IS THE NEW YORKER MIDDLEBROW? James Campbell describes the New Yorker as a “mid-market” magazine in a review of SALINGER (by David Shields and Shane Salerno) in the TLS (December 20 and 27). He describes a story by Salinger in which Holden Caufield appears as Holden’s “final foray into the mid-market magazines before publication of THE CATCHER IN THE RYE”. Is “mid-market” the same as “middlebrow”? And is it fair to think of the New Yorker as “middlebrow”? After all, the New Yorker is characterized by Eustace Tilley, who examines a butterfly on the cover of an issue each February. I think the answer to both questions is yes. The New Yorker cannot be considered “highbrow” because the writing is not “difficult” and avant-garde. And its large readership in itself is damning.
Categories
Archives
Recent Comments
- Gary Nuetzel on THE OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE STARTS ITS 32ND SEASON. (COMMENT).
- Francesca on EATING PEAS WITH A KNIFE.
- avon wilsmore on CHEATING IN CHAMPIONSHIP BRIDGE.
- Anonymous on THE LANGUAGE WEIRDNESS INDEX.
- James Friscia on THE SECOND OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE.
- Ken Babcock on THE SECOND OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE.
- Lickity Splitfingers on THE SECOND OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE.
- Ken Babcock on THE OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE STARTS ITS 32ND SEASON. (COMMENT).
- David Quemere on THE OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE STARTS ITS 32ND SEASON. (COMMENT).
- Nicholas Schaefer on THE SECOND OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE.
Meta