
― lag∞n, Monday, 16 January 2012 02:24 (1 year ago) Permalink
any rebroadcast, reproduction or other use of this content without the express written consent of cats is prohibited
― mookieproof, Monday, 16 January 2012 02:36 (1 year ago) Permalink
i'm actually still half a page away from finishing it but the elif batuman piece on the hunter gatherer monuments, from the last double issue, is amazing, huh
― quick brown fox triangle (schlump), Monday, 16 January 2012 12:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
talk of the town david cross piece is super bizarre
― Mordy, Monday, 16 January 2012 13:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
David cross is sort of disturbing
― lag∞n, Monday, 16 January 2012 13:53 (1 year ago) Permalink
All I know is that the issue with a whopping four pieces I read was followed by an issue where barely anything appealed to me: youtube, on and off the avenue, Remnick review, S F-J stupid essay ... is the LA mogul piece any good? Egyptian novelist?
― Josh in Chicago, Monday, 16 January 2012 16:05 (1 year ago) Permalink
I liked the la mogul piece
― lag∞n, Monday, 16 January 2012 18:10 (1 year ago) Permalink
next issue is out on the ipad
― lag∞n, Monday, 16 January 2012 18:15 (1 year ago) Permalink
next issue is an ipad
― dayo, Monday, 16 January 2012 18:15 (1 year ago) Permalink
free ipad
― lag∞n, Monday, 16 January 2012 18:16 (1 year ago) Permalink
those shoplifting charges are bogus its true
― HOOS steen is it anyway? (Lamp), Monday, 16 January 2012 18:20 (1 year ago) Permalink
Huh, I thought the L.A. mogul piece was a bit boilerplate, perhaps inevitable given its subject hasn't sat down for an interview in decades. Still, I'm always fascinated/scared by these powerful behind the scenes players whose money/influence literally permeates nearly every facet of society.
― Josh in Chicago, Tuesday, 17 January 2012 19:07 (1 year ago) Permalink
main thing i learned from the gingrich article this week: his first wife was his high school geometry teacher!?!?
― congratulations (n/a), Tuesday, 17 January 2012 21:03 (1 year ago) Permalink
It was so Ron Swanson.
― Nicole, Tuesday, 17 January 2012 21:05 (1 year ago) Permalink
LA Mogul is the AEG guy?
― this is funny u bitter dork (forksclovetofu), Tuesday, 17 January 2012 23:52 (1 year ago) Permalink
Wow the Don Bosco article is a tour de force. I'm still not done with it, but I don't think an article has ever made me feel such a potent mixture of admiration and utter horror.
― frogBaSeball (Hurting 2), Wednesday, 18 January 2012 00:01 (1 year ago) Permalink
xpost Yeah, AEG guy, who doesn't do interviews and is a conservative Christian. For some reason it just felt like a story I've read several times over the course of the past few years.
― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 18 January 2012 01:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
got all geared up for a bitchy hatchet job on callista gingrich but that article illustrated what happens when you have a non-cooperative (and essentially boring) subject
― demolition with discretion (m coleman), Wednesday, 18 January 2012 11:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
shouldve just been 10 full pages of portraits of he frozen real doll face
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 18 January 2012 15:07 (1 year ago) Permalink
I want to say the current issue is at least the second and maybe the third in recent memory to feature an author overview that focuses on the writing of explicit sex scenes. In other words, this is two issues in a row that I'd consider a bust, unless the piece about the guy trying to save a breed of endangered turtle is worthwhile.
― Josh in Chicago, Wednesday, 18 January 2012 19:53 (1 year ago) Permalink
i agree, i skipped most of the articles in the last couple of issues. although oddly shouts & murmurs was again at least amusing this week - your basic outsourcing/foreigners jokes but by gary shteyngart who at least is a little weird and funny.
― congratulations (n/a), Wednesday, 18 January 2012 21:41 (1 year ago) Permalink
sorry i said at least so many times
I thought I had totally missed this detail until I got the magazine last night and realized that you were talking about the Gingrich article in this week's issue (focusing on Callista), rather than the one from two weeks ago (focusing on Newt).
