The World Beyond BetterMost > The Culture Tent
In the New Yorker...
serious crayons:
--- Quote from: Front-Ranger on September 26, 2019, 01:13:53 pm ---Some articles are so well written that I find myself zipping through them even though I'm not interested in the subject. "Dr. Robot" by D. T. Max is such an article.
--- End quote ---
I do that, too. I haven't done it with "Dr. Robot," and D.T. Max probably wouldn't be as big a draw for me as some other New Yorker writers (I read and liked Max's stuff about David Foster Wallace, but then DFW is already a subject of interest to me). But Malcolm Gladwell, Ariel Levy, Adam Gopnik, Jia Tolentino and others would be enough of a draw on their names alone. The writer I am most likely to open straight to before I even look at anything else is David Sedaris, but his subjects are always personal/universal enough that they'd be of interest anyway.
Front-Ranger:
I tried to like "The Stone" by Louise Erdrich in the September 9 issue. But I was strangely unmoved by the fable. So I went to an online interview with the author, where she says that the stone, which is the main character in the story, is neither benevolent or malevolent. "It is indifferent," Erdrich says. And that's how I felt about the story.
Jeff Wrangler:
--- Quote from: Front-Ranger on September 27, 2019, 09:32:53 am ---I tried to like "The Stone" by Louise Erdrich in the September 9 issue. But I was strangely unmoved by the fable. So I went to an online interview with the author, where she says that the stone, which is the main character in the story, is neither benevolent or malevolent. "It is indifferent," Erdrich says. And that's how I felt about the story.
--- End quote ---
I read it, too, because of Louise Erdrich, but I didn't think much of it.
serious crayons:
I interviewed Louise Erdrich about 20 years ago, a year or two after she'd gone through a messy time in her life. She had just published the first book after her husband/mentor/writing partner had committed suicide. Which happened not long after she'd gone to the police and accused him of physically and/or sexually abusing some of their six kids. I knew I had to ask her about that, and I knew she'd probably say "no comment." Still, I was really nervous about it. But it went exactly as I had expected and we just went on to talk other stuff: her new book and her bookstore in Minneapolis and the new baby she'd just had with a person whose identity she did not disclose.
One thing she said that was weird was that she wrote a scene in which a character in the new novel, a priest who had appeared in a previous novel, undresses and is revealed to be a woman pretending to be a man. Louise said she did not know until she wrote the scene that was going to happen, so she was as surprised as anyone when it did. That struck me as disingenuous. I would believe it didn't occur to her to have that happen before she started writing, but I didn't think it was possible for her fingers to start typing on their own (or writing longhand, if that's what she does) as she watched the scene unfold like someone in the audience at a movie.
I loved her first three novels and read a couple of others but after a while stopped trying to keep up with them.
Front-Ranger:
--- Quote from: Front-Ranger on September 26, 2019, 01:13:53 pm ---Some articles are so well written that I find myself zipping through them even though I'm not interested in the subject. "Dr. Robot" by D. T. Max is such an article.
--- End quote ---
Sigh. . . . After "Dr. Robot", I was halfway through the Tiktok article when I decided that I don't like my New Yorker Magazine writing the words "algorithm" and "server" so much. Checking the rest of the articles and the cover, methinks I'll have to give the rest of the issue a pass, at least for a day or two. I like my magazines to be analog, thank you very much!
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version