New Yorker magazine alert thread

Totally OTM posts by both Jordans. I first read the Louise Brooks profile in a Tynan collection, think it was titled Show People, also good on Johnny Carson and Ralph Richardson, others (whole thing is now folded into an even bigger collection, it seems). Think I'll get the library to order this expanded edition of her collection:

Louise Brooks, Lulu In Hollywood
Paperback – Illustrated, Univ Of Minnesota Press

One of the few film books that can be called indispensable (Roger Ebert, 1998)
Reviewed in the United States on August 30, 2022
Verified Purchase
“Lulu in Hollywood” starts with a forty-six-page introduction by Kenneth Tynan, “The Girl in the Black Helmet”, originally published in The New Yorker of June 11, 1979, and reprinted in The New Yorker of August 29, 2022.
Following are seven essays by Louise Brooks (interspersed with 40 pages of photos):
[1] Kansas to New York
[2] On Location with Billy Wellman
[3] Marion Davies’ Niece (about her close friend Pepi Lederer, who died in 1935)
[4] Humphrey and Bogey
[5] The Other Face of W. C. Fields
[6] Gish and Garbo
[7]] Pabst and Lulu (about the making of the 1929 film “Pandora’s Box”).
At the end there is an epilogue by Louise Brooks, “Why I Will Never Write My Memoirs”, a little piece by Lotte H. Eisner, “A Witness Speaks”, and Louise Brooks’ Filmography (24 films between 1925 and 1938).
This is a great read. I read it overnight in one sitting the day I received it. Louise Brooks’ writes as an eyewitness to the world of filmmaking of the 1920s and 1930s in a style that is crisp and unpretentious.
In a 1998 review of “Pandora’s Box” Roger Ebert wrote:
“In Rochester, she [Louise Brooks] wrote memoirs that were eventually collected into Lulu in Hollywood, one of the few film books that can be called indispensable. She remembered Bogart as a kid starting out on the New York stage, and the private lovability of her old friend, W.C. Fields. And she was frank about her rise and especially her fall. Many silent stars become boring relics, repeating the same memorized anecdotes. Louise Brooks was saved by the astringent power of her wit.”

the personal history pieces sometimes dont hit for me but the 1 abt elizabeth hardwick in this issue was real good

yeah, I liked that one.

Same.

Menand's review of the Giuliani bio made me lol in places.

Can very much say to dow that the Louise Brooks book is excellent.

Another reliable source! Thanks, James, well def check it out.

i'm usually ok with kelefa sanneh iirc but the shane gillis profile was so pointless. it seemed to want to imply that he's somehow smarter or more thoughtful than the 8 billion other "shocking" white dude comedians but didn't provide any evidence of this in describing his personality or his life. wasn't crazy about the article on the woman who makes centerpieces for art exhibitions either (the photos of her work were not impressive) but she at least seemed interesting as a person.

on the other hand i'll devour any article about art authentication controversies, and the lucian freud one was particularly good

Didn't Sanneh once do a sympathetic profile of Michael Savage? Maybe he's got a soft spot for this type.

Yeah, a lot of Sanneh's NYer profiles seem to be of people ignored by or looked down upon by the urban cognoscenti: Morgan Wallen, Jake Paul, etc.

He sorta leans that way on social media

Can’t imagine why anyone would want to look down on either of those charming fellows!

yeah the gillis piece felt like something to round out a book and was genuinely uninteresting

Does the centerpiece article ever explain what it means to be the"Bjork of food?"

a fountain of blood in the shape of fondue

Lol

the bread chair was fire tho

https://static.dezeen.com/uploads/2020/01/loaf-comfort-omar-sosa-friedman-benda-new-york_dezeen_2364_col_0.jpg

Chotiner interviews Matt Duss on Ukraine, etc..