(Anyone think that the New Yorker jumped the gun about six weeks ago, when Newt was leading the polls, and assigned both of those pieces with the assumption that his campaign would be doing better than it is?)
― Girl I want to take you to a JBR (jaymc), Thursday, 19 January 2012 17:12 (1 year ago) Permalink
kinda, but newt is p much a fascinating topic anytime
― lag∞n, Thursday, 19 January 2012 17:13 (1 year ago) Permalink
True!
― Girl I want to take you to a JBR (jaymc), Thursday, 19 January 2012 17:16 (1 year ago) Permalink
plus newt is on the rebound now
― congratulations (n/a), Thursday, 19 January 2012 17:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
― mookieproof, Tuesday, 24 January 2012 03:26 (1 year ago) Permalink
in real life she looks like an animatronic figure designed by ralph steadman
― this is funny u bitter dork (forksclovetofu), Tuesday, 24 January 2012 05:15 (1 year ago) Permalink
just read that article, yeah holy wow @ that illustration
― tebow gotti (k3vin k.), Tuesday, 24 January 2012 05:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
i'm gonna crosspost this here just in case we have any harper's readers who check this thread:
i'm halfway through this article and it's totally fascinating: http://harpers.org/archive/2012/02/0083789story of peru's largest prison, so overcrowded and understaffed that the inmates essentially are able to live normal lives within its confines: it basically has its own economy (inmates own and run restaurants and shops inside the prison) run on contraband brought by visitors; its inmates' (drastically disparate) living conditions are determined by their wealth, much like the outside world; and in one literally walled-off community they even hold local elections. the story follows some of the delegado candidates in the days leading up to the big election― tebow gotti (k3vin k.)
story of peru's largest prison, so overcrowded and understaffed that the inmates essentially are able to live normal lives within its confines: it basically has its own economy (inmates own and run restaurants and shops inside the prison) run on contraband brought by visitors; its inmates' (drastically disparate) living conditions are determined by their wealth, much like the outside world; and in one literally walled-off community they even hold local elections. the story follows some of the delegado candidates in the days leading up to the big election
― tebow gotti (k3vin k.)
― tebow gotti (k3vin k.), Friday, 27 January 2012 02:20 (1 year ago) Permalink
there was a similar piece abt a brazilian prison in the times a while ago, so nuts
― lag∞n, Friday, 27 January 2012 02:24 (1 year ago) Permalink
Donald Hall's essay on growing old was great
― Kiarostami bag (milo z), Friday, 27 January 2012 02:25 (1 year ago) Permalink
oh alright i gotta read that, it seemed interesting but then i forgot about it
steve coll's piece on mullah omar and the relationship between the US, afghanistan, and pakistan (& the taliban and al qaeda) was a good read too, especially if you haven't read much about omar
― tebow gotti (k3vin k.), Friday, 27 January 2012 02:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
yah it was p sweet
― lag∞n, Friday, 27 January 2012 02:30 (1 year ago) Permalink
which 1
― tebow gotti (k3vin k.), Friday, 27 January 2012 03:58 (1 year ago) Permalink
mullah omar
― lag∞n, Friday, 27 January 2012 03:59 (1 year ago) Permalink
'essay abt aging' isnt exactly in my wheelhouse
― lag∞n, Friday, 27 January 2012 04:00 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah me otm
xp aw u old
― tebow gotti (k3vin k.), Friday, 27 January 2012 04:01 (1 year ago) Permalink
I'm about to start the Hall essay. I'm getting old!
― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 27 January 2012 04:01 (1 year ago) Permalink
we shall wear our trousers rolled
― tebow gotti (k3vin k.), Friday, 27 January 2012 04:02 (1 year ago) Permalink
I hate peaches though
― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 27 January 2012 04:08 (1 year ago) Permalink
i'm up and down with gopnik but i thought this was a thoughtful and interesting piece on prisons in americahttp://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/atlarge/2012/01/30/120130crat_atlarge_gopnik?currentPage=all
― this is funny u bitter dork (forksclovetofu), Friday, 27 January 2012 04:55 (1 year ago) Permalink
― SELF DEPORTATION (Z S), Friday, 27 January 2012 05:44 (1 year ago) Permalink
what do u people think of the new tv critic, anyone is better than nancy franklin but she called dexter like intelligent and charismatic so basically i have decided never to read her
― lag∞n, Friday, 27 January 2012 16:31 (1 year ago) Permalink
i like her writing, i don't think i've watched any of the shows she's written about
― the American Enterprise Institute asks "How Thick Is Your (symsymsym), Friday, 27 January 2012 17:26 (1 year ago) Permalink
"better than nancy franklin" is pretty much the most i can say for her.
read the Bosco football and the 13 year old kills grandpa, goes to jail for life stories this morning. It's a fucking hard time being young right now.
― this is funny u bitter dork (forksclovetofu), Friday, 27 January 2012 18:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
i find myself missing nancy franklin or like the idea of nancy franklin. i guess it was p lol that the ny had someone who p much totally resisted the default narrative abt tv's golden age or w/e and just seemed bemused and mostly indifferent to the prestige cable dramas and single camera sitcoms that most tv critics really love. i mean i cant imagine that nancy franklin even knew 'community' was a tv show never mind thought it was 'the smartest sitcom on tv' or w/e. i just wish she were a better writer or smarter or s.thing so that when she treated the sopranos w/the same breezy condescension w/which she wrote abt dance moms or w/e it wasnt just dumm
anyway the new critic is a better writer, i thought her piece in last week's issue was p good but its mostly just standard blog opinions i guess
― Lamp, Friday, 27 January 2012 19:08 (1 year ago) Permalink
w/e w/e w/e
― Lamp, Friday, 27 January 2012 19:09 (1 year ago) Permalink
w/e w/e w/e so excited
― tinker tailor soldier sb (silby), Friday, 27 January 2012 19:09 (1 year ago) Permalink
lol yes reading her on downtown abbey I thought to myself the nyer has hired a blog style writer how interesting
― lag∞n, Friday, 27 January 2012 19:11 (1 year ago) Permalink
lol same
― tebow gotti (k3vin k.), Friday, 27 January 2012 19:16 (1 year ago) Permalink
downtown abbey
for a long time i thought this was what the show was called, tht i was abt like cool nuns or s.thing
― Lamp, Friday, 27 January 2012 19:25 (1 year ago) Permalink
ha the iPad did that swear, but I have for sure thought abt how it'd be a good name for an olde timey prostitute
― lag∞n, Friday, 27 January 2012 19:26 (1 year ago) Permalink
did nancy franklin die or something?
― President Keyes, Saturday, 28 January 2012 02:43 (1 year ago) Permalink
she just like resigned w/o really having a new job/diff project iirc
― johnny crunch, Saturday, 28 January 2012 02:44 (1 year ago) Permalink
For some reason I always mixed her up with the Sci-Ti weirdo who voices Bart Simpson. Cartwright, I know.
― President Keyes, Saturday, 28 January 2012 03:05 (1 year ago) Permalink
It seems like every issue of Harpers or the New Yorker has an essay about aging. A gentle reminisce with a sting in the tail about 2000 words in. Boooring
― badg, Saturday, 28 January 2012 23:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
nuh uh, and nope
― SELF DEPORTATION (Z S), Sunday, 29 January 2012 04:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
v. good issue this week - sad but balanced article about rutgers suicide, chinese "work novels", cookie factory strikes; i even liked the classical pianist talking about his recording process even if he came off a little annoying. i think i read every article this week after a few weeks of skipping lots of stuff.
― congratulations (n/a), Tuesday, 31 January 2012 22:51 (1 year ago) Permalink
Yeah, the last two weeks blew over me but the current issue is a grab bag. Putting it off until I have time to read it all properly.
