An Open Letter to the New Yorker
Hello New Yorker,
I like your magazine. I like the poems, I like the short stories, I like the long news pieces, and the occasionally uproarious cartoons. Seeing your magazine also fills me with a bit of nostalgia as my friend A has been reading it religiously over his morning cup of tea since our college days.
Generally speaking, I also like satire. Voltaire is perhaps my favorite French playwright. Even so, I can't imagine what you were thinking with your most recent cover. It does not follow the conventions of satire since it is not highlighting or representing anything true, and it does not debunk, but instead underlines the pervasive and pervasively believed lies about the embattled Democratic nominee.
I assume this was not a hit job on your part since your readership will, almost to a person, be voting for Obama. Instead, it seems to be a display of the massive hubris of a certain class of smart, but tragically un-savvy American voters, as well as a profound disconnection from and misunderstanding of the way that politics and political discourse works.
In short, this is a prime example of arrogance + ignorance. A deadly equation under any circumstances, not to mention during the most important presidential campaign in recent history. I know you may have thought that in the end this equation would = wit, but I'm afraid you were wrong. Quite. Let me add my voice to the many who will seek to disabuse you of your egg-headed delusion.
Your recent cover is the editorial equivalent of accidentally shooting your unsuspecting friend in the face. Now, the entire Democratic party is along for the ride to the hospital and we'll be stuck, languishing in emergency, for the next several news cycles.
The upside is that you, dear New Yorker, will sell this issue. Yes, indeed. Not for the 18 pg. article about Obama-the-organizer that's inside -- nobody that hasn't been reading the New Yorker for years is gonna take the time for that one. Instead, it will be so that folks who have rarely been acquainted with your text-heavy layout can rip off the cover and display the pretty color picture in all it's contextual glory on their garage walls next to confederate flags or, as the splash screen that provokes a giggle on the way to the home page set to the National Review Online.
Way to go, guys!
I tell you what, with friends like these we won't even have to wait for 'the terrorists' to come get us, we can just hold up at home, go about our business, and feign surprise when a wayward, well-meaning, know-it-all cousin spazzes out in a violent orgy of geeky laughter, throws an elbow, and accidentally knocks us down the stairs.
Thanks New Yorker, for reminding us all of how practically stupid being an intellectual snob can really make you. A cautionary tale that many, obviously, need to hear before the final leg of this campaign robs us of any room for dumb-ass, mass produced gaffes like this.
Sincerely,
yldoow
I like your magazine. I like the poems, I like the short stories, I like the long news pieces, and the occasionally uproarious cartoons. Seeing your magazine also fills me with a bit of nostalgia as my friend A has been reading it religiously over his morning cup of tea since our college days.
Generally speaking, I also like satire. Voltaire is perhaps my favorite French playwright. Even so, I can't imagine what you were thinking with your most recent cover. It does not follow the conventions of satire since it is not highlighting or representing anything true, and it does not debunk, but instead underlines the pervasive and pervasively believed lies about the embattled Democratic nominee.
I assume this was not a hit job on your part since your readership will, almost to a person, be voting for Obama. Instead, it seems to be a display of the massive hubris of a certain class of smart, but tragically un-savvy American voters, as well as a profound disconnection from and misunderstanding of the way that politics and political discourse works.
In short, this is a prime example of arrogance + ignorance. A deadly equation under any circumstances, not to mention during the most important presidential campaign in recent history. I know you may have thought that in the end this equation would = wit, but I'm afraid you were wrong. Quite. Let me add my voice to the many who will seek to disabuse you of your egg-headed delusion.
Your recent cover is the editorial equivalent of accidentally shooting your unsuspecting friend in the face. Now, the entire Democratic party is along for the ride to the hospital and we'll be stuck, languishing in emergency, for the next several news cycles.
The upside is that you, dear New Yorker, will sell this issue. Yes, indeed. Not for the 18 pg. article about Obama-the-organizer that's inside -- nobody that hasn't been reading the New Yorker for years is gonna take the time for that one. Instead, it will be so that folks who have rarely been acquainted with your text-heavy layout can rip off the cover and display the pretty color picture in all it's contextual glory on their garage walls next to confederate flags or, as the splash screen that provokes a giggle on the way to the home page set to the National Review Online.
Way to go, guys!
I tell you what, with friends like these we won't even have to wait for 'the terrorists' to come get us, we can just hold up at home, go about our business, and feign surprise when a wayward, well-meaning, know-it-all cousin spazzes out in a violent orgy of geeky laughter, throws an elbow, and accidentally knocks us down the stairs.
Thanks New Yorker, for reminding us all of how practically stupid being an intellectual snob can really make you. A cautionary tale that many, obviously, need to hear before the final leg of this campaign robs us of any room for dumb-ass, mass produced gaffes like this.
Sincerely,
yldoow
Advertisement





word. this is exactly where i am at... satire...very clever... very funny... way protected free speech. buuuuut, does it really launch a thousand great, deep conversations, or is it just a way to show how smart and clever we can be, and how uch better we are than those "low information" voters (not to mention sell some mags)?
gkp
July 14, 2008 11:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
July 14th, 2003
From the Desk of the New Yorker Magazine
Dear yldoow,
First, let's get out of these wet clothes and into a dry martini! Now, let's have a chat.
I quite appreciated your open correspondence of earlier today. As a magazine, basically either an institution or an inanimate object, I am rarely moved to respond and as I have no eyes or hands, writing back is rather difficult so I hope you'll understand why my response will necessarily embody the soul of wit (i.e., brevity).
You say, "Your recent cover is the editorial equivalent of accidentally shooting your unsuspecting friend in the face. Now, the
entire Democratic party is along for the ride to the hospital and we'll be stuck, languishing in emergency, for the next several news cycles."
Really? I've been a magazine for a long time. Not even those foldover Mad Magazine back covers have the kind of destructive power that you describe. I'm fairly sure that our joke, made at the expense of Republicans, will not force the Democratic party into some sort of metaphorical emergency triage.
You think I'm arrogant, elitist and just in this business to sell copies of myself. Guilty! And those are my good qualities!
Please understand, though I as a magazine would like to see Obama become president, I'm not going to pass up a good cover for fear that we'll topple Obama's campaign (which, frankly, it won't do). It's Obama's job to get elected. It's my job to inform, amuse, entertain and to sell copies of myself.
So do loosen up, old sport. You'll find that I'm as good an egg as I've ever been.
Warmly,
The New Yorker
July 14, 2008 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh destor, from what I've read you never have believed that mass produced words can matter as much or more than issues and events, primarily because it is our words about events, not the events themselves that shape our political reality. Maybe that's not the way it should be, but it is the way it is.
That said, I'm not being histrionic, I never said anything about this cover toppling Obama. I'm just annoyed. I know and completely believe the intent of the New Yorker is to cause an amusing stir, but I'm not sure this cover does that. Now, I'm no MFA so I can't say for certain that this is a satirical gaffe, but I am a political scientist and you bet your bottom dollar that this cover is a political one. And the fact that it comes from a media organization not affiliated with the campaigns does not diminish that reality at all.
That said, I agree with you, in the guise of the New Yorker, that it's Obama's job is to get himself elected even despite the slings and arrows of friendlies. Luckily, he's a big boy and he can certainly do it.
But I'm still annoyed. Hence the post.
July 14, 2008 11:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
We're on the same page, pretty much. I kind of figured you'd be amused if The New Yorker wrote you back.
July 14, 2008 12:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, I was amused. I actually think you got the tone of voice just right. Quite hard to do with an inanimate object. Kudos ;0)
July 14, 2008 12:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Politics is an art.
July 14, 2008 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink