I disagree, but of course YMMV. I read Denby and Lane with an understanding of how they approach films (after reading years of their reviews) so I can factor that in. And Peter Schjeldahl, their chief art critic, is freakin’ brilliant about art as well as being a great writer (and, apparently, a poet). I don’t always agree with his POV, but his ability to express visual concepts in written prose is simply wonderful - it’s part of what I value about The New Yorker - finding his pieces reviewing Richter or Chardin in an issue which includes an article about the inner workings of the brain by Jonah Lehrer and an overview of the economy by James Surowiecki is such a joy…
This is my take. I think the articles are wonderful, but simply don’t have time to do the magazine justice. Too often I found myself having to set it aside “until later,” but later never came, so I let my membership lapse. But I still love reading old copies when I get the chance.
jellyblue writes:
> I read one of the first excerpts of Brokeback Mountain there, though, so
> they really do pick some winners.
What you read was the entire thing, not an excerpt. It’s a short story, not a novel:
Anyone remember that George Saunders short story, “The Bohemians”?
“I just gone use my lips, OK?”
And does anyone remember the one-page piece (Shouts & Murmurs, I think) where the author used words like ‘chalont’ rather than ‘nonchalant’? The entire article was filled with such non-words. Hilarious.
If you know when it was published, please point me in that direction. 
[* puts on snob hat *]
there are only two magazines in the English speaking world that I think you can put forward as serious candidates for the best magazine ever:
(1) the Economist, and
(2) the New Yorker.
For me, I prefer the Economist, but the New Yorker is really great.
What’s so great about the New Yorker?
Week after week, it is great, urbane sophisticated writing, both in its articles and in its cartoons. The anthology of New Yorker cartoons over the past 100 years or so ought to be on the short list of books that best capture the twentieth century. The reviews are great. The New Yorker movie reviews were what first introduced me to the idea that you could read a review AFTER you saw the movie, because the movie was worth thinking about and talking about. The breadth of coverage of the cultural world is amazing.
A few weaknesses:
-
it’s politics. The magazine is, to my taste, somewhat too accepting of left wing pieties. Agree with the poster above who said that the magazine treats nearly all conservative or libertarian thought with condescension and feels kind of like talking to that smart Yale sophomore who is clever and well informed but can’t quite accept that there are good arguments to be found across the political spectrum.
-
Related to that, in it’s coverage of technical issues, e.g. global warming, or economics issues, it is kind of out of it’s depth, compared to, say, the Economist or scientific american. It sometimes feels like the English major who did really well in the physics for poets class talking about science.
But these are quibbles.
There is no doubt that it is the greatest culture magazine that ever was.
I don’t hate them, but I don’t base my film viewing on anything they say. I find the ballet critic to be way over my head (but then, so is ballet–I just don’t get it); but the theater reviews are always interesting, even if I’m not familiar with the playwright or work.
I also don’t look at the table of contents, but simply open it up and start reading. I am working my way through this week’s issue, all about the murder trial. It’s fascinating, although I don’t remember hearing anything about it in the mainstream media at all (then again, I went on a news hiatus last year, so that may be why). Sure their political slant is liberal, but I find them fair to the right–or at least honest about the GOP. Certainly I think they’re fairer to conservatives than WSJ is to liberals. YMMV.
I also love the health care and medical articles. I love Atul Gawande’s writing! I have also enjoyed reading the Profiles section over many, many years (I remember reading one about Johnny Carson when I was a teen, and Jerry Lewis a few years later–like Terry Gross, TNY seems to have a knack for choosing celeb and political profiles somewhere between “who’s the latest?” and “whatever happened to?”. I have found the Profiles to be remarkably balanced and not fawning in the least.
I grew up on TNY cartoons–they were some of the first things I read. I also loved the covers as a child. We even had a book of TNY covers, which was wonderful.
Do I get tired of TNY assuming that everyone either lives in Manhattan or Brooklyn? Sure. Sometimes the writers’ view of the rest of America borders on naive, to say the least (I say naive because it sounds better than completely ignorant), but it IS titled The New Yorker. It’s not supposed to be about LA or Chicago or Des Moines.
I also think they blew that Supreme Court cartoon. There have been a few cartoons lately that I am left 
about. I can only hope they run a few pages of those in their humor issue and 'splain them. And their “first 100 days of Bush” series kept me going in early 2005. 
Someone should send them this thread. That’d be a hoot.
A friend of mine described it as a magazine written by and for snobs. That about sums it up AFAICT.
Regards,
Shodan
I saw this coming a mile away. A furore normannorum libera nos domine.
As for the TNY, I consider it one of America’s best journals. It is true that I largely agree with its politics, but I’m more than willing to read well-reasoned opposing viewpoints–it’s just that I usually have to read those elsewhere.
I did subscribe for a couple of years; in my case, I was unable to find time to read the bulk of the volume, but always made time for the short story and at least one of the articles. And the cartoons, it goes without saying.
I don’t think this aspect of it is as bad as it once once. Maybe “urban-centric” would be a truer description. Many of the independent films listed in “Goings On About Town” are sure to show up at a theatre near you soon if you live in L.A., Chicago, or San Francisco–if they aren’t there already. And even if a lengthy article is devoted to a local institution like the Metropolitan Museum, it generally deals with issues facing other museums across the country. There was one a few years back on the Met’s curator of classical antiquities, discussing the repatriation demands. Italy wanted them to return a piece acquired in 1895–“It’s not going to happen”, said the curator.
The same is true of theater, opera, classical music, what have you. If you live in a city and care about these things, you might be interested in what the magazine has to offer.
Even the founder, Harold Ross, described the magazine at its inception, as “not edited for the old lady in Dubuque.” 
True, dat. 
My bad. I have the collection it’s in, too.
The short story in the current issue is really good.
Recent subscriber to TNY who enjoys archive immensely.
While highly literate exactly literary magazine it is not, as subjects and topics are wide, contemporary and often political. For OP I would recommend http://www.parisreview.com/
I used to have a coffee-table sized book of ALL the cartoons, 1950 through 1955. I could kick myself for not having it now, and I can’t even remember when or how I parted with it.
The Janet Malcolm “A Reporter at Large” story on the murder trial of Mazoltov Borukhova has left me stunned. It reads like a Greek tragedy. I still don’t know how to think of her or the murder. IMO, this article is a treatise on truth–can we ever know it? Is there such a thing as an essential truth?
I am left with many questions: is she mentally ill? Did her husband do what she accused him of? How is their daughter now? What of the paid assassin–his family?
How much did their isolationist culture play into this situation, if any? And what of the law guardian and his “issues”?
Anyone else read this? Thoughts you’d like to share?
I read the first half of it this morning and I’ll probably finish it on my lunch break. I hadn’t opened the article until now because I hadn’t heard of the case, but it’s a good read so far.
Last winter the magazine ran photos of dozens of world leaders who were in town for a UN conference. The captions didn’t say very much about who they were; mostly they just gave ages and said how long they’d been in power. But it was a great study in faces. The best photo by far, I thought, was Rupiah Banda of Zambia. This is a face with a lot of character.
This is me, too. Much as I enjoy TNY when it’s in my hands, I never have time to read as much of it as I’d like to, which is frustrating and guilt-inducing. When we visit my in-laws in Vermont, though, and I have more time, I often plow through their back issues.
Mean Mr. Mustard, this is probably the piece you were thinking of: How I Met My Wife
Not there yet. Just read half-way thru Jill Lepore’s Tea and Sympathy with subtitle “Who owns American Revolution?”.
Sidenote: I find myself way too often going to wiki or google to read on what’s mentioned in TNY article as part of reference frame - a line or a paragraph, sometimes. Then you start reading on it and exploring and come back to the original article in about few days.
Seconded. I know several old ladies (and gents) in Dubuque, as my parents are from the area, and none of them would be caught dead reading anything that highbrow.