It is quite different, and better, as tek says.
well, not only me, I hope...
Soon we won't be able to distinguish it from The New York Review of Books.
we'll see. FA should generally be able to eat NYRB's lunch on foreign policy issues, and vice versa on cultural or broader intellectual stuff. Same with the New Yorker. It's a question of specialization, author stable, and in the latter case money (FA can only pay peanuts). Also, the new FA should be more accessible than the NYRB.
As for Power's piece, I wasn't too impressed by it (nor the well-intentioned but oddly boring Dissent package). Why not? Because she started from the unworldly premise that genocide prevention was an important foreign policy priority, and was therefore shocked, shocked, to find out that it wasn't. The very fact of the pattern she establishes--officials never seem to do anything about the problem--should have been the starting point for analysis, not the conclusion. Still, I'm told by people I respect that the book is quite good. I gather that it will be reviewed in the next issue of FA, by a very sharp fellow; we'll see what he says about it.
tb@nowthatyou'rehooked,subscribetogetyourfix.com |
