Skip

New Yorker Hard Drive
August 24, 2006 3:34 PM   Subscribe

Every issue of the New Yorker on a portable hard drive. For $299 you get an 80GB hard drive loaded with every article, poem, short story, advertisement and lame cartoon that has appeared in the over 4,000 issues of The New Yorker Magazine since February, 1925. The vintage ads alone MIGHT be worth it (depending on res/format) but does anyone really WANT every one of those unfunny cartoons? Does anyone outside NYC even care that this magazine is still being published?
posted by Dome-O-Rama (108 comments total) 1 user marked this as a favorite

 
The Complete Cartoons of The New Yorker
Amazon sales rank 7381. Just sayin'.
posted by hydrophonic at 3:38 PM on August 24, 2006


I read the New Yorker regularly. I'm from Portland. I care! On the other hand, I'd never drop $299 on the complete back archives.
posted by OverlappingElvis at 3:39 PM on August 24, 2006


Right? I'm sure it'll be torrented soon enough :)
posted by jtron at 3:40 PM on August 24, 2006


i wonder if it's encrypted and/or watermarked? (and the NYPL and others have complete archives anyway)
posted by amberglow at 3:45 PM on August 24, 2006


that Amazon rank is actually really good, compared to most, hydro.
posted by amberglow at 3:46 PM on August 24, 2006


see also...
posted by FreezBoy at 3:47 PM on August 24, 2006


I also read it weekly and live in Portland (though I lived eight years in NYC). With the exception of arts/entertainment listings and the short "Talk of the Town" pieces, the content often has little or nothing to do with New York -- it's just an intelligent general-interest magazine with actual long, well-written features (which are becoming a rarity in today's journalism world).

That said, you can buy the set of 8 DVDs (going up until 2005) for $63 from Amazon.
posted by lisa g at 3:47 PM on August 24, 2006


I don't have time for magazines anymore but when I was younger I loved the New Yorker, including the cartoons. They turned me on to dozens of amazing writers (& illustrators) I would never have heard of otherwise. But a selection, even a huge one, would be way better than 80 gigs. What the hell am I going to do with 80 gigs of *anything*?
posted by facetious at 3:48 PM on August 24, 2006


I own the eight-disc set on DVDs and it's very cool to see the original ads and whatnot, much like browsing old magazines is cool for people who like that kind of thing. But having to swap out discs by decade sucks, and having it all in one place for browsing would be a lot cooler. On the other hand, three hundred bucks . . . I don't know if it's that cool.
posted by cgc373 at 3:48 PM on August 24, 2006


Hooptyrides figured out how to turn the 8 DVD set into a laptop full of wonderfulness.
posted by squalor at 3:49 PM on August 24, 2006 [3 favorites]


Why's it come with a FireWire cable?
posted by cillit bang at 3:50 PM on August 24, 2006


I'm not in NYC, but I subscribe to the mag, and find that it's hit or miss. A few gems (such as an article last week on the invention of surfboards with foam interiors) mixed in with a lot of stuffy, blue blood Northeasterny articles on fishing and birdwatching and the like.

Some great stories. "Brokeback Mountain"? The original, by Annie Proulx, appeared in the New Yorker back in '97 or '98. Read it several times.

But most stories, although they hired a new short story editor a few years back, run to the "Upper-middle class fiftysomething female with cancer" genre. When a story begins with, "Alyson, after visiting her oncologist, made a trip to Berghoffs to select wigs," my eyes glaze over.

The cartoons have been mining the same "Desert Island" or "New arrivals in hell" meme for nigh on 80 years. Even so, I'm often astonished as the freshness of a select few.

Seymour Hirsh writes interesting articles with a liberal bent, but his "sources close to the President" style of you-said he-said anonymous references don't help our cause, IMO.

All in all, worth the subscription price, but just barely. I usually skim the cartoons, search out the single readible article, and 86 the rest.
Luckily, I've got Rolling Stone to wash out the bad taste when I'm done.

