We've Moved!

If you've bookmarked us at this location, we suggest redirecting yourself here. See you on the other side of your click-thru!

Begob, there's our bus...

Where We Hang Our Hat

Last night, we convened the monthly round table at Kieran's. Owing to the lazy holiday period when we had nothing better to do, the deputy editor had reserved the Titanic Room, which was—of course—an unintentional indulgence of present distractions. Much the usual crowd, lively banter, pints of Finnegan (charitable, but not deductible). For calorie counters, the Big Boss had a walleye sandwich, which won the traditional plaudits. To our right was a "buffalo salad"—a plate of greens piled with chicken that was roughly the color of orange Ne-Hi. (We thieved a piece from starving speech-writer DG. Yummy!) Down at the end of the table, we took note of columnist CC, who can normally be counted on to hoarde the french fries and nurse the beer.

We find the main thing to come out of these little to-dos is a persistent hankering for Tullamore Dew, another recently aquired vice (affordable! benign!). The question arose as to which was smoother—Canadian or Irish Whiskey. No one cared to speculate. The wise words of Sandberg, not present, were evoked: "You know, I don't drink that much bourbon anymore."

Although we have other favorite haunts within stumbling range of the office, Kieran's is our social headquarters. It is a comfortable and gracious place to take the family out in public. The homage to one of The Rake's patron saints, the generally inspiring nature of all things Irish, above all the noble art of blarney—Kieran's fits us like a mitten.

Readers sometimes say they'd like to visit us at the office. Sometimes they just pop in. We recognize them from a mile away, and the party instantly grinds to a halt. Our man at the front desk radios up. "Incoming!" Everyone looks very busy indeed. Boomboxes are shut behind closet doors, open liters of Mountain Dew and Jolt Cola are stowed behind book cases, cigars are extinguished, the dog, cat, and shetland pony are led into the back hall and vigorously shushed, the hang-glider is folded away, the pom-poms and shredded paper are kicked into the corners, shirts are buttoned, the small kiddie pool is shoved into the conference room, the Incredible Hulk boxing mits are returned to the Ad Directors empty filing cabinet, the disco ball is turned off, the mini-trampoline goes into the wine cellar, the throwing knives go back into their velvet lined case, the can-can dancers are shuttled into the copy room, garters are pulled up, skirts smoothed, hair patted, cowlicks flattened, flasks hidden in potted plants, whoopie cushions deflated. The reader is ushered in. Nothing going on here. Just a bunch of mouse-jockeys staring at screens. A scent of Lysol hanging on the air.

No, actually here is a little flash tour of The Rake World Headquarters.

It's true that the office is maybe not as exciting as it could be, but we're comfortable and we do have our own brand of fun. But if you want to see us at our razor-witted best, try to sneak into our monthly round table at the pub. Flattery often pays the tab, you know.

Begob, there's our bus. Good-bye.

Remember Pole-Sitting?

Inexplicably, I've been obsessed with sailing—right here in the heart of winter in Minnesota. Well, there is a reason, but it's not what you think... just a new personal obsession, originating here and here. In my ongoing effort to reverse a previous decision never to reread a good book (so many other classics I'll never get to, for shame!), I picked up Moby-Dick again. For years now, I've called it the all-time best American novel. But looking back—and attempting a re-reading— I realize now why it took a graduate course in theology to force me to finish the book on a schedule. All those victorian flourishes and bygone references, they become goads, not impediments, when you are reading a book for an elective credit. It may no longer be the best American novel—probably Twain deserves that honor, I guess.

So, anyway, I've just finished reading the chapter on mastheads on the Pequod. Apparently, the word did not come into regular usage until the 1740s—when whaling was beginning to become one of the world's most vigorous commercial enterprises. There have been masts, and the heads of masts, since boats were first equipped with sails (Jonah was thrown from a sailing ship, you know). But no one thought to stand at the top of one until it became a useful perch from which to spot whales spouting far off in the distance. (Pirates, seeing other merchant mariners as plunderable whales, no doubt manned the masthead too.)

