The Hauenstein Center Collection

Here's the second half of our conversation with Sam Anderson, critic at large at the New York Times Magazine.

Last episode, we heard about how Sam became interested in magazine writing and criticism, and how he tends to approach texts and subjects. In this episode, we hear about Sam’s gradual shift from doctoral work at NYU to writing from time to time for Slate and then full time at New York Magazine, where he wrote mostly about sports before becoming book critic. We also get back to the question of whether Sam is a generalist. That topic allows us to address some of Sam’s favorite subjects: the people he’s written about and is endlessly fascinated by: we move from Dostoesky to Michelangelo, Samuel Beckett to Mark McGuire, the baseball player.

We touch on all these folks because there’s something about each of them—their work, their stories—that preoccupies Sam. But what is it? We ask that. We consider some of the themes around which Sam’s writing tends to orbit. I ask whether he feels he has some real writerly mission, some main idea to get across, main insight to relate.

Here's the second half of our conversation with Sam Anderson, critic at large at the New York Times Magazine.

Last episode, we heard about how Sam became interested in magazine writing and criticism, and how he tends to approach texts and subjects. In this episode, we hear about Sam’s gradual shift from doctoral work at NYU to writing from time to time for Slate and then full time at New York Magazine, where he wrote mostly about sports before becoming book critic. We also get back to the question of whether Sam is a generalist. That topic allows us to address some of Sam’s favorite subjects: the people he’s written about and is endlessly fascinated by: we move from Dostoesky to Michelangelo, Samuel Beckett to Mark McGuire, the baseball player.

We touch on all these folks because there’s something about each of them—their work, their stories—that preoccupies Sam. But what is it? We ask that. We consider some of the themes around which Sam’s writing tends to orbit. I ask whether he feels he has some real writerly mission, some main idea to get across, main insight to relate.

For this week: the first half of our convesation with Sam Anderson, critic at large at the New York Times Magazine.

We talk about Sam’s time as an undergraduate at Oregon State and LSU, how he became a sort of auto-didact. We talk, as well, about his early admiration for old New Yorker writers like James Thurber and E.B. White. Sam describes life as a PhD student in English at NYU, where he started to pitch articles to magazines almost entirely in secret. Sam describes his habits as a reader and critic, what he sees in Jacques Derrida’s command not to “double the text,” and how criticism itself should be a creative act.

For this week: the first half of our convesation with Sam Anderson, critic at large at the New York Times Magazine.

We talk about Sam’s time as an undergraduate at Oregon State and LSU, how he became a sort of auto-didact. We talk, as well, about his early admiration for old New Yorker writers like James Thurber and E.B. White. Sam describes life as a PhD student in English at NYU, where he started to pitch articles to magazines almost entirely in secret. Sam describes his habits as a reader and critic, what he sees in Jacques Derrida’s command not to “double the text,” and how criticism itself should be a creative act.

In this episode, we hear from Teresa Mathew, a journalist and writing fellow at The Atlantic’s City Lab, who writes a good deal about religion and race, particularly about the Syro-Malabar Catholic Church, in India as well as America. We discuss some of the cultural differences between faiths in India, as well as between the same faith, Catholicism, in India and America. Teresa considers what it means to inherit a faith and culture and tradition, as well as what it’s like to fear losing them. Teresa also talks about what it’s like to work as a freelance journalist in Brooklyn, and wonders how on earth anyone can be good at Twitter.

In this episode, we hear from Teresa Mathew, a journalist and writing fellow at The Atlantic’s City Lab, who writes a good deal about religion and race, particularly about the Syro-Malabar Catholic Church, in India as well as America. We discuss some of the cultural differences between faiths in India, as well as between the same faith, Catholicism, in India and America. Teresa considers what it means to inherit a faith and culture and tradition, as well as what it’s like to fear losing them. Teresa also talks about what it’s like to work as a freelance journalist in Brooklyn, and wonders how on earth anyone can be good at Twitter.

In our last episode, you heard three writers and editors on the left debate and discuss with three writers and editors on the Right. In this episode, you’ll hear the second part of that panel conversation. We begin with the left’s response to the right’s remarks about the possibility of fusion, or of coalition building—both within the ranks of one’s political movement, and outside those ranks. In this episode, we first hear from Bhaskar Sunkara of Jacobin Magazine, then Sarah Leonard and David Marcus of THE NATION. Then, on the right, we hear Ingrid Gregg, then Winston Elliot of The Imaginative Conservative and Dan McCarthy of The American Conservative.

We hear from these speakers, we also get some good questions from the audience, including one from David Sehat, past guest on the podcast and host of Mindpop.

In our last episode, you heard three writers and editors on the left debate and discuss with three writers and editors on the Right. In this episode, you’ll hear the second part of that panel conversation. We begin with the left’s response to the right’s remarks about the possibility of fusion, or of coalition building—both within the ranks of one’s political movement, and outside those ranks. In this episode, we first hear from Bhaskar Sunkara of Jacobin Magazine, then Sarah Leonard and David Marcus of THE NATION. Then, on the right, we hear Ingrid Gregg, then Winston Elliot of The Imaginative Conservative and Dan McCarthy of The American Conservative.

We hear from these speakers, we also get some good questions from the audience, including one from David Sehat, past guest on the podcast and host of Mindpop.

On May 5th, right in the middle of the Hauenstein Center’s Conservative / Progressive summit, three writers and thinkers on the right met with three on the left to discuss the significance of election 2016. What did the victory of Donald Trump, as well as the rise of Bernie Sanders on the left, mean for American politics? Was the center being pulled apart, and could that, in their view, be a good thing?

It comes as no surprise that our panelists, separated ideologically, don’t agree about many points of politics or, as we in fact hear in this episode, culture. Still, they do have in common a critique of the so-called neoliberal center, or at least most of them share a similar distrust for it. They haggle over some of the key differences between their respective positions. They also talk about the opportunities they see in building new coalitions post-2016, and how they go about articulating the alternatives to the political status-quo for which they advocate.

Panelists include:

Sarah Leonard at The Nation

Bhaskar Sunkara at Jacobin

David Marcus at The Nation

Daniel McCarthy at The American Conservative

Ingrid Gregg at the Archbridge Institute

Winston Elliott III at The Imaginative Conservative

On May 5th, right in the middle of the Hauenstein Center’s Conservative / Progressive summit, three writers and thinkers on the right met with three on the left to discuss the significance of election 2016. What did the victory of Donald Trump, as well as the rise of Bernie Sanders on the left, mean for American politics? Was the center being pulled apart, and could that, in their view, be a good thing?

It comes as no surprise that our panelists, separated ideologically, don’t agree about many points of politics or, as we in fact hear in this episode, culture. Still, they do have in common a critique of the so-called neoliberal center, or at least most of them share a similar distrust for it. They haggle over some of the key differences between their respective positions. They also talk about the opportunities they see in building new coalitions post-2016, and how they go about articulating the alternatives to the political status-quo for which they advocate.

Panelists include:

Sarah Leonard at The Nation

Bhaskar Sunkara at Jacobin

David Marcus at The Nation

Daniel McCarthy at The American Conservative

Ingrid Gregg at the Archbridge Institute

Winston Elliott III at The Imaginative Conservative