The golden years of the New Yorker were during the Tina Brown age (early 90s?), when the magazine, by choice, took on a new edginess in photos, daring reportage, and short stories. But it's all humdrum these days.
posted by Gordion Knott at 3:51 PM on August 24, 2006


I'm a Canadian who subscribes to the New Yorker. Indeed, there is some content that is specific to residents of, or visitors to, that improbable city. However, the majority of the articles and fiction focus on general subject matter and have been composed by some of the greatest writers alive today.
posted by ChaoticIndustry at 3:51 PM on August 24, 2006


I read and have a subscription to the New Yorker and I'm on the opposite coast. I don't know that I'd have any use for every issue ever made, buy I do enjoy it for the articles. Nothing else though. I just read it for the articles.
posted by lekvar at 3:51 PM on August 24, 2006


that Amazon rank is actually really good, compared to most, hydro.

Indeed it is. I meant that they're actually pretty popular. I don't read the New Yorker regularly, but the cartoons are funnier than almost every newspaper strips.
posted by hydrophonic at 3:52 PM on August 24, 2006




Is the content really searchable?
posted by chillmost at 3:53 PM on August 24, 2006


Wow you're an idiot. The New Yorker has had and still has some of the best magazine journalism, fiction and poetry in existence.

Just because the cartoons are too subtle for your tastes doesn't mean you have to bash the whole thing. Try "Cathy."
posted by fungible at 3:54 PM on August 24, 2006 [1 favorite]


yeah my friend had figured out the NYT mysql hack and we struggled with whether or not we should release the hack, but then hooptyrides went and made all of our handwringing moot...

anyway it will be interesting to see if they just abandoned DRM for this new hard disk version. i bought the DVDs and then never have the time to go back and read the old ones. sigh.
posted by joeblough at 3:56 PM on August 24, 2006


sorry, not NYT, i mean New Yorker.
posted by joeblough at 3:56 PM on August 24, 2006


"lame cartoon"?

What's funnier than a good New Yorker cartoon?

Dilbert?
posted by wfc123 at 3:58 PM on August 24, 2006


The New Yorker cartoons can all be boiled down to one caption: "What an asshole". (this observation is original to someone here on MeFi I forget who said it first). The cover of the beach scene in the most recent issue for example. Also If you read the Fiction, a lot of it is feminist-leaning, whch is fine, not my target audience. The feature articles and book reviews are good.. but then yeah you can buy every back issue for about the same price as a one year subscription on DVD, and the better feature article usually end up on MeFi or an RSS feed anyway. Plus you know its being run by career women and who can trust a career woman ;)
posted by stbalbach at 3:59 PM on August 24, 2006 [1 favorite]


My only objection is that the hard drive itself is branded, and that is really tacky. You could purchase the CD set and a similar hard drive for about the same, or less, so it's not like you are getting a good deal here. So yeah, a stupid idea from their marketing department.

Now as far as the criticism of the magazine goes, that I take exception to: (unlike apparently, yourself) not everyone outside of NYC is a philistine m'dear.
posted by lilboo at 3:59 PM on August 24, 2006


This Modern World, Tom Tomorrow
posted by dibblda at 4:03 PM on August 24, 2006


The golden years of the New Yorker were during the Tina Brown age

This is a joke, right? Someone please tell me he was joking? Please?

Please?
posted by dersins at 4:11 PM on August 24, 2006


i only read the new yorker when I'm flying, don't know what it is but it's only enjoyable at 30,000 feet
posted by jacob hauser at 4:17 PM on August 24, 2006 [1 favorite]


"What the hell am I going to do with 80 gigs of *anything*?"

You don't have 80GB of porn?

Slacker.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 4:24 PM on August 24, 2006


I read it pretty regularly, and I don't even live in the US. Always skip the fiction, mind you.

This is a joke, right? Someone please tell me he was joking? Please?