So how did newspapers and other publications come to use the term as it is used today—to let you know who all the fine folks are that are responsible for creating your favorite magazine or journal? Some etymological sources say that the masthead on a ship is where you fly the flag—thus the "flag" (in a newspaper sense) is flown from its masthead. But that is a tautology. Why is the flag in a newspaper called a flag? (We've stopped using that word in the magazine world. We call the flag the "logo." Stubborn newspapermen persist, as ever.) I don't really have an answer, other than the rough guess that it originated with some broadsheet of shipping news. The first newspaper in America was Publick Occurrences, Both Foreign and Domestick in Boston, in 1690. There could not have been a newspaper in the American colonies that did not concern itself with shipping and mariners and the like, and most likely on the front page, over the fold.

I like the association, actually. It's neat to think of every little publication as its own ship, on its own journey, with captain and crew steadfast and loyal at the helm. We may not really compete with the Titanics and Lusitanias and Disney Cruise Ships of the world, but we have our own white whales to chase. Personally, I am not afraid of heights, and I don't mind being on the lookout for ice bergs and pirates and friendly trade winds. Avast!—The Editor in Cheese

Song & Dance

We noticed in the Sunday Times magazine a twenty-five-page advertising supplement promoting the Times’ "Arts & Leisure Weekend." That would be this coming weekend, and it would encompass hundreds of events across the country (even spreading to Europe). What type of thing are we talking about here? Mostly it is theater and art shows, but also includes—somewhat oddly, we thought—restaurants, spas, health clubs, and "attractions." It’s fun to browse through the supplement to learn what is going on in your own neck of the woods—but also to learn what other necks of other woods the New York Times seems to occupy throughout this bitterly divided land. The supplement constitutes fully a third of the issue, so it must be a big deal. (Paid for, apparently, by four full-page ads in the pagination by "Weekend" presenters Volkswagen, Mastercard, UBS, and Microsoft.)

Lots of publishing companies are trying this sort of thing, including our own little enterprise here at The Rake. Surely the Times is trying to fight the same weight as the New Yorker, which has quietly cultivated the New Yorker Festival into the gold standard in this particular area of the publishing biz. And the NYer Festival has merely been the locomotive at the front of a spiffy train of similar events and services that complement the book, and no doubt account for the magazine’s celebrated return to profitability last year. The New Yorker’s events and marketing department today is a wide-ranging juggernaut of brand-extension. (We noticed, for example, an advertisement in last week’s issue for a new service at Cartoonbank.com, the New Yorker’s online store, that resells New Yorker comics. The ad was promoting a new feature: Licensing cartoons for corporate reports and presentations. Go, Bob Mankoff, go! When will you return our call?)

So what is the story with every little festival accosting the good readers of America? You kind of have to make allowances for a huge diversity of offerings--from the shite "home tours" to the cerebral book signings to full-blown parties—but basically they are of a piece. The "branded editorial event" is the sort of marketing and "brand-extension" operation that can do two things. One, it "leverages relationships" with potential advertisers. Two, it offers interesting real-life opportunities to readers. Without offering both of these things, though, we feel like these things are a tremendous waste of effort—not to mention a possible distraction from a magazine that might improve its position in the world by merely being a better magazine.

Now, the New Yorker has a delicate and valuable brand that automatically lends any event a certain class and panache, a certain attractive world view. We suppose the New York Times does too, but it is interesting that they brand this event as a particular section of the newspaper. Each section of the paper surely has its own identity and voice, and this is probably a good thing—for the paper, but not necessarily for a festival. We wonder what the "Week in Review Weekend" would look like. Lots of events celebrating short-term memory? A movie marathon of "Memento"?

There’s a lot of cork in this particular wine, but if you’re lucky enough to live in New York, you may drink long and deep. From our point of view, the real value of the "Arts & Leisure Weekend" will be the limited number of Manhattan events that really flex the muscle of the brand. The "Times Talks" series, tacked on as the last page of the supplement, is where New York readers really luck out. We here in the Twin Cities can go to Gold’s Gym any day out of the year, with or without the imprimatur of the New York Times. But if you’re in Manhattan this weekend, you could see Times reporters interviewing Kiefer Sutherland, Billy Joe Armstrong, Chuck Close, Bill Murray, and Amy Tan—and that’s just in the first twenty-four hours. Blue-chip advertisers like Microsoft, Mastercard, and VW probably don’t care about these tiny little first-come-first-seated events at the City University of New York. But without them, they’d be underwriting a whole lot of events that would go off just fine without them or the Times.

