3 ms·

Wow, what a time capsule! I have a newfound appreciation for the New Yorker after this. I’ve often found their articles tiringly long and full of unnecessary m

Wow, what a time capsule! I have a newfound appreciation for the New Yorker after this. I’ve often found their articles tiringly long and full of unnecessary mundane details and side tangents. But reading something from a hundred years ago, those very details and side tangents are the best part. People generally don’t care to record what ordinary life was like - everyone knows! - yet when we look back far enough in history that is the kind of stuff we have the most difficulty relating to and understanding. Perhaps better to think of the New Yorker’s style as not writing for today, but writing for future historians.

bookofjoe 7y ago
In the same vein, archaeologists find much of interest in trash from the past.
ralphc 7y ago
Reading the "digression" about the plans for the monument at Kitty Hawk, and Washington's meddling and bumbling, gives you a whole "the more things change, the more they stay the same" feel.