Must've been.
posted by jack_mo at 4:25 PM on August 24, 2006


It appears as though Gordionn Knott has it exactly backwards. He's either a deadpan sarcasm artist or one should take what he said and pretty much invert every sentence.

Rolling Stone? Hmm.
posted by gramschmidt at 4:26 PM on August 24, 2006


Best Magazine ever.

Seymour Hersh has been part of their stable for a long time, and alone is worth the cost of a subscription. Better yet is the sheer variety of articles- from the current loss of the biggest supplier of surfboard blanks, to the genesis of the triple blade razor, to thirty pages of John McPhee riffing on the national railroad system, and some of the best political reporting ever put to page. Not to mention short fiction by people as oh-so-highbrow as Thomas McGuane and George Saunders.

They are hamstrung by a zombie-like (i.e. nearly impossible to kill) stink of elitism. Factor in that it is a weekly publication and you have something truly sublime.
posted by docpops at 4:27 PM on August 24, 2006


The golden years of the New Yorker were during the Tina Brown age (early 90s?),

< *cough* *sputter*!>. The golden age was the age of Harold Ross, when James Thurber, Dorothy Parker, E.B. White, Joseph Mitchell, S.J. Perelman, John O'Hara, Alexander Woollcott, Robert Benchley, and others were on staff.
posted by QuietDesperation at 4:27 PM on August 24, 2006


But for cartoons, no one could beat Punch.
posted by QuietDesperation at 4:29 PM on August 24, 2006


The fiction department still puts up some astounding gems. Kevin Brockmeier's original novella version of A Brief History of the Dead alone cancels out any number of middling "I'm not Raymond Carver, but I'm hoping that if you step back a bit and squint..." stories.
posted by Iridic at 4:33 PM on August 24, 2006


Does anyone outside NYC even care that this magazine is still being published?

Well, yes, obviously so. But does anyone outside Hollywood read those recurrent articles about the movie industry? Michael Eisner, Michael Eisner, Michael Eisner... why?
posted by The corpse in the library at 4:34 PM on August 24, 2006


Anybody know whether installing the new update disk puts anything on your computer that prevents dowlnoading them all onto your hard drive? Be interesting to know if they've corked this.

Also, for those overwhelmed by the thought of 80GB of New Yorker, I made a metafilter clone earlier this year intended to help New Yorker fans point one another toward interesting things they've found either on the disks or the archive. This is a total self-link so if you're offended by that, drape something over your monitor before visiting NewYorkerFilter.
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 4:35 PM on August 24, 2006 [1 favorite]


Today I was reading a story in what was probably last week's magazine, and in it the two characters passed from Michigan into Ontario, and the monotony of Highway 401 was spoken of, then Mounties were mentioned. Mounties? In Ontario? What happened to the fact checkers? Or maybe fiction was always excluded from that.

I like that caption contest at the back, but its introduction seems like a jump the shark moment.
posted by TimTypeZed at 4:35 PM on August 24, 2006


The golden years of the New Yorker were during the Tina Brown age

If your interest lies in endless articles about media figures, I can recommend a magazine called 'Talk'.

Oh wait...
posted by liam at 4:36 PM on August 24, 2006


Oh good, someone else took issue with the Tina Brown = golden years mystery utterance, so I can take issue with the "women with cancer" slant comment. I don't much like most of the fiction either (and I've been reading the magazine religiously for the majority of my life, starting at about age 6 with the cartoons) but women with cancer? Come on. Every New Yorker story is about one of two things: 1. Middle aged man regrets something he did as a child or 2. Nothing. Nothing at all happens for four unbearable pages. Except for sometimes, when a middle aged person, in the middle of doing nothing and saying nothing manages, for a couple of lines, to regret a childhood trauma. So how that is "feminist leaning" baffles me. What constitutes a feminist leaning short fiction piece anyway and would make it something you wouldn't want to read?
posted by mygothlaundry at 4:38 PM on August 24, 2006


"I'm not Raymond Carver, but I'm hoping that if you step back a bit and squint..." stories.

