I got a nice e-mail from Ann Althouse today, thanking me for commenting on her recent Maureen Dowd posts.
On her site today is a hilarious send up of the New Yorker's overly literate style, and I have to say I couldn't agree more.
Somebody, somewhere along the line at that magazine, a long time ago, decided the writer has to paint a picture for the reader. So whether you're interviewing a movie star or a scientist, you've got to give us some words about the person's face, what the room was like, what food was consumed, whether a dog trotted into the room. What was the reason for this stylistic policy? To thin down difficult material with easy-to-consume trivia? The readers are going to skim anyway, so what the hell? Make the nonfiction in the magazine more like the fiction for an overall, classy, literary effect?
Read the last bit about Judge Richard Posner - I was cracking up. Poor man, I personally can't stand the guy, (look, he's brilliant and accomplished, but I disagree with his views and politics as they relate to healthcare, morality and ethics vehemently), but no one deserves this....
|
