Mark Bennett wrote:
>
>
> I, too, had a memory of the New Yorker from the '70s as being considerably different from the present - less commercial, more genteel. Wrong. The magazine seems to have been essentially the same throughout its history.
The power of the past (mythologized & recreated in memory) is all-powerful unless one consciously and continually resists that power.
One source of this is the damage time inflicts on aste buds, which generates a sharp contrast between the foods of one's youth and the same foods now. I don't think that one should _ever_ trust any spontaneous preference for the past over the present.
Carrol
Exemplum: Current New Yorker cartoonists are grossly inferior to Peter Arndt, James Thurber, Helen Hokinson, etc. :-<