Introduction

What is The New Yorker? I know it’s a great magazine and that it’s a tremendous source of pleasure in my life. But what exactly is it? This blog’s premise is that The New Yorker is a work of art, as worthy of comment and analysis as, say, Keats’s “Ode on a Grecian Urn.” Each week I review one or more aspects of the magazine’s latest issue. I suppose it’s possible to describe and analyze an entire issue, but I prefer to keep my reviews brief, and so I usually focus on just one or two pieces, to explore in each the signature style of its author. A piece by Nick Paumgarten is not like a piece by Jill Lepore, and neither is like a piece by Ian Frazier. One could not mistake Collins for Seabrook, or Bilger for Goldfield, or Mogelson for Kolbert. Each has found a style, and it is that style that I respond to as I read, and want to understand and describe.

Saturday, July 18, 2020

July 6 & 13, 2020 Issue


I always enjoy Leo Robson’s book reviews. His “The Art of the Unruly,” in this week’s issue, is excellent. It’s an assessment of Joyce Carol Oates’s new novel Night, Sleep, Death, The Stars. Robson says it’s “enormous and frequently brilliant.” He views it as an instance of what he calls Oates’s “counter-aesthetic” – her style of “rousing roughness.” He says,

Her dozens of novels and hundreds of short stories, many of them set in western New York, forgo an air of cool mastery in favor of a kind of cultivated vulnerability, an openness to engulfment. Human existence, in her handling, seems a primarily somatic enterprise, and her greedily adjectival prose can sometimes read like a sort of dramatized phenomenology. Even on a bustling city street, her characters can come across as frontierspeople, or toilers on a polar expedition. As she invokes a world of pounding hearts and thumping ears and watering mouths, she exhibits a refreshing freedom from embarrassment, an indifference to the concept of overkill.

I like that “greedily adjectival prose.” I wish Robson had provided an example of it. He also refers to Oates’s “sentences both snaking and staccato,” but, again, no examples. In one of his best lines, he describes Oates’s introduction of a character as “the syntactic equivalent of a four-car pileup,” and this time he follows up with a quotation to prove his point:

Just a glance at Thom McClaren, tall and rangy-limbed, sandy-haired, handsome face now just perceptibly beginning to thicken, in his late thirties—(Virgil often stared, when [he believed] Thom wasn’t aware of him)—you could see that Thom was one of those persons who feels very good about himself, and his self-estimate is (largely) shared by those who gaze upon him.

As Robson points out, the brackets are Oates's.

I confess I haven’t read any of Oates’s novels. But I devour her book reviews. They brim with artful quotation and illuminating commentary: see, for example, “In Rough Country” (The New York Review of Books, October 23, 2008) and “The Treasure of Comanche County” (The New York Review of Books, October 20, 2005).

Robson says that among contemporary American fiction writers, Oates “possesses a strong claim to preëminence.” She’s also one of our best critics.

No comments:

Post a Comment