New Yorker magazine alert thread

Like, look the dude's track record, which has been this unbalanced pattern of "four for them, one for me." So many flops and shitty boilerplate sequels.

ya the author's fascination in the reznor piece with the idea of using computers to make music was pretty bad, like, if you still haven't gotten over that, maybe you shouldn't be the person or the publication to be covering trent reznor

a friend of mine had the cassette of pretty hate machine melted into her dashboard by the sun

see that would be a good talk of the town

s1ocki is a food person

it's 'bon vivant'

With computers, Reznor can make any sounds he wants, even sounds that don't exist!

he took a cello and a piano and put them together at the same time iirc

other recent hilite was the long piece about the engineer that had worked in silicon valley

Libertarian venture capital guy, or have I really fallen ?

... behind?

William Trevor story in the latest. Anyone read it?

Patricia Marx on personal outsourcing actually made me lol in a gentle and predictable way

Going Clear: Scientology, Hollywood, and the Prison of Belief is out (or nearly out, in my time zone).

wait how is this book not from the same project as Paul Haggis' article discussed upthread, how did I get so confused, that's not relevant to this thread at all now

>:(

oh lol I'm all confused. Yes, this book is the book by the writer who wrote that article. Hooray!

i don't really want to be mean, but roz chast *sux*

why won't maira kalman grace us with her works more regularly

sex offender piece was wrenching, almost vertiginous to me.

St. Francis piece is gold. It's gonna get my highest accolade (tearing it out to save in my files).

yeah i'm looking forward to reading both of those this weekend

Gods! Last three issues all seemed to arrive within the last 1.5 weeks, plus my bedside pile has officially become "unstable."

Unless said pile involves issues dated 2010, I don't want to hear about it.

Only goes back to 2011. ._.

Thankfully the Jan 21 issue (obomber hearding cats on the cover) was unusually uninteresting (to me).

Much catching up to do, which can be accomplished in a couple of weeks thanks to lolunemployment.

Nussbaum only mentions six other shows in her Justified piece. Progress!

i don't really want to be mean, but roz chast *sux*

I've been saying this for years.

love the mongolian dinosaur article

Procedure required that an arrest warrant be issued against the dinosaur itself, so the action became known as United States of America v One Tyranosaurus Bataar Skeleton.

xp Actually, I kind of chuckled at this one from a few months ago:

http://imgc.allpostersimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/65/6527/OJ84100Z/posters/roz-chast-a-woman-stands-in-front-of-a-bookshelf-of-memoirs-in-a-bookstore-new-yorker-cartoon.jpg

But 99% of her stuff is lame.

i like roz chast

The Remnick story on the far right in Israel was a good terse account.

roz chast = too many words

early roz chast is fine, she's just been doing the same thing for like thirty years and it's exhausted

Haha:

too many words

― mookieproof (mookieproof), Thursday, October 12, 2006 1:47 PM (6 years ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Roz Chast: C/D

i was otm

JessiRoz Chastain

I finally got around to that Elizabeth Kolbert piece on the Dutch wilderness preserve. Like a lot of New Yorker articles, it seemed to take something that was interesting, but probably not worth more than a page or two, and stretch it severely. I think I also just don't usually love her pieces that much.

I thought the Kolbert was interesting for being part of the zeitgeist in conservation that sez maybe preserving native species shouldn't be the end all be all.

three fb friends posted borowitz report abt republicans demanding Obama resign over beyonce lip synching thinking it was real like they've gone too far this time, oof

all Canadians lol

well there you go

I uh thought the Tom Cruise S&M was funny.

Dr. Oz piece was unsatisfying.

Does it address the fact that wearing surgical scrubs at every appearance makes him look like an idiot?

Or that going to medical school does not make you an expert in everything?

No! Which is part of my disappointment! He should have been a totally intriguing subject, and instead it was just a very meh article. There was a little glimpse of a difficult father-son relationship, but it just scratched the surface.

TBF he did mention that the scrubs looked as though they had been tailored on Savile Row, but did not adequately capture how they, and he, are straight-up repugnant.

It was just really, really weak from a science/medical write of his stature.

it was pretty funny how they kept implying that he's totally controlled by his nutball wife

http://m.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2013/01/the-awful-recess-appointment-ruling-in-canning-v-national-labor-relations-board.html

Have never read Toobin opine this candidly.

The Oz article is more about exposing him as a quack than telling any sort of intriguing story about Oz. Specter writes about science denialism and really has no interest in delving into the root cause of Oz's transition from respectable surgeon to believing in homeopathy/reiki and other bullshit.

I think we know the root cause: Oprah, or more specifically, TV. Same thing with CNN's Sanjay Gupta. If you become an iconic, well-paid medical expert, then it's only a matter of time before you actually do think you're a Medical Expert and not just a doctor. And I bet it's just one step beyond that to believe you have, you know, magic powers.

i watch dr oz on the tv sometimes at the gym (sound off), and i was always like, well maybe he's ok, but then on monday he was doing some whole homeopathic thing and i was like fuck this dude

http://i48.tinypic.com/izc3k8.jpg

i'm really glad that my mom watches dr oz and oprah and dr phil all of the time, they are the holy triumvirate of knowledge