I have a piece out for the Daily Beast about Jordan Neely and why we need looser standards for involuntary commitment. It was read by very few and quickly disappeared from the front page, which is a perfect symbol for the position it advocates. n+1, the Vampire Weekend of political journals, has published
Thanks for the link to the Daily Beast piece, which is excellent. It is absolutely correct to say that there is an excellent chance that he'd still be alive were he cared for against his will. (I'd further add that this would also be the case were he simply incarcerated against his will for one of his many crimes, but I realize that's not the same as the argument you are making.)
It also had a lot of history I wasn't aware of; I was aware that "Reagan closed the asylums" but the Medicaid aspect and the Kennedy history was new to me. I'm grateful.
"The Face of Seung-Hui Cho" is one of the greatest polemics ever put to print. Never before had I seen such a raw, brutal take on the Asian American social position. It is indeed sad that perhaps no journal is willing to touch that sort of essay today, which is why platforms like Substack are so integral to free speech. I've written articles myself that I doubt would be published anywhere else due to their controversial nature, particularly regarding race.
Perhaps one day we'll see a lit mag like this. But the few explicitly anti-woke ones, like IM-1776, seem to go the opposite way in their own form of reaction. I just want a journal that truly allows for well-written controversial viewpoints of all stripes to be heard.
Freddie you may have stewed over the comma for years but clearly not enough, as it is worse than you think. As written the sentence clearly implies that the high population is evidence of the city's poverty.
I share your pain about “the comma”. I wish old media, new new media, or the recently-passed “new” media, would (or would have) employed people who cared more about grammar. Not much turns me off a piece more than crap English. So I appreciate that pieces here are written well, regardless of what is being written about.
It will be interesting to see how the new economy for consumption of the written word continues to evolve. It appears that “traffic” has passed its heyday, at least for this iteration. Even NYT has leaned back towards the subscriber model. And substack is at the forefront of that as well. The balance of the good of supporting “quality” content, vs the bad of silofication, will be interesting to watch in this current/“new” era.
Freddie, as someone who works in the industry you may know more about what this really means than me. In my print edition of n+1 containing the same essay you are writing about, the acknowledgements page lists a veritable who’s who of institutional supporters: a bunch of major publishing house (including FSG, Hatchette and Simon & Schuster), Audible, Amazon Studios, as well as sponsorships from multiple state and federal programs including the NEA.
Simply being listed as a supporter I would guess doesn’t mean much about that group’s level of financial backing of course. But I would think that might have some effect both on its content and its place in the industry. Or am I wrong, and is having a bunch of institutional titans as sponsors basically necessary to fight the losing fight of being a lit mag nowadays?
Legacy media has a Trump problem full stop. That's both the disease and the symptom. When I open up The Atlantic I don't need three articles on Trump, two on DeSantis, and one on MTG. I want, like, actual news and thought. And when anything does get through it's so overly sensitive to not accidently, maybe, saying something that can possibly help the "bad guys" that I really do not trust them. They will bend the truth if it helps "The Narrative" and this has been obvious for a long time. I disagree with a lot of what Freddie says but at least I know he's not going to twist facts or play stupid semantics to score points.
That's why the weirdest thing is that Jamelle Bouie gets a lone name check from the n+1 crowd. He's a ChatGPT prompt that is basically "interpret this news story in the most inflammatory identarian way possible". The living embodiment of a left-wing where the bulk of their morality is defined as being anti-Republican. The number of Republicans he lets live rent free in his head could both swing New York and end the housing crisis. I don't read the news for the left's version of the Tea Party. And as long as this, more than anything, is the ideological tilt of legacy media, then alternative press is going to thrive. I think one reason the NYT has succeeded beyond all others, even employing Bouie, is that they simply cover too much to be monomaniacally Trump obsessed.
"n+1 was once a vehicle for getting sensitive-but-horny Harvard graduates some Manhattan pussy"
Ha. I met a few of the n+1 guys a long time ago at a party after they published "Diary of a Very Bad Year: Confessions of an Anonymous Hedge Fund Manager". Perfect description. I forget specifics, but one of them was secretly very rich and embarrassed about it. He was ranting about wall street while wearing a royal oak.
Thanks for the link to the Daily Beast piece, which is excellent. It is absolutely correct to say that there is an excellent chance that he'd still be alive were he cared for against his will. (I'd further add that this would also be the case were he simply incarcerated against his will for one of his many crimes, but I realize that's not the same as the argument you are making.)
