On my first day at the Columbia Journalism Review, the editors were reading page proofs for an upcoming issue, and if you found a glitch, the editor who had read the piece before you had to pitch a coin into a pizza-fund jar—a dime to a quarter, depending on the grievousness of the error. This provided a quick insight into the economics of the place. Also, it was fun. I thought, maybe I could work here for a while.
So, I did. The copy we were reading that fall day was for the twenty-fifth anniversary issue, and here we are—zip!—at the fiftieth, trying to peer into the past and the future, as I will here. I see that Jim Boylan, CJR’s founding editor, stole all the Pulitzer quotes for his essay on the previous pages. So if you don’t mind, I’ll start this on a personal note and save the mission material for the end.
I came to CJR as half of a junior editor, splitting the position with my wife, Mary Ellen Schoonmaker, as we had done before on the copy desk at BusinessWeek. We took bimonthly turns, one of us working at the magazine while the other tended toddlers and wrote freelance. In one of my at-home stints, I wrote a long piece for CJR. Mary Ellen delivered the manuscript, and her desk was positioned in a way that allowed her to observe the reaction of the editor, a thin and classy man named Spencer Klaw. “He danced,” she whispered to me on the phone. “What?” I said. “He danced,” she said, “in the hall.” Thus was the hook set.

Klaw, who died in 2004, edited the magazine from 1980 to 1989. If I was ever going to be an editor, I thought in those days, here was the model. He didn’t scare anybody; you just didn’t want to disappoint him. His lieutenants were a bear of a man named Jon Swan, who spun straw prose into gold overnight, like Rumplestiltskin, and the steely Gloria Cooper, passionate and smart. Some time before I started, the legend goes, Gloria detected inadequate valuation of her work, vis-a-vis Jon’s work, and secretly wrote an unsigned commentary, overnight, on Jon’s typewriter. When Spencer praised the puzzled Jon the following morning, Gloria was all cat and canary.
This is a good moment to thank all of them for caring for the flame that Jim Boylan and his colleagues lit back in 1961, and to thank all the editors and staff members before and after them. In my time, Suzanne Levine was the editor after Spencer, and led the magazine in a fairly gutsy fashion between 1989 and 1997. In 1994, she sent Trudy Lieberman to write about David Bossie, the activist who at the time was feeding Whitewater gumbo to reporters. We could not obtain a photo, so Suzanne hired a police artist, who revised and revised his sketch until Trudy said, bingo!—that’s the guy. Marshall Loeb came next, from 1997 to 1999, and pushed the magazine in a slicker direction that reflected his roots at Fortune and Money. I have a memory of Marshall walking into the office early one morning with two immense suitcases, after what must have been a grueling all-night flight from China. He was in his seventies by then, but he dove into the pile of papers on his desk with what looked to me like rapture.
I found this piece interesting. I have some doubts about the CJR desks system. There is space for columns where papers have recently tried but failed (On Language at The NYT, for example).
The field of Cognition is wide open. The WSJ Review obsessively orbits cognition without getting much traction.
A prospective CJR Cognition columnist should study the 5th edition of Mark Ashcraft's "Cognition" minutely for a first column. (Also, Wired science blogs have failed to generate enough penetrating power on cognition). So the Perry memory slippage went right past without the cognitive issues being appropriately elaborated.
Language is a real puzzlement. You never see great columns on the corpus revolution in linguistics. It seems to be impossible for columnists to understand the limitations of factitious tests (without curricula), such as IELTS or TOEFL.
The CJR website is somewhat generic. It is infinitely better than many others for reader comment. Still, in comparison with The TLS's, it exhibits pretty much routine design.
I would like to see a CJR True Crime Desk where young writers would be educated. NY is a great site for such learning. I often read the NY Post for crime news.
The news cycle at CJR is sometimes a little bit slow and lacking in depth. More tenacity on Jim's events would be appreciated. Too many news threads tend to ravel away.
#1 Posted by Clayton Burns, CJR on Tue 15 Nov 2011 at 07:02 PM
[It contains several well-known Hemingway stories, including the Nick Adams stories "Indian Camp," "The Doctor and the Doctor's Wife," "The Three Day Blow," and "The Battler", and introduces readers to Hemingway's distinctive style.]
"The Battler" is one of my favorites.
I am trying to put together a package for students. I do work with one who has a MacBook Pro 13 inch. This is an excellent computer. The camera system I am looking at is the Nikon 1.
If the CJR had a Higher Education column with capacity in analysis, then it should be possible to review practices at J-schools in America so as to determine the ones with the best "extended phenotype" packages for students.
Normally, universities are not only behind, but even if the students would be buying the products, the institutions still resist out of seemingly ritualistic obsolescence.
CJR should write a major and well-researched editorial with national implications to be syndicated nation-wide once a week, focusing the incoherence of our practices. In the aftermath of Jim's troubles, it is perhaps amazing that nobody has even recommended formal official language tools, such as the COBUILD English Grammar and Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, for J-schools.
Finally, if anything, CJR needs a Cosmetics Desk. It is astounding how much traction these outfits are getting. If we are obsessed with products, we might consider Lauder's "The Colour Stylist." I guess in a male-dominated world, reality blurs.
#2 Posted by Clayton Burns, CJR on Tue 15 Nov 2011 at 09:04 PM
Lovely nostalgic piece, and your sketch of today's organisation and plans is welcome.
But this part of what you said is almost cruel -- creates a ferocious longing for a chance to listen:
=== As an orientation exercise, perhaps the new editor and I will listen together to my greatest-hits phone-message collection. I have saved one from the late David Halberstam, for example. Imagine a voice that sounds exactly like God, telling you emphatically he is not used to people messing with his copy. ===
Couldn't you post some of the recordings on this site?
I got the idea from this quotation on my own blog:
=== Raymond and his computer lived together in intense codependency, … On Houndvoice Raymond posted eerie little videos of long-dead poets reading authentic sound recordings emerging from the mouths of digitally animated photographs. It was clear from the Comments that some viewers thought they were really seeing Alfred Noyes read ‘The Highwayman,’ while even those who weren’t taken in were apparently impressed by the fish-like gaping of the poet’s lips …===
Explanation is here:
http://post-gutenberg.com/2011/11/15/good-guardian-bad-guardian-and-two-more-censored-comments/
#3 Posted by postgutenberg, CJR on Wed 16 Nov 2011 at 03:33 AM