The real issue is resources. It's hard for smaller magazines to hold on to writers when they start getting offers from bigger outlets.
-
-
That I can live with. It's also hard for the Miami Marlins to hold on to talent when the Yankees wave dollars. That doesn't make the Marlins a training ground for the Yankees.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Agree with that formulation. For the record, I don't think of National Review as a "training ground" but rather as (especially under
@RichLowry) a fine magazine whose stable of talent other publications naturally try to poach.2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet @clarencejohnsn and
I'm going to hold you to your opinion that NR is "a fine magazine."
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @jackshafer @clarencejohnsn and
I'm on record as saying that National Review is better now than it has been in decades.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet @clarencejohnsn and
That's different than saying it's a fine magazine.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @jackshafer @clarencejohnsn and
Well, the two statements are compatible and both are true. I think it's a fine magazine & better than it has been in decades (probably last period it was this strong was 1960s).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @jackshafer @clarencejohnsn and
I actually read a fair bit of 1960s National Review in my misspent youth (mainly for the Guy Davenport, Joan Didion, Garry Wills & Hugh Kenner).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Mano was great. I keep thinking someone should do an anthology of his 1970s NR pieces.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.