Possibly the best summary of ninety percent of new publihed fiction I've ever seen.
posted by docpops at 4:39 PM on August 24, 2006


[Downs martini bracing for a few bons mots from his fellow campers at MeFi...]

"The golden years of the New Yorker were during the Tina Brown age"

[Spit Take!]
posted by hal9k at 4:46 PM on August 24, 2006


but does anyone really WANT every one of those unfunny cartoons?
Especially when they all have the same caption.
posted by kirkaracha at 4:47 PM on August 24, 2006


Wasn't there an editor there for a while named William Shawn? I recall he was quite good. Of course, he was no Harold Ross. . .
posted by Astro Zombie at 4:48 PM on August 24, 2006


Best.
New Yorker.
Cartoon.
Ever.

posted by wendell at 4:50 PM on August 24, 2006


Sorry for the derail (and the potentially stupid question) but Gordion Knott mentioned he skims the cartoons, searches out the single readible article, and will "86 the rest".

I've never heard that phrase before and I'm not sure what it means.
posted by rinkjustice at 5:00 PM on August 24, 2006


Not sure either.
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 5:02 PM on August 24, 2006


"The New Yorker cartoons can all be boiled down to one caption: "What an asshole". (this observation is original to someone here on MeFi I forget who said it first)."


This is wrong. The correct universally funny caption to a New Yorker (or any one panel) strip is:

"Who Farted?"


example:

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

posted by stenseng at 5:03 PM on August 24, 2006


"86" is New York short-order cook code for "we're out of an item." It's come to mean "cancel". By the way, "99" used to mean "Look busy, the boss is coming." Mel Brooks used "86" and "99" as the numbers of the agents in the show "Get Smart" as an hommage to thsi bit of hometown trivia.

Other etymologies exist, but they look contrived to me.

Adam and Even on a Raft, draw one!
posted by QuietDesperation at 5:06 PM on August 24, 2006


They ran a story once about a woman whose child had cancer, if that counts for anything. The story in question is titled "People Like That Are The Only People Here," and it was written by Lorrie Moore. That one was really good.
posted by anjamu at 5:07 PM on August 24, 2006


86

Check the Urban Dictionary
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=86&defid=1213425
posted by speug at 5:08 PM on August 24, 2006


blue blood Northeasterny articles on fishing and birdwatching and the like.

Do we read the same magazine?
posted by kosem at 5:11 PM on August 24, 2006


Rich person's magazine, rich person's toy. Unfunny cartoons? Philistines.
posted by nanojath at 5:26 PM on August 24, 2006


The New Yorker has had and still has some of the best magazine journalism, fiction and poetry in existence.

Best Magazine ever.

Agree .. and agree! The 'New Yorker' has always been -- and will likely always be -- my favorite magazine.
posted by ericb at 5:33 PM on August 24, 2006


stupidSexyFlanders, the copy to harddrive hack actually makes use of the mechanism they provided to load an update. in fact there are a couple of issues that are on the DVDs that are borked, so they used it almost right out of the chute.

but you are right, its certainly possible that they changed something to blacklist all the 'known good' issues from being copied to the hard disk.
posted by joeblough at 5:44 PM on August 24, 2006


Elaine: Well I bet I can get in once I mention I'm from ...The New Yorker.

Jerry: The New Yorker?

Elaine: Yes , The New Yorker , I've met with their cartoon editor and I got him to admit that that cartoon

...MADE NO SENSE....
posted by Obvious Fakename at 6:03 PM on August 24, 2006


Oh I miss the New Yorker. You Americans have it lucky. A subscription in Australia is really quite expensive.

I would happily subscribe for $20 a year to get full access on the web.

Alas, such an option doesn't seem to be there.

it's odd how they are ahead on their releasing of their archives digitally but behind on release their current content that way.
posted by sien at 6:03 PM on August 24, 2006



Rich person's magazine, rich person's toy.