It also had a lot of history I wasn't aware of; I was aware that "Reagan closed the asylums" but the Medicaid aspect and the Kennedy history was new to me. I'm grateful.
I like writing that makes me think, in an unanticipated way.
Most journals, most writers are as predictable as yesterday's dinner.
"The Face of Seung-Hui Cho" is one of the greatest polemics ever put to print. Never before had I seen such a raw, brutal take on the Asian American social position. It is indeed sad that perhaps no journal is willing to touch that sort of essay today, which is why platforms like Substack are so integral to free speech. I've written articles myself that I doubt would be published anywhere else due to their controversial nature, particularly regarding race.
Perhaps one day we'll see a lit mag like this. But the few explicitly anti-woke ones, like IM-1776, seem to go the opposite way in their own form of reaction. I just want a journal that truly allows for well-written controversial viewpoints of all stripes to be heard.
I got a couple good chuckles out of this.
Freddie you may have stewed over the comma for years but clearly not enough, as it is worse than you think. As written the sentence clearly implies that the high population is evidence of the city's poverty.
I share your pain about “the comma”. I wish old media, new new media, or the recently-passed “new” media, would (or would have) employed people who cared more about grammar. Not much turns me off a piece more than crap English. So I appreciate that pieces here are written well, regardless of what is being written about.
It will be interesting to see how the new economy for consumption of the written word continues to evolve. It appears that “traffic” has passed its heyday, at least for this iteration. Even NYT has leaned back towards the subscriber model. And substack is at the forefront of that as well. The balance of the good of supporting “quality” content, vs the bad of silofication, will be interesting to watch in this current/“new” era.
Freddie, as someone who works in the industry you may know more about what this really means than me. In my print edition of n+1 containing the same essay you are writing about, the acknowledgements page lists a veritable who’s who of institutional supporters: a bunch of major publishing house (including FSG, Hatchette and Simon & Schuster), Audible, Amazon Studios, as well as sponsorships from multiple state and federal programs including the NEA.
Simply being listed as a supporter I would guess doesn’t mean much about that group’s level of financial backing of course. But I would think that might have some effect both on its content and its place in the industry. Or am I wrong, and is having a bunch of institutional titans as sponsors basically necessary to fight the losing fight of being a lit mag nowadays?
Legacy media has a Trump problem full stop. That's both the disease and the symptom. When I open up The Atlantic I don't need three articles on Trump, two on DeSantis, and one on MTG. I want, like, actual news and thought. And when anything does get through it's so overly sensitive to not accidently, maybe, saying something that can possibly help the "bad guys" that I really do not trust them. They will bend the truth if it helps "The Narrative" and this has been obvious for a long time. I disagree with a lot of what Freddie says but at least I know he's not going to twist facts or play stupid semantics to score points.
That's why the weirdest thing is that Jamelle Bouie gets a lone name check from the n+1 crowd. He's a ChatGPT prompt that is basically "interpret this news story in the most inflammatory identarian way possible". The living embodiment of a left-wing where the bulk of their morality is defined as being anti-Republican. The number of Republicans he lets live rent free in his head could both swing New York and end the housing crisis. I don't read the news for the left's version of the Tea Party. And as long as this, more than anything, is the ideological tilt of legacy media, then alternative press is going to thrive. I think one reason the NYT has succeeded beyond all others, even employing Bouie, is that they simply cover too much to be monomaniacally Trump obsessed.
‘Anyway, I know n+1 must be a good journal, because they published me…’
Easily my favourite part of this piece.
“Hey, remember when I listed you in 30 Under 35-38, Taylor?”
Okay, who else laughed?
Does anyone have a link to the Yang essay that isn't behind a pay wall?
"n+1 was once a vehicle for getting sensitive-but-horny Harvard graduates some Manhattan pussy"
Ha. I met a few of the n+1 guys a long time ago at a party after they published "Diary of a Very Bad Year: Confessions of an Anonymous Hedge Fund Manager". Perfect description. I forget specifics, but one of them was secretly very rich and embarrassed about it. He was ranting about wall street while wearing a royal oak.
Your piece fell off the front page because you didn't believe hard enough in the Daily Beast's reputation for excellence.
“n+1 was once a vehicle for getting sensitive-but-horny Harvard graduates some Manhattan pussy”
I haven’t read n+1 in a long time but that quote perfectly encapsulates the n+1 I remember
Where do you reckon the New York Review of Books and Dissent fit into this?