The specificity and detail is helpful. It is also the kind of article that a newspaper would not do, because it is ultimately hypothetical. By being engaged with the immediate news, but giving itself the freedom to extend beyond it, this type of story provides an excellent service — similar to James Fallows’ prophetic November 2002 article “The Fifty-First State?,” about the Iraq catastrophe that was then just a glint in Donald Rumsfeld’s eye.
There are other stories since Bennet’s arrival that strike us as containing this same sensibility. The July/August issue, for example, provided two long articles that looked at the “War on Terror.” One, about the Internet-savvy adherents of al Qaeda, showed us the Islamic movement from an angle we don’t usually see. The profile of Musab al-Zarqawi, who was conveniently killed moments before the magazine went to print, dug deeper into the man than any newspaper had yet done.
It could be argued that these articles are consistent with the general excellence the Atlantic has long displayed, but we think Bennet has added something. Beyond simply keeping up the standards and adjusting, contrary to Keller’s warning, to the metabolism of a monthly, the magazine strikes us as even more relevant, more topical, more indispensable in the last few months than in recent memory.
- 1
- 2
Since Murphy and Langwiesche have left and the magazine has moved to D.C., I find it to be less dynamic. Its style remains elegant. The subjects are mostly important. But there aren't the surprises there used to be when maybe the Boston atmosphere caused mischief. To me it now comprises long newspaper articles. Very gray. Very somber. Often very superficial, almost like a party line influenced by too much proximity to the politicians.
Posted by John Tiernan on Fri 31 Jul 2009 at 02:37 PM