https://t.co/dtFYjKQe5k
new site & two zines for sale!
1) a 20,000 word essay about the reviews of sally rooney's "beautiful world," a novel i have not read!
2) a short story about winning a book prize for an unpublished, uncompleted novel!
free PDF if only curious!
Updated my iPhone 11 (a second-hand bday gift four years ago to replace my iPhone 6) for the first time in three years so I could use the grocery store app to see what’s on sale
Unfortunately the economics of small mags are EXTREMELY bleak because no one in this country is willing to pay for culture. There is unlimited money for bad things and no money for good things. It isn’t the biggest problem in the world, but it is a big problem.
and here's a kicker: of the gifts, one party alone gave $1,302,500.
i don't think one should comment on the financial choices of literary nonprofits without first reading through their tax filings, it just seems like the polite thing to do.
once again arguing about the finances of a magazine whose taxes are available for all to read—the baffler made $77,331 in 2024 after expenses. of their revenue, $2,100,569 came from gifts and $358,972 from sales, total: $2,465,764. they spent $2,388,433, EOY net assets: $144,494.
all this, & the winners finding out they were a 2nd choice is overlooking the fact that dozens & dozens of writers deserve awards like the WC, and one person's win isn't indicative of anything more than a lack of resources, not talent, skill, vision, or hard work.
the callous lack of generosity some people have shown for helen dewitt is mind boggling, as though a person who has been incredibly, radically open about their struggles with publishing, writing, money, you name it, would just give up all that money on fucking principle? come on!
people pointing to other writers who could've or would've gone about this differently like people are interchangeable. people aren't bananas, you fucking nitwits! still: salute to AES and GR, great writers who were given and deserve the award; anyone claiming HD's openness about
@LingoUnbound Potentially written by Gordon Lish himself; he wrote a lot of the jacket copy for books he edited at Knopf, but this one feels slightly more reserved than his others
frankly, i think you do far more speculating than "intricate analysis and critique"; hell, your opening is imagining Lolita marked & rewritten by an MFA (cliché). & yr og tweet is even semantically askew: "main argument..is an..analysis"? like, i get it, but you didn't write it.
nick (like hem's Adams) one of the problems is you're victim to your own comments below, too, not on a stylistic level but a rhetorical/promotional one, using mccarthy's two dismissive words about IJ, and IJ itself, to smuggle your finger-pointing screed, and, but, hey, it works!
What I find so interesting is that this article has generated a lot of predictable vitriol for the opinions it reveals.
However, the main argument of my article is an intricate analysis and critique of the monopoly capitalism at the heart of the “publishing-industrial complex,” and the sociological conformity therein.
No one so far has engaged with this new analysis.
Maybe try reading it :)
i think few would disagree w/you the industry has contracted and that MFAs maybe have to do with it, but i think even fewer, from the whole, would think DFW the best effigy or McC the best exemplar; the same feels true if your problem is the "emasculation" of "literature".
what a lot of yarn spun from a piece of lint with a "trust me, i watched him pluck it from his belly button" pedigree.
i'm not convinced anyone cares what another writer thinks about books any further than insofar one can articulate "why" in a manner interesting in its own right