― Autumn Almanac (Schlafsack), Tuesday, 31 January 2012 23:14 (1 year ago) Permalink
slight update to the don bosco article: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/sportingscene/2012/01/on-youthful-indiscretions-and-high-school-football.html
― mookieproof, Wednesday, 1 February 2012 00:48 (1 year ago) Permalink
Interesting, not to defend some of the words he was using in the least, but have some of those people never seen a teenager's Twitter feed before? Seems like such an innocuous thing to lost a football career over.
― Gonjasufjanstephen O'Malley (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 01:14 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah that seems like some pretty sanctimonious bullshit
― tebow gotti (k3vin k.), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 01:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
it prob only happened cause it's a catholic school tho.
― iatee, Wednesday, 1 February 2012 01:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
"common fast food prank"?
― tinker tailor soldier sb (silby), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 01:49 (1 year ago) Permalink
I'm guessing the one where they throw a milkshake or drink back at the worker at the drive-thru window. Which, tbh, is completely indefensible no matter who does it. Like a minimum wage slave at McDonalds needs that shit to deal with on top of already having a horrible job.
― Gonjasufjanstephen O'Malley (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 01:54 (1 year ago) Permalink
hurling food @ the ppl giving food 2 u is unchill
― markers, Wednesday, 1 February 2012 02:24 (1 year ago) Permalink
just EAT IT
open up your mouth and feed it
― Autumn Almanac, Wednesday, 1 February 2012 02:25 (1 year ago) Permalink
disgusting savages, completely unironically
― tinker tailor soldier sb (silby), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 03:22 (1 year ago) Permalink
people who deliberately make life harder for people in shit jobs are worse than Hitler
yeah I wonder how much of it is 'we're pulling a lol prank on a stranger' and how much of it is some micro-level power trip / status thing, 'at least I don't work in fast food'
― iatee, Wednesday, 1 February 2012 03:24 (1 year ago) Permalink
markers angriest about good snacks being wasted
― Mordy, Wednesday, 1 February 2012 03:26 (1 year ago) Permalink
idk -- i just think food should be EATEN
― markers, Wednesday, 1 February 2012 04:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
teenagers are the worst kind of ppl
― the parable is the parable of the (Lamp), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 04:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
that "prank" is called fire in the hole and people have been doing it forever and it is grounds for a beating imoyeah, that dude's tweets are just dumbass kid stuff. but u r a PRO ATHLETE at that level so he gotta figure it out.
― Wie wol ich bin der vogel has noch den erfret mich das (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 04:46 (1 year ago) Permalink
― the parable is the parable of the (Lamp), Tuesday, January 31, 2012 11:35 PM (Yesterday)
so otm
― tebow gotti (k3vin k.), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 05:02 (1 year ago) Permalink
that rutgers article was really good
― the third kind of dubstep (Jordan), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 15:44 (1 year ago) Permalink
Wouldn't feel TOO bad about the kid who got kicked out of Bosco, he got a scholarship from Colorado (lol pac12?).
― omar leeettle (Leee), Wednesday, 1 February 2012 18:59 (1 year ago) Permalink
yah srsly he missed one hs football game is what happened
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 1 February 2012 19:00 (1 year ago) Permalink
not loving this week's cover
― Autumn Almanac (Schlafsack), Monday, 6 February 2012 05:28 (1 year ago) Permalink
the picture is not loading, that is the actual cover
― Autumn Almanac (Schlafsack), Monday, 6 February 2012 05:31 (1 year ago) Permalink
the article about suicide is really, really good, though. so strange, now, how our lives can be reconstructed through our online breadcrumbs.