As someone who reads his New Yorker second-hand for want of $5/wk, I have to disagree.
posted by The White Hat at 6:08 PM on August 24, 2006


I can't wait until Esquire does this.
posted by ColdChef at 6:23 PM on August 24, 2006


Or, you know, Playboy.
posted by ColdChef at 6:24 PM on August 24, 2006


All in all, worth the subscription price, but just barely. I usually skim the cartoons, search out the single readible article, and 86 the rest.

Luckily, I've got Rolling Stone to wash out the bad taste when I'm done.


What the hell? You had my interest piqued and then had to ruin it all. That's kind of like saying "a bmw is ok, but overrated. Luckily I have my yugo".
posted by justgary at 6:24 PM on August 24, 2006


And I hate to even mention this here, in case I might mess up a good thing, but a "student" can get The New Yorker for less than $25 a year. You just have to ask.
posted by ColdChef at 6:25 PM on August 24, 2006


"I'm not Raymond Carver, but I'm hoping that if you step back a bit and squint..." stories

Good line - I may have to steal that.
posted by vronsky at 6:36 PM on August 24, 2006


Previous discussion of the "christ, what an asshole" thing. Personally I can't stand the cartoons and most of the fiction leaves me cold, but the magazine is usually good for the sheer length of the articles, if they are about a topic you're interested in.

They need to fire that Anthony Lane guy, though, he writes like a Pitchfork hack artist.
posted by whir at 6:36 PM on August 24, 2006


I love Anthony Lane and for those who don't: break me a fucking give.
posted by ColdChef at 6:45 PM on August 24, 2006


Does anyone outside NYC even care that this magazine is still being published?

I don't read Rolling Stone, since who cares about Mick Jagger?

Duh.
posted by j-dub at 7:02 PM on August 24, 2006


You can add me to the list of New Yorker readers who are not in New York. I even have fond memories of the Tina Brown era because I was young back then and didn't know any better.
posted by betweenthebars at 7:05 PM on August 24, 2006


The New Yorker has more readers in California than in New York. See here.
posted by spira at 7:21 PM on August 24, 2006


I just find it incredibly annoying when New Yorkers gush incessantly about the mother fucking Hamptons. Jesus Christ where can I get one of these magazines!
posted by The Jesse Helms at 7:35 PM on August 24, 2006


thanks a lot for beating me to the punch, ColdChef.

that review was priceless.

really, the New Yorker is priceless, and Gordion Knott seems to be reading Field and Stream.

it's like a better version of Harper's four times a month.
posted by Hat Maui at 7:38 PM on August 24, 2006


I read the New Yorker. But then, I am one.

Okay, take two: I read the New Yorker, and I read the articles first.

Am I cool now?
posted by danb at 7:42 PM on August 24, 2006


And here is the second best NYer cartoon ever:

posted by squalor at 8:11 PM on August 24, 2006




Bonus extra: Bumping Into Mr Ravioli [pdf]
posted by Armitage Shanks at 8:22 PM on August 24, 2006


I subscribed while I was in college, dropped it because I didn't have time to keep up. Refused to consider it again when Tina Brown was running it. Been reading secondhand copies (but not the fiction) for the past few months and am seriously thinking of subscribing again if a good deal comes along. And no, I don't live in New York.

I'm not sure why anyone would pay $300 for a hard drive version when DVDs are available for well under $100, though.

Best cartoon? I lean more toward this classic.

Any more questions, Dome-O-Rama?
posted by pmurray63 at 8:34 PM on August 24, 2006


I love Anthony Lane. And I love Terrence Malick. But Anthony Lane will never wear out if only for this priceless opening paragraph from his review of The New World:

How would your kids respond if you took them to “The New World”? First, much of Terrence Malick’s film would afford them the chance to catch up on the restorative sleep that every child needs. Second, as they watched the British captain make googly eyes at the timid Native American, who learns his language by dancing around and crying “Wind, wind,” our young viewers would shout with one voice, “No, dummy, it’s the colors of the wind.”



