july 25 New Yorker issue
best of the issue:
'My Dog is Tom Cruise' This piece is almost impossible to read, which is a theme of this issue. But when it was read outloud to me, it was a fun time. Also, the good friend who read it to me identified with a sense of joy of both dog and Tom Cruise, which I think is nice, after all the negative vibes.
Actually, this good friend is falling in love with Noah Baumbach, as far as I can tell, which will be an interesting development for me and my ihatethenewyorker blog. We watched The Life Aquatic this week too - it took us so long to get around to watching this because (a) we'd heard only tepid responses (b) Wes Anderson's previous films seemed aimed at people just a little younger than us. But this movie has a GREAT pace - slow and deliberate and you don't get stressed out watching it. Romantic too. And I don't mean the Cubby and Ned story, the other stories.
From the Nyer review of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (which we also saw, its HOT here) describing the family "a selection of bedridden grandparents who appear to be rehearsing for a production of 'Endgame.'" (p.100) This is just the truth, not a brilliant piece of writing on the NYer's part. Dahl, Quentin Blake and Burton are all working from this same model. And I think that is why, when I read "Endgame," those two elderly dears were familiar and uncanny, and held my attention.
As for the movie, my little brother and I liked the drawing out of the denistry-teeth theme, present, but quieter, in the book.
worst of the issue:
'Bloodsuckers' Impossible to read, in a bad way.
raises the eyebrows:
Seymour Hersh's discussion of Nancy Pelosi's protest against US interference in the Iraq election. (p.53) If she's has information about rigged elections that she is not "going public" with, well, that is frustrating. And if Hersh has sources, she should too. Where is the opposition party?
The following issue of the NYer is also impossible to read, but that is because I have lost it!
Categories: newyorker, currentevents, film
'My Dog is Tom Cruise' This piece is almost impossible to read, which is a theme of this issue. But when it was read outloud to me, it was a fun time. Also, the good friend who read it to me identified with a sense of joy of both dog and Tom Cruise, which I think is nice, after all the negative vibes.
Actually, this good friend is falling in love with Noah Baumbach, as far as I can tell, which will be an interesting development for me and my ihatethenewyorker blog. We watched The Life Aquatic this week too - it took us so long to get around to watching this because (a) we'd heard only tepid responses (b) Wes Anderson's previous films seemed aimed at people just a little younger than us. But this movie has a GREAT pace - slow and deliberate and you don't get stressed out watching it. Romantic too. And I don't mean the Cubby and Ned story, the other stories.
From the Nyer review of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (which we also saw, its HOT here) describing the family "a selection of bedridden grandparents who appear to be rehearsing for a production of 'Endgame.'" (p.100) This is just the truth, not a brilliant piece of writing on the NYer's part. Dahl, Quentin Blake and Burton are all working from this same model. And I think that is why, when I read "Endgame," those two elderly dears were familiar and uncanny, and held my attention.
As for the movie, my little brother and I liked the drawing out of the denistry-teeth theme, present, but quieter, in the book.
worst of the issue:
'Bloodsuckers' Impossible to read, in a bad way.
raises the eyebrows:
Seymour Hersh's discussion of Nancy Pelosi's protest against US interference in the Iraq election. (p.53) If she's has information about rigged elections that she is not "going public" with, well, that is frustrating. And if Hersh has sources, she should too. Where is the opposition party?
The following issue of the NYer is also impossible to read, but that is because I have lost it!
Categories: newyorker, currentevents, film
posted by zoe p. at 4:27 PM
2 Comments:
"bloodsuckers" was the article about medicinal leeches, yes? what did you find unreadable about it? i thought it was quite interesting. my memory of the writing style is vague, and the issue is long gone... i remember being so horrified by the description of the giant amazonian leech that i had to stop reading for a minute, but i didn't let it break my will.
its not even in the bathroom anymore here. so i can't be very precise.
i thought it was poor choice of subject matter for a summer issue, having had leeches myself. in a non-medicinal context.
seemed a bit sensationalizing . . . a kind of high brow gross out thing.
Post a Comment
<< Home