― Z S, Monday, 6 February 2012 05:31 (1 year ago) Permalink
Lol I like that cover
― max, Monday, 6 February 2012 12:36 (1 year ago) Permalink
the face transplant article is amazing
― johnny crunch, Monday, 6 February 2012 19:27 (1 year ago) Permalink
I think the cover is really nicely done
― post, Monday, 6 February 2012 19:39 (1 year ago) Permalink
it looks terrible on a tablet i can tell you that
― ELI OWNS YOUR HUSBAND (forksclovetofu), Monday, 6 February 2012 19:41 (1 year ago) Permalink
never loads completely
― http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1tAYmMjLdY (dayo), Monday, 6 February 2012 19:42 (1 year ago) Permalink
haa
― lag∞n, Monday, 6 February 2012 19:44 (1 year ago) Permalink
― tebow gotti (k3vin k.), Monday, 6 February 2012 19:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
so strange, now, how our lives can be reconstructed through our online breadcrumbs.
Yes, it reminded me of a book a professor of mine wrote recently about a murder-suicide that occurred on our college campus when I was a senior. Lots of details pieced together -- and psychological insights gleaned -- through e-mails and instant-message transcripts.
― jaymc, Monday, 6 February 2012 19:47 (1 year ago) Permalink
psychological insights, or pontificating?
― http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1tAYmMjLdY (dayo), Monday, 6 February 2012 19:48 (1 year ago) Permalink
In both the New Yorker article and the book I read, there does tend to be a lot of extrapolation, but at least by reproducing the original sources, it's somewhat transparent about it.
― jaymc, Monday, 6 February 2012 19:52 (1 year ago) Permalink
tijuana food article from a couple weeks ago was interesting! definitely made me want to head down there the next time I'm in san diego...
― tylerw, Monday, 6 February 2012 20:07 (1 year ago) Permalink
the plagiarism article was crazy
― President Keyes, Monday, 6 February 2012 23:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
― lag∞n, Monday, 6 February 2012 23:18 (1 year ago) Permalink
the plagiarism piece was cray
― http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1tAYmMjLdY (dayo), Monday, 6 February 2012 23:22 (1 year ago) Permalink
Haven't read it yet. But I went to college with him and used to talk about spy novels and cold war paranoia movies when I saw him at the store he worked for. Crazy story.
― dan selzer, Monday, 6 February 2012 23:54 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah plagiarism story was like high-level n/a-bait NYer story, wish it had been longer
― congratulations (n/a), Tuesday, 7 February 2012 16:38 (1 year ago) Permalink
I wish I had more access to my wife's iPad, because I get all jealous when you guys are talking about the new issue and I'm still waiting for the print edition to show up (yes I know I could read them online, but I refer reading either print or iPad on the train).
― Gonjasufjanstephen O'Malley (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Tuesday, 7 February 2012 18:14 (1 year ago) Permalink
P psyched to have discovered that I can get it on my Nook every Monday for free, as a print subscriber. Looks great in this format (except the cartoons).
― Axolotl with an Atlatl (Jon Lewis), Tuesday, 7 February 2012 18:18 (1 year ago) Permalink
Agreed that last week's was fucking solid.
― Axolotl with an Atlatl (Jon Lewis), Tuesday, 7 February 2012 18:19 (1 year ago) Permalink
You can get this on the Nook now? I didn't know that.
― Gonjasufjanstephen O'Malley (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Tuesday, 7 February 2012 18:24 (1 year ago) Permalink
plagiarism piece is p lol, some of the quotes from the guy are classic
― lag∞n, Tuesday, 7 February 2012 18:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
i did end up feeling somewhat sympathetic to the guy but i did lol that the last paragraph or two was basically like "oh and now he's writing a book about his struggles being a plagiarist," def. made me feel not as sympathetic b/c it made it all seem like grist for his fancy memoir
― congratulations (n/a), Tuesday, 7 February 2012 18:39 (1 year ago) Permalink
finally read the rutgers suicide story
roommate sounds like an asshole, but not really a manslaughterer or purveyor of hate crimes
kind of amazed that the two roommates appear to have communicated almost exclusively electronically, but then here we are
― mookieproof, Tuesday, 7 February 2012 18:41 (1 year ago) Permalink
yah roommate came off as a super-gossipy & entitled kid but im thinking that is par for the course among 18 yr olds
― johnny crunch, Tuesday, 7 February 2012 18:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
I spent almost an entire semester communicating with my roommate solely through post-it notes and whiteboard.