Pitchfork isn't fit to carry his spit-bucket.
posted by docpops at 8:35 PM on August 24, 2006


Here's something else to keep in mind, when you bump into that crappy fiction: it's entirely possible that they ran that piece of crap because they couldn't find anything better. There is not, as it turns out, an inexhaustible supply of fantastic fiction, being written right now. Short fiction is an art form. Despite all the MFA programs, not that many people (40 a year, or whatever) are that good at it.
posted by It ain't over yet at 8:35 PM on August 24, 2006


Armitage - I've been trying to remember what the hell that essay was called. Thanks.
posted by docpops at 8:37 PM on August 24, 2006


Yeah, not every article, story or poem is wonderful, but I've been reading the New Yorker for twenty years and I've rarely opened an issue that didn't contain something to sing about.
posted by patry at 8:58 PM on August 24, 2006


i would care. my grandmother used to write profiles for the new yorker in the 50's. i'd love to read some of them.
posted by the painkiller at 9:18 PM on August 24, 2006


cillit bang: Why's it come with a FireWire cable?

I'm just guessing, but I think it's so you can, like, hook it up to your computer.

nanojath: Rich person's magazine, rich person's toy.

I'm not rich, and I've enjoyed the magazine over the years. And though I won't be rushing out to buy this collection myself anytime too soon, I don't think the price is exorbitant, given the staggering amount of material contained therein.

Otherwise... This idea of a magazine putting everything onto a hard drive and selling it like that (as opposed to, say a giant box full of CD-roms) is a really good one. I'm thinking it's the first time this has happened. Anybody know if any other company has done anything like this?
posted by flapjax at midnite at 9:44 PM on August 24, 2006


I've always considered the newyorker the metafilter of magazines.
posted by afu at 9:47 PM on August 24, 2006 [1 favorite]


I thought "What an asshole!" wouldn't work for Thurber, but I was wrong.
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 10:10 PM on August 24, 2006


I first came accross the New Yorker from a Peace corps Volunteer who lived near me in the Tanzanian bush. Reading material was hard to find and we would read anything we could get our hands on.

So each issue we would read from cover to cover. Literally every word. It was a delight, but I'd rather have paper copies than a hard drive.
posted by quarsan at 10:23 PM on August 24, 2006


I'm late to the party, but I feel it necessary to point out that Roz Chast is God.
posted by L. Fitzgerald Sjoberg at 10:24 PM on August 24, 2006


Roz Chast is [comment deleted for trolling] !
posted by lekvar at 10:30 PM on August 24, 2006


Best.
New Yorker.
Cartoon.
Ever.


Both the captions 'Who farted?' and 'What an asshole!' work for this and the cartoons inlined here. I think we're on to something.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:39 PM on August 24, 2006


"I'd rather have paper copies than a hard drive."

Whoa, you must have a lot of shelf space! ;-)
posted by flapjax at midnite at 10:39 PM on August 24, 2006


I'm just guessing, but I think it's so you can, like, hook it up to your computer.

Yes, but it's a USB hard disk and so I was suggesting we all point and laugh at the photographer and worship me as the observant god I am. Why are you not doing this?
posted by cillit bang at 1:11 AM on August 25, 2006


..."worship me as the observant god I am. Why are you not doing this?"

I am now worshipping thee, o Observant One! And the erring photographer will be burned in a red-hot bed of firewire!
posted by flapjax at midnite at 1:39 AM on August 25, 2006


i live in new york and i only read the new yorker on the subway. it is the best magazine ever, and when i can have all the issues on my ipod with some kind of electronic paper adapter for easy reading in transit, that will be cool. i don't understand why someone who has obviously never read the new yorker would post about this, though.
posted by snofoam at 4:53 AM on August 25, 2006


Rich person's magazine

What a dumb idea. Like others here, I don't have any money; in fact, I can't really afford to subscribe to anything—but I subscribe to the New Yorker, even though I've never liked the cartoons (aside from the great Gahan Wilson) or most of the fiction (aside from the great Alice Munro). It has its ups and downs like anything else, but over the years it's been the best magazine in America, and right now it's doing a bangup job reporting on the crimes the current administration is perpetrating. Yeah, they have ads for expensive things. I guess you'd rather have them shut down the magazine than pay for it that way.