And that is ultimately what the print-media festival is about. Coincidentally, it is precisely what print advertising is about: You are an advertiser, and you want good customers. So you associate yourself with a brand that already has them. All that’s left to be sorted out is who pays whom for the privilege. And whether readers actually get something they didn’t already have.—The Editor in Cheese

Comic Relief

Well, I never did find Jim Romenesko ice fishing, but I found the flu. So last night abed, I had two friendly companions—the DVD player and a magazine. I’ve had a copy of the movie "American Splendor" gathering dust on top of the TV for months, and I grabbed the latest issue of the New Yorker. It was an interesting coincidence.

To refresh your memory and mine, "American Splendor" is about Harvey Pekar, the Ohio working stiff who authored a famous comic book series of the same title. During one of those times when comics and graphic novels become fashionable, Random House published an anthology of the first numbers in 1986—ten years after American Splendor No.1 was pulped. In the normal course of publicity glad-handing and ass-grabbing, and glad-handed ass-grabbing, Pekar was invited to be a guest on David Letterman’s popular television show. Letterman found Pekar a raw, entertaining, and combative guest, and kept inviting him back.

Pekar never had much patience for anyone, and it didn’t take long for him to rebel against "the American Dream" which Letterman believed he was offering Pekar—in other words, anomic midwestern working stiff gets rare opportunity to become world-famous TV star, not unlike the Ball State graduate himself. It ended badly between the two of them, in part because Pekar just doesn’t like people that much, and because a few TV appearances with the cynical, mocking David Letterman shows just how devalued the Warholian "fifteen minutes" of fame has become. Also, Pekar seems to prefer his life of relative obscurity and subterranean credibility. It’s both his muse and his material. He couldn’t stop being himself just to be a celebrity.

Here in my sickbed, I say it was a coincidence, because now I am looking at last week’s New Yorker, and in it there is a nice little comic feature by R. Crumb and his wife Aline. Pekar and Crumb were old friends from Cleveland, and it was Crumb who originally encouraged Pekar to write comics, though Pekar had (and has) no facility as an artist.

As "American Splendor" makes clear, Crumb was an underground sensation as early as the mid sixties, making a decent living, hanging out with bohemians, moving to San Francisco, and generally being himself a substantial, life-supporting satellite of that whole Merry Prankster, Summer of Love, hippy-dippy cultural moment.

And now, forty years later, he makes the pages of the world’s greatest magazine.

Am I the only one who finds that a little depressing? I realize Crumb has been in previous issues, and I realize that the New Yorker has hardly been sitting on its thumbs--having within the past twelve months published full spreads by, for example, Chris Ware. (Credit Bob Mankoff with being a true hero of the revolution, though we’re not sure anyone has noticed, even when it is a National Book Award winner. I mean, you know, like who really cares about the "graphic novel" category anyway?) So it certainly is not the New Yorker’s fault--nor even David Letterman’s fault. But there is a persistent, aggravated tension between mainstream media and comic artists, and I wonder if it can ever be fully overcome.

Is there something inherently anti-social about serious, adult-oriented comics, something that causes an inevitable backlash and fall-out and back-slide into obscurity? That prevents the final big breakthrough into mass culture that seems to be the forever just-out-of-reach apotheosis? (And what would that look like, anyway? A Dan Clowes page in every newspaper and magazine in the land?) It’s a wonderful and unique art form, but can it be a billion-dollar industry like film or video games? We’re tempted to say that its greatest naturalist pioneers—Crumb and Pekar—were too steeped in hippy paranoia and politics to ever allow themselves to be embraced by "Big Media." Or maybe they just have not translated to other mechanical requirements as gracefully as others.