― Gonjasufjanstephen O'Malley (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Tuesday, 7 February 2012 18:47 (1 year ago) Permalink
dharun's friends seemed like total assholes.
― Z S, Tuesday, 7 February 2012 18:47 (1 year ago) Permalink
whys the ipad always always telling me there are updates to issues, anyone know what these updates consist of
― lag∞n, Tuesday, 7 February 2012 19:03 (1 year ago) Permalink
ugh facial transplant article is very intense and difficult to read (esp during lunch)
― congratulations (n/a), Tuesday, 7 February 2012 20:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
yeah I stopped somewhere on the first page, wasnt quite ready
― lag∞n, Tuesday, 7 February 2012 22:13 (1 year ago) Permalink
Was he really like an adult version of McLovin from Superbad?
― President Keyes, Tuesday, 7 February 2012 23:59 (1 year ago) Permalink
He's a really nice guy.
― dan selzer, Wednesday, 8 February 2012 03:07 (1 year ago) Permalink
was prob just trying to make u like him
― lag∞n, Wednesday, 8 February 2012 03:10 (1 year ago) Permalink
In the Rutgers story, the webcam guy (who didn't post it) does come across as an erratic kid at first, prob confused about his own sexuality ("never known him to have a girl friend", etc etc from his fellow assholes). The first viewing (not a posting, but a gossip-hyped "experiment") scared him, he scared himself, basically. But then he tried to do it again, and set up a viewing party. All of this as loudly as possible online--bias intimidation? I dunno, of course the jury won't hear it just like we read it, the evidence might seem quite different in court. And the author depicts the mysterious aspects of suicide; what an ending to the article. But, even though Tyler did take it to his r.a., and was going to get another roommate, when he'd first discussed this with his friend online, he'd worried he'd end up with somebody even worse. And speaking of electronic breadcrumbs, he may have decided that, even if he started using motel rooms and got smarter online, all manner of shit could just go on and on. And in terms of death ny a thousand breadcrumbs, check this if you haven't already (Facebook is just the beginning, despite the title) http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/05/opinion/sunday/facebook-is-using-you.html?src=me&ref=general
― dow, Wednesday, 8 February 2012 03:33 (1 year ago) Permalink
LexisNexis has a product called Accurint for Law Enforcement, which gives government agents information about what people do on social networks.
First I've ever heard of Accurint and googling around doesn't bring up any articles or other information about it. What a tidbit to drop in the middle of a NYT article!
― Mordy, Wednesday, 8 February 2012 03:44 (1 year ago) Permalink
I don't think he was confused about his sexuality he prob just wasn't good w/ girls and stunts like this were just trying to get people to like him
― iatee, Wednesday, 8 February 2012 03:46 (1 year ago) Permalink
― buzza, Wednesday, 8 February 2012 03:53 (1 year ago) Permalink
Still pretty vague. Where does it pull this information from? Can it be used on anyone or do you need a warrant to look someone up? Is it all publicly available information?
― Mordy, Wednesday, 8 February 2012 03:58 (1 year ago) Permalink
weird. my agency deals with lexisnexis to help validate the identities of reporters of information, but i didn't know they got into THAT kind of stuff. makes sense, i guess.
uuuuugh, 2012 suuuuucks
― Z S, Wednesday, 8 February 2012 04:15 (1 year ago) Permalink
i stopped believing in privacy roughly around 1994not that this is good in any way or that i am special just gave up early
― ELI OWNS YOUR HUSBAND (forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 8 February 2012 04:58 (1 year ago) Permalink
u r special to us forks
― tinker tailor soldier sb (silby), Wednesday, 8 February 2012 05:35 (1 year ago) Permalink
giving up privacy is the first step towards liberation. well done.
―