Bonus extra: Bumping Into Mr Ravioli

Thank you, Armitage Shanks! Gopnik is one of my favorite essayists these days, and I've been wanting to share that piece with people for... (checks date on pdf) ...almost four years now.
posted by languagehat at 5:21 AM on August 25, 2006


Some of the best in-depth political reporting around. I read my issue pretty much cover to cover even though I don't live in NYC (I don't think I even like NYC).
posted by bluesky43 at 5:56 AM on August 25, 2006


Just because the cartoons are too subtle for your tastes doesn't mean you have to bash the whole thing. Try "Cathy."

This statement sums up why I don't like the New Yorker.
posted by jonmc at 6:12 AM on August 25, 2006


Huh? Because one person said a dumb thing, you hate the magazine? That doesn't make any sense. Hell, I could probably dig up a Jim Thompson fan who said something dumb about him.
posted by languagehat at 6:23 AM on August 25, 2006


Well, it's been a veritable slapfest thanks to my pro-Tina Brown comment.

Okay, okay, I'll admit that Brown introduced a glitzy, elitist, "Talk" like format to some of the articles. But she also cleaned off the mildew and stuffiness of the Shawn era. She trimmed off the fat of the longwinded articles. Introduced a more liberal use of the f* word, judiciously, of course. Relaxed the laws on nude photography.

Some of the reportage under Brown really shined, such as a lengthy piece on imagined child molestation memories, which helped to blow off the lid on the insanity of remembered child rape and satanic rituals of the late 80s.

The current guy, Remnick (I believe that's his name), has retained some of this edginess, but alas, as many people have pointed out, allowed the mag to lapse into its pre-Brown old school (and old money) elitism.

This is best reflected in the stories, which were slightly edgier under their new stories editor, but have drifted into the old, moldy patterns of late.

Yes, Roz Chast is a goddess. She's the only illustrator who doesn't follow the New Yorker illustrator's code, ie, your comic must stick to a riff on a familiar theme, like the desert island, the entrance to hell or heaven, the therapist's couch, the suicide from a building ledge, or the like.

Yep, Anthony Lane is a Pitchfork-worthy hack. As much as two thirds of his film reviews consist of mild puns, inane wordplay, and dull, egotistical tangents. But Netflix is a better source of reviews anyway.

Despite these flaws, The New Yorker is the only mag where you can read the latest from Annie Proulx or Alice Munroe, or linger over an article on surfboard manufacture. It's kinda like Playboy in the 60s or seventies, which published Isaac Singer and incisive reviews.

Too bad there's no jack off content. Well, there might be if Tina Brown was still editor.
posted by Gordion Knott at 6:36 AM on August 25, 2006


Huh? Because one person said a dumb thing, you hate the magazine?

Nah, it just seems to sum up what it's appeal is to a lot of people. Very middlebrow, self-flattering, and way too fucking dry. It always makes me think of that Family Guy - 'No one at the New Yorker has an anus.'
posted by jonmc at 7:02 AM on August 25, 2006


IMO: funny cartoons, incredible nonfiction (except when they bloviate about a CEO), some good poetry, not too much good fiction, and almost none of of the humor which launched the magazine in the first place.

I have The Complete New Yorker because someone gave it to me but it's pretty useful to, say, find out what the literary world thought of Catcher in the Rye when it first came out. I teach lit.

My favorite magazine.

Although you couldn't pay me enough to live in that city.
posted by kozad at 7:14 AM on August 25, 2006


...it's like a better version of Harper's four times a month.
posted by Hat Maui at 10:38 PM EST on August 24


Hat Maui, I feel exactly the same way. God bless the New Yorker.
FWIW, I don't live nor have I ever lived in NYC.
posted by msali at 7:14 AM on August 25, 2006


Your favorite magazine sucks.

