4 ms·

I'm having a difficult time reading this article because of the syntax, I think. So many parentheticals, a little subject verb object never hurt anyone.

throwanem 1y ago
Twain, like Faulkner, has long been a favored subject of the trust-fund set...now that he's safely dead and unable to render a direct opinion in the matter, of course. In this case, the author evidently need not earn his living through the quality of his prose. He would be destitute, otherwise. But Harper's is not what once it was.
- cafard 1y ago
  The trust-fund set? Does this mean I should get in touch with the postal inspectors and find out where all those checks have gone for all those years? I think that you owe it to HN to let us know what authors real, red-blooded working Americans favor.
  - throwanem 1y ago
    Twain, for a start. If you mistake me for saying he shouldn't be read, in saying he lately attracts a regrettable audience which I did not say was exclusive, then you would better spend your time studying his exemplary prose than grinding in my direction whatever axe this is.
    - cafard 1y ago
      I have been reading Twain for something between 55 and 60 years, I suppose. I don't count that as "lately"; but at the time I started reading him, he had been dead for 50 years, which most would count as "safely". About 30 years ago, Cynthia Ozick published an essay on Trollope in the NY Times Book Review. A couple of weeks later, there were annoyed letters to the editor from persons who considered that her essay had the tone of granting permission to read Trollope, as if Trollope-reading had previously been the province of Anglophile snobs. I offer that as an example of how one may qualify an audience in terms it finds offensive without writing down the author.
      - throwanem 1y ago
        Would you take it equally as a criticism of David Foster Wallace?
beezlebroxxxxxx 1y ago
I don't think the syntax is particularly difficult, if slightly archaic; but the real problem is the lack of a paragraph break in the first 2 paragraphs (it felt like reading Henry James) and the way Harper's styled their website. On paper, though, even when the sentences and style are quite out there, I find Harper's to be the most readable of all the major magazines.

throwanem 1y ago

Twain, like Faulkner, has long been a favored subject of the trust-fund set...now that he's safely dead and unable to render a direct opinion in the matter, of course. In this case, the author evidently need not earn his living through the quality of his prose. He would be destitute, otherwise. But Harper's is not what once it was.

cafard 1y ago
The trust-fund set? Does this mean I should get in touch with the postal inspectors and find out where all those checks have gone for all those years? I think that you owe it to HN to let us know what authors real, red-blooded working Americans favor.
- throwanem 1y ago
  Twain, for a start. If you mistake me for saying he shouldn't be read, in saying he lately attracts a regrettable audience which I did not say was exclusive, then you would better spend your time studying his exemplary prose than grinding in my direction whatever axe this is.
  - cafard 1y ago
    I have been reading Twain for something between 55 and 60 years, I suppose. I don't count that as "lately"; but at the time I started reading him, he had been dead for 50 years, which most would count as "safely". About 30 years ago, Cynthia Ozick published an essay on Trollope in the NY Times Book Review. A couple of weeks later, there were annoyed letters to the editor from persons who considered that her essay had the tone of granting permission to read Trollope, as if Trollope-reading had previously been the province of Anglophile snobs. I offer that as an example of how one may qualify an audience in terms it finds offensive without writing down the author.
    - throwanem 1y ago
      Would you take it equally as a criticism of David Foster Wallace?

beezlebroxxxxxx 1y ago

I don't think the syntax is particularly difficult, if slightly archaic; but the real problem is the lack of a paragraph break in the first 2 paragraphs (it felt like reading Henry James) and the way Harper's styled their website. On paper, though, even when the sentences and style are quite out there, I find Harper's to be the most readable of all the major magazines.