Molly Ringwald reminisces on working with Godard on King Lear.

that was a good one. what a weirdo

Watching Burgess Meredith drink wine was my favorite part.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/04/19/the-repressive-politics-of-emotional-intelligence

So many stories about Burgess Meredith, didn’t know what to expect in the Molly Ringwald thing.

It's not like I have much faith in liberal journalists but it's truly astonishing to see this passage in the New Yorker. What year is this? pic.twitter.com/WvXUUMJWWT

— Erik Baker (@erikmbaker) December 29, 2022

It's unfortunate to see some of the most respected venues in journalism taking this turn—exceptionalizing individuals and groups who advocate for greater public health protections and portraying them as deviant, immature, countercultural, Marxists, etc. 1/https://t.co/eqqA8x6YOY

— Martha Lincoln (@heavyredaction) December 28, 2022

That headline is awful.

the headline seems designed to be hate read bait for the right, whereas the contents are not. and sure enough ian cheong is tweeting it and musk replying. congrats to the new yorker.

The problem with creating hate read bait for the right is that the right doesn’t read.

if this is in reference to the emma green article, I haven’t read it and am not terribly interested to do so, I’m not a stan or anything for the new yorker but there is a certain… standard that she consistently falls below, just a very odd fit for the institution. her heterodox bumpkin david brooks-citing approach seemed more suited for the atlantic, where she was previously

an editorial failure I suppose

yes

One to skip

I never had a source assaulted in front of me until today when an Israeli soldier who stopped my interview did this with a Palestinian peace activist Issa Amro in Hebron. I can't stop thinking how dehumanizing the occupation is on the young soldiers charged with enforcing it. pic.twitter.com/Qrsa1UJsfA

— Lawrence Wright (@lawrence_wright) February 13, 2023

amazing tweet

…

Man. (At the tweet, the video, the responses.)

Wright also had a very, very long story about Austin, Texas and how it’s changing in the latest issue.

That Austin piece was a rare example of a New Yorker article that seemed like it should be a book (in the vein of Sam Anderson's Boom Town, about Oklahoma City), rather than the reverse.

I mean, he's not wrong about the dehumanizing effect on soldiers but ...

I am currently irritated with the NYer because it feels like they are doing “double” issues way more than they used to.

That Austin piece was kinda irritating, too.

That Austin piece was a rare example of a New Yorker article that seemed like it should be a book

He already wrote a big book about Texas, "God Save Texas: A Journey into the Soul of the Lone Star State."

Hope it was better than his novel, which was a pile of shit.

Scientology book was ok, but fell short of being the definitive outlier text

that tweet phrasing is abominable

should i read the agnes callard thing

i mean i love a trainwreck as much as the next person but possibly it will be too depressing

i read it and just kind of shrugged but she seems like she sucks

Yet another pseudo-intellectual justifying their fucking around with bullshit, this stuff should have died with the Fabian Society.

seems like she's surrounded by people who like her for some reasons and just kind of let her do whatever because it's not worth disagreeing

I did see some reactions on twitter from the guy she co-hosts a podcast with and he was kind of brutal!

A few years ago, I wrote an essay that, in passing, questioned faculty solidarity with unionizing graduate students. I had not realized how sensitive that topic was, and I was inundated with angry and hateful messages and a few threats online.

https://media-cldnry.s-nbcnews.com/image/upload/t_fit-1240w,f_auto,q_auto:best/ap/06990af2-6d7a-4d62-b9c3-1ddcf771b5e5.jpg

that bad stance still far outweighs the weird and bad relationship hijinks

JCO multiple-driveby for those who celebrate

(excerpt from an uncompleted novel of Iris Murdoch focusing intensely, one might say hysterically-minuscule-ly, upon banal-stereotypical notions dressed up in philosophy-speak is no departure for the deceased novelist but her usual fatuous characters are here unleavened by wit.) https://t.co/YLvTL4SYdS

— Joyce Carol Oates (@JoyceCarolOates) March 8, 2023

damn

Thought JCO would like her for throwing out her kids' Halloween candy