Those in the U.S. interested in New Yorker (or virtually any magazine) should get them on eBay. I got a 2 year subscription to New Yorker for $17. I don't know how they do it. The downside is that you have to wait approx. 6-8 weeks to begin getting issues, but the label does show that it expires in 2 years. (As always, check the seller's feedback and choose a good one).

PS...I'm a Nebraska reader of New Yorker. My only other home subscription mag is BYO.
posted by spock at 7:23 AM on August 25, 2006 [1 favorite]


I was going to add what spock just said. It's only a rich person's mag if you're too stupid to find the cheap subscriptions.
posted by graventy at 7:46 AM on August 25, 2006


Wow. Does anybody still read the New Yorker outside NYC? Of course!!!!
posted by Ironmouth at 8:14 AM on August 25, 2006


....I don't like the New Yorker.
posted by jonmc at 6:12 AM PST on August 25


I am shocked-- shocked!-- that jonmc would say he doesn't like the New Yorker.
posted by dersins at 8:26 AM on August 25, 2006


Armitage Shanks/Languagehat,


Thank you for the "Bumping into Mr Ravioli" link - and the subsequent prompt.

Wow.
posted by Jody Tresidder at 8:31 AM on August 25, 2006


What happened to the fact checkers? Or maybe fiction was always excluded from that.

No, fiction gets factchecked too. Brand names, geography, history, all that gets checked -- it should've been caught.
posted by The corpse in the library at 8:37 AM on August 25, 2006


Lane rocks, Gopnik's a tedious pompus twerp, Tina Brown is evil and Remnick is a hottie. Whew. Jut had to get that off my chest.

I wish the instructions for putting the DVDs on your hard drive were a little more idiot-friendly though.


I actually visited the NYer offices two days ago for the first time. Coolest thing I saw: a beat up old wooden table relegated to the mail room. On one side, etched in the wood a half decade ago along with lots of initials and scratches, the letters c-a-p-o-t-e.
I thought to myself: "ooo, battered piece of literary history hidden away in a mail room in a glitzy corporate magazine office. What a great Talk of the Town piece. Oh wait. Never mind."
posted by CunningLinguist at 10:23 AM on August 25, 2006


Lane rocks, Gopnik's a tedious pompus twerp

*puts on editor's green eyeshade, squints, reaches for blue pencil*

Gopnik rocks, Lane's a tedious pompous twerp

*sits back, smiles in satisfaction*
posted by languagehat at 11:01 AM on August 25, 2006


I'm in Seattle.

My Dad's in Milwaukee.

We've both been reading the New Yorker for years, and we both love it.
posted by spinifex23 at 11:22 AM on August 25, 2006


"Pompus"? Yikes. Now I'll NEVER work there.
posted by CunningLinguist at 1:06 PM on August 25, 2006


I love Smithsonian my self... for $12 a year it's the one mag thats on my "no cancel" list. Every issue is a great gem with lots of intertesting articles.
posted by Dome-O-Rama at 5:04 PM on August 25, 2006


Wow. Does anybody still read the New Yorker outside NYC? Of course!!!!

"According to 2005 data from the Audit Bureau of Circulation, The New Yorker has 183,732 subscribers in the New York metropolitan area, representing 19 percent of its total circulation of 1,051,919. (Circulation includes both paid subscriptions and newsstand sales.)

The New Yorker has 965,341 subscribers in the United States, 14,044 subscribers in Canada, and 20,453 subscribers in the rest of the world.

The state with the most subscribers is California, with 177,814; the state with the fewest is South Dakota, with 723.

The smallest market for The New Yorker in North America is the Yukon Territory, with seven subscribers.

There are several countries—including Malawi, Brunei, the Dominican Republic, and Albania—with only one subscriber to the magazine."

[source]
posted by ericb at 11:41 AM on August 31, 2006


« Older C86, 20 Years On   |   Roof Sex (NSFW???) Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post