New Yorker magazine alert thread

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (4891 of them)

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 (five 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 (five years ago) Permalink

The Patel story was amazing.

dan selzer, Monday, 3 January 2011 21:28 (five years ago) Permalink

yeah needs a good 3rd act tho.

gr8080, Monday, 3 January 2011 21:34 (five 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 (five 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 (five 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 (five 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 (five 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.

max bro'd (nakhchivan), Tuesday, 4 January 2011 00:27 (five years ago) Permalink

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 (five 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 (five 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 (five years ago) Permalink

Lamp, thanks for the Gawande link.

Kip Squashbeef (pixel farmer), Tuesday, 4 January 2011 01:54 (five 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 (five 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 (five 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 (five 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 (five 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 (five 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 (five 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 (five 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 (five 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 (five 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 (five 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 (five 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 (five 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 (five years ago) Permalink

like, if i want economist-lite i'll read newsweek

snark on that one for size

progressive cuts (Tracer Hand), Monday, 10 January 2011 17:39 (five years ago) Permalink

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 (five 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 (five 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 (five 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 (five 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 (five years ago) Permalink

t-pain?

gr8080, Monday, 10 January 2011 21:33 (five 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 (five 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 (five 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 (five 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 (five 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 (five 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 (five years ago) Permalink

Yes, that was ugh.

Zsa Zsa Gay Bar (jaymc), Friday, 14 January 2011 17:09 (five years ago) Permalink

i am considering writing a disappointed email, is how disappointed i am, right now

Lamp, Friday, 14 January 2011 17:09 (five years ago) Permalink

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 (five 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), 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 (five years ago) Permalink

freud/china piece nakh http://pastie.org/1460821

caek, Friday, 14 January 2011 17:59 (five 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 (five years ago) Permalink

I knew the Brooks article would settle the argument.

Gus Van Sotosyn (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 14 January 2011 18:28 (five 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 (five 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 (five years ago) Permalink

omg that brooks article guys

horseshoe, Friday, 14 January 2011 22:39 (five years ago) Permalink

unacceptable

horseshoe, Friday, 14 January 2011 22:39 (five years ago) Permalink

anyway we should probably start a chapo traphouse thread now that lefty twitter has it's own Hipster Runoff

Whiney G. Weingarten, Monday, 21 November 2016 16:59 (one week ago) Permalink

lefty Twitter has it's own Hipster Runoff

Ha. This is pretty succinct. Chapo getting a regular slot on Sirius XM coming next, no doubt.

Anyhow, they posted an ep already reacting to their own coverage and discomfort at being rendered in watercolor.

(rocketcat) 🚀🐱 👑🐟 (kingfish), Monday, 21 November 2016 17:13 (one week ago) Permalink

is this Chapo thing the new Ken Bone?

Supercreditor (Dr Morbius), Monday, 21 November 2016 17:20 (one week ago) Permalink

also what is a "trap house"

slathered in cream and covered with stickers (silby), Monday, 21 November 2016 17:21 (one week ago) Permalink

A better written intro: here.

Or this unofficial pilot, an excoriation of and discussion of the bizarro psychopathologies in the Michael Bay Benghazi movie.

Your mileage may vary, like with every other single thing on the internet.

(rocketcat) 🚀🐱 👑🐟 (kingfish), Monday, 21 November 2016 17:32 (one week ago) Permalink

Curious what a fan makes of that profile, because they come across as deeply unfunny to me.

yeah, I've been listening to this for awhile and the hosts are not funny at all. Some of the writing they find on the web is pretty hilarious though.

duped and used by my worst Miss U (President Keyes), Monday, 21 November 2016 18:37 (one week ago) Permalink

They're definitely at their best in interviews and when doing "reading series" stuff. It's fun to hear them shoot the shit for a while but it gets a little repetitive, especially Felix ("cucks" "he taught me it was ok to be weird" etc.). I don't really listen to it as a comedy podcast, more as a political podcast that is sometimes funny.

the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Monday, 21 November 2016 18:59 (one week ago) Permalink

I thought I said this on this thread earlier, but the profile to me did not at all convey the appeal of the show

the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Monday, 21 November 2016 19:26 (one week ago) Permalink

Also, I've been a fan for a while and have listened to nearly every ep, but I'm wondering how it will sustain my interest in a Trump presidency. I think even Will expressed that concern about the show. It's almost like they were right about the center-left and center-right punditocracy they targeted and it indeed proved to be irrelevant and now they're stuck trying to figure out a more original take on cheeto mussolini jokes.

the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Monday, 21 November 2016 19:29 (one week ago) Permalink

Anyway, if you want a good intro to the show, I'd listen to one of the Freeway Ross Douthat episodes and stick through the banter to the part where they actually read from Douthat's book.

the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Monday, 21 November 2016 19:30 (one week ago) Permalink

ya they're fucked now that Trump won

flopson, Monday, 21 November 2016 19:31 (one week ago) Permalink

More podcasts should be short-lived imo

rob, Monday, 21 November 2016 19:32 (one week ago) Permalink

I expect the flourishing of intra-left bickering we saw under Obama to subside now that we have zero power anywhere

flopson, Monday, 21 November 2016 19:32 (one week ago) Permalink

The two episodes per week model is kind of crazy (one free and one premium) -- hard to fill that much time with good content. Also not so sure about the new five-person model with Amber and Virgil Texas, always liked them as guests but it feels a bit crowded now.

the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Monday, 21 November 2016 19:36 (one week ago) Permalink

Anyway sry to turn this into Chapo Trap Thread instead of NYer thread.

the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Monday, 21 November 2016 19:37 (one week ago) Permalink

rob otm

illegal economic migration (Tracer Hand), Monday, 21 November 2016 21:45 (one week ago) Permalink

just have to say the illustration of the chapos was extremely hilarious and weird, no idea what it was going for

the last famous person you were surprised to discover was actually (man alive), Tuesday, 22 November 2016 04:37 (one week ago) Permalink

all the articles in that section have the same style - http://www.newyorker.com/culture/persons-of-interest

just sayin, Tuesday, 22 November 2016 04:58 (one week ago) Permalink

I expect the flourishing of intra-left bickering we saw under Obama to subside now that we have zero power anywhere

― flopson, Monday, November 21, 2016

bush years suggest this will not be the case

Larry Elleison (rogermexico.), Tuesday, 22 November 2016 06:33 (one week ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.