Well, the fact that I am watching a major motion picture about a filing clerk from Cleveland should tell you something. That I am reading a three-page feature drawn by R. Crumb in the world’s most prestigious magazine is also another clue. We call it the First Corollary to the Thermodynamic Law of Pastry Acquisition and Consumption (alternate, informal name: Letterman’s Razor): In rare cases, it is possible to have your cake and eat it too—but you may have to do it without anyone else noticing or caring.

On the other hand, y’know, comics are still basically for kids, right?—The Editor in Cheese

Down Time

We hear Jim Romenesko is ice fishing up on Mille Lacs. We're investigating. See you in a week.—The Editor in Cheese

Bigger & Better: Linkless But Insinuating Christmas Edition

Sitting around the office yesterday, we had noticed the proliferation of little pamphlet-sized magazines in our fair city—in fact, in cities all over the country. These are neat little publications, not because of anything that is in them, necessarily, but just because of the way they are. The format is fun, easy to pick up, maybe tuck into your back pocket—if your back pocket isn't already occupied by a wallet full of ATM receipts which represent cash that very briefly occupied that same space.

There are a couple of competing titles here in the Twin Cities. One is the clunky, unfortunately named "The Cites," which has some kind of pronunciation bar over the "e." (Note to self: simple puns rely on simple recognition. The sights? The citations?) For about six months, we read this as a typographic error in their very logo, rather than a device of surpassing cleverness. We hear through the grapevine that "Industry" is a knockoff started by a band of disgruntled "Cites" mutineers. (We hope this revolution was started by a righteous copy editor, but we have our doubts.)

Neither of these magazines has an editor, per se, which is fine because neither really has much editorial content to speak of. This is alright by us. The pictures are certainly pretty, the paper is heavy and white, and there is a certain sassiness to the design that must appeal to the twenty-something audience that palms these little magazines in the lobbies of strib clubs and martini bars.

As it turns out, a lot of serious Big League magazines are now toying with this sort of format, particularly in Europe. A couple years ago, Conde Nast-Europe began publishing pocket-sized versions of GQ and one or two other titles. In fact, the paractice goes way back, at least to World War II. One of the secrets of the New Yorker's massive success was their "pony edition" which they published during the war, without advertisements, for the leisure of American soldiers abroad. When those GIs came home, they were easily converted into a massive inflow of subscribers to the full-sized, ad-enhanced version of the magazine.

One can never think too literally about media, especially about the way people actually use the TV, or a CD, a book, or a magazine. What does it feel like in your hands? What is the actual, concrete experience of using this form of entertainment? In the magazine world, we frequently talk about "heft" value. How heavy is it in your hands? (Warning to all self-respecting editors: this, sadly, bears no relationship at all to the "substance" therein. Those perfume inserts are great scale-tippers though!) Part of this is down to nothing more than advertising. More advertising equals more pages. More pages equals more respect. Advertisers are pack animals, and they tend to gather where other advertisers have gathered. As our friend Dave Pirner once said, nothing attracts a crowd like a crowd.

And yet, we think it is more than professional jealously that compells us to say what we must now say: It is possible to have TOO much of a good thing—whether it is ad pages or edit pages. There is nothing as easy to ignore as a 400-page issue of Vanity Fair, as great as that magazine is. And we very nearly missed Dave Eggers' disarmingly restrained story on Monty Python in the "Winter Fiction" issue of The New Yorker, just because we find these fat theme issues off-putting.

We look at our so-called competitors here in Minneapolis/St.Paul, and we are exercised. We strain our back picking these door-stoppers up off the floor beneath the mail slot, and we are just overwhelmed by hundreds of pages of... well, nothing much at all. (The size itself is annoying. But what is infuriating is how little they do with how much they have. There is a special circle in hell reserved for the idle rich.)

To be perfectly fair, the January issue of Vanity Fair—traditionally one of the thinnest of the year, advertisers having blown their wads in December—always sets records for uninterrupted edit pages, this year something like 80 straight full-pages of feature stories and jump pages. We find this nearly unreadable too. It's just too much. We prefer to invest that much time into a good book with a sustained subject and voice. Or a video game.—The Editor in Cheese