In the New Yorker...

[Front-Ranger]

I read the new George Saunders story in the June 12 issue and found it haunting as his work usually is.

[Jeff Wrangler]

Our Chuck would probably find the June 12 article about the Marvel Universe interesting.

Superheroes are all the same to me: Marvel, D.C., it's all one.

[serious crayons]

A rare New Yorker typo?! This from a story in the May 29 issue about the host of a Netflix series showcasing Black cuisine.

"After a semester at the University of Oregon, Satterfield dropped out and enrolled in culinary school in Portland; Burch?s parents co-signed his student loan. Living in a cheap apartment building that turned out to be full of heroin addicts, he supplemented his classes with ?self-guided studies? in food and wine. He read every good book that he could find at Powell?s, took classes at the International Sommelier Guild, and talked his way into simultaneous jobs at exclusive venues. At the four-star Benson Hotel, he started as a room-service co?rdinator in a basement workspace, then rose to sommelier, holding daily tastings in the foyer."

Even on its own, the sentence doesn't make much sense. It doesn't define what constitutes "good" books, most people read books they consider good and Powell's probably carries far more good books than any individual could read (especially in the timeframe described here). It's also among examples of how he made "self-guided studies" of food and wine.

But G is next to F on the keyboard, and a sentence saying the guy "read every food book he could find at Powell's" makes much more sense.

This was about halfway through the story, which I wasn't finding all that fascinating, so I guess I will use my outrage over the typo as an excuse to stop reading the article and possibly recycle the whole magazine.

I do, however, recommend Rachel Aviv's story un that issue about author Alice Sebold mistaking the identity of her rapist, thus sending an innocent man to prison and including him in her memoir about the rape. I'd read about this when the mistake was first revealed, but the article went into much more detail that takes some of the blame off Sebold.

[Jeff Wrangler]

But G is next to F on the keyboard, and a sentence saying the guy "read every food book he could find at Powell's" makes much more sense.

It does make more sense. I remember something struck me as odd about that sentence, but I didn't stop to try to figure it out.

I do, however, recommend Rachel Aviv's story un that issue about author Alice Sebold mistaking the identity of her rapist, thus sending an innocent man to prison and including him in her memoir about the rape. I'd read about this when the mistake was first revealed, but the article went into much more detail that takes some of the blame off Sebold.

U and I are next to each other on the keyboard, too. ...

Sorry. ...

But that was a good article.

And I'm still annoyed by TNY's use of capitalization in direct quotations.

[Front-Ranger]

The June 26th issue was kind of blah until I got to the critics' section. I found the Kathryn Schultz article about heist stories interesting and it fed my theory about the growing interest in people being someone they're not. The bio of Sarah Jessica Parker just kept going on and on and on until I had to just stop reading it.

Oh, I take it back. The article about the tactical bra by Patricia Marx was entertaining and well-written. It would have made a good S & M!!

[Jeff Wrangler]

Oh, I take it back. The article about the tactical bra by Patricia Marx was entertaining and well-written. It would have made a good S & M!!

I'm looking forward to that one. Patricia Marx is always entertaining. I remember her article on mattresses quite fondly.

I also remember reading (maybe in a Talk of the Town?) that she's good buddies with Roz Chast, whose cartoons I always enjoy.

[serious crayons]

U and I are next to each other on the keyboard, too. ...

 

Good point. The difference, though, is that I make typos all the time, whereas TNY is famous for its proofreading. It really is unusual to find errors. Even this one could pass as correct.

And I'm still annoyed by TNY's use of capitalization in direct quotations.

What do they do? I don't remember discussing this before. I grabbed a random magazine off my stack of unfinished issues, flipped through it and didn't see anything weird.

[serious crayons]

The bio of Sarah Jessica Parker just kept going on and on and on until I had to just stop reading it.

There've been a lot of those lately. But having never watched SatC and not really caring much about SJP I've let myself off the hook for most.

Oh, I take it back. The article about the tactical bra by Patricia Marx was entertaining and well-written. It would have made a good S & M!!

Patricia Marx's stories are among the few amusing things in TNY. Maybe because they aren't necessarily required to be funny; they could just be straightforward consumer articles. Not only are S&Ms not usually funny, I don't even like most of the cartoons (Roz Chast a notable exception, of course). Andy Borowitz is not as funny as The Onion doing approximately the same thing. The cartoon on the last page with the reader submissions are sometimes amusing, but the premises are usually dumb -- the humor has to come from some absurd pairing of characters, objects and settings, whereas many or most of the regular cartoons are just ordinary people sitting in a living room, chatting at a cocktail party or walking on the street.

They're good friends and I feel like they play music together or something like that, as revealed by one of their husbands, who is also a writer for TNY, in an essay a while back.

[Jeff Wrangler]

Good point. The difference, though, is that I make typos all the time, whereas TNY is famous for its proofreading. It really is unusual to find errors. Even this one could pass as correct.

I once found a typo in a Bible (I think it was a running head).

What do they do? I don't remember discussing this before. I grabbed a random magazine off my stack of unfinished issues, flipped through it and didn't see anything weird.

Sometimes they begin a direct quote that is a complete sentence with a lower case letter--and sometimes they don't. I disagree with the practice--wasn't what I was taught--but the inconsistency also annoys me.

I may be able to make some time later to hunt down some examples. Meanwhile, here's an example of the "correct" way to do it, a "rule" from a wonderful old grammar book called Warriner's English Grammar and Composition (apparently first published in 1951):

Capitalize the first word of a direct quotation:

Mr. Jackson said, "Your sister is her own worst enemy."

Do not capitalize the first word of a quoted sentence fragment:

I agree with Mr. Jackson's remark that my sister is "her own worst enemy."

[serious crayons]

Capitalize the first word of a direct quotation:

Mr. Jackson said, "Your sister is her own worst enemy."

Do not capitalize the first word of a quoted sentence fragment:

I agree with Mr. Jackson's remark that my sister is "her own worst enemy."

Thanks! This issue has always been a bit grayish for me. Glad to know there's a specific answer and I've (at least usually) been doing it correctly.

But the New Yorker is never grayish! Any publication that can't write re-election without a diaeresis and spells out large numbers should certainly have a rigid rule about this, too!

Speaking of funny misuse, just today I came across an article (not in TNY) that used "eponymous" to mean publishing a book, not named after its author, after the author's death.