newyorker--2020-10-02--“The Apprentice 2021”: Tax Masters Edition

PR Newswire , Jan. 1 , 2021 : FOX ANNOUNCES REBOOT OF CLASSIC DONALD TRUMP REALITY SHOW FEATURING ORDINARY AMERICANS COMPETING TO PAY THE LOWEST TAXES .
The Fox network announced today that it is launching a new version of President Donald Trump ’ s hit reality show “ The Apprentice , ” to be hosted by the President as he awaits his return to the White House , while the fraudulent results of the recent election are overturned by the Supreme Court .
The première episode will air on January 20 , 2021 , as an alternative to watching @ @ @ @ @ @ @ screaming V.O . )
: Ladies and gentlemen , leaders and fighters for freedom and liberty and the American Dream , live from the Southern White House in Palm Beach , Florida , it ’ s “ The Apprentice 2021 : Tax Masters ” !
PRESIDENT TRUMP : O.K.
, let ’ s go .
What ’ s your name ?
CONTESTANT No .
1 : Oh , yes , sorry , they told me about that backstage .
My name , sir , is , sir , Agnes Wallace , sir .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Agnes ?
CONTESTANT No .
1 : I ’ m a schoolteacher .
Sir .
At a public school in Chicago and— TRUMP : Uh-huh .
So you ’ re a loser ?
I ’ m not sure what we can do , but let ’ s take a look .
Are these your tax returns ?
( pages through document ) It says here that you spent seven hundred and fifty dollars on school supplies .
I like that number , at least .
CONTESTANT No .
1 : Yes , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and other art supplies for the kids so I bought them with my own money .
TRUMP : Sucker .
You spent seven hundred and fifty dollars on crayons ?
CONTESTANT No .
1 : Yes .
$ 761.80 , to be exact .
TRUMP : So you actually reported less than you spent ?
( shaking head ) Wow .
You ’ re hopeless .
All right , so , first off , let ’ s add a zero .
Seventy-five hundred dollars for art supplies .
CONTESTANT No .
1 : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believe that I spent seventy-five hundred dollars on art supplies .
TRUMP : Well , in that case , there ’ s no reason not to add two zeroes .
Seventy-five thousand dollars on art supplies .
Since you paid forty-two thousand dollars in taxes , you deduct the seventy-five thousand dollars you spent on art supplies as a business expense , and you ’ ll be entitled to a refund of , I don ’ t know , twenty-five thousand dollars or something—fifty to fifty thousand dollars .
CONTESTANT No .
1 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deduct the art supplies as a business expense .
CONTESTANT No .
1 : Because I work at a public school .
It ’ s not a business .
TRUMP : Yeah , well , you see , that ’ s the problem right there .
O.K.
, Abner— TRUMP : You look like an Abner .
Ivanka , tell him what he needs to do .
IVANKA : Abner , you have to incorporate your business .
.
.
.
What do you do again ?
IVANKA : Right .
Teacher .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ have so much respect for .
.
.
what was it again ?
IVANKA : Yes .
So your business can provide “ teaching services ” and hire you as a “ teaching consultant.
” That ’ s the way we usually do it .
And then everything is tax-deductible—your plane .
.
.
TRUMP : You really should .
It ’ ll improve your productivity by a thousand per cent .
Add a zero .
Ten thousand per cent .
IVANKA : And you can deduct the cost of buying your golf @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but not so regularly that they start making money .
CONTESTANT No .
1 : I don ’ t have any golf courses .
I ’ ve never even played golf .
TRUMP : That ’ s another big problem right there .
If you and your fellow-citizens had been a little more interested in playing golf and a little less interested in teaching , this country wouldn ’ t be such a disaster .
IVANKA : Do you deduct your hair styling ?
CONTESTANT No .
1 : I cut my own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that .
TRUMP : O.K.
, this is getting boring .
I told Mark I didn ’ t want any crazy people .
How about this ?
You can license my name for your teaching-services company .
Call it “ Trump Teach U.
” My attorney is waiting outside with the paperwork .
You ’ re fired .
Get out .
CONTESTANT No .
2 : Well , I ’ m in a bit of a mess .
You see , a few years back , a small business I owned went bankrupt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then I got divorced .
CONTESTANT No .
2 : I got hooked on cocaine .
TRUMP : Right .
Could you make it “ I got hooked on opioids ” ?
A lot of people are saying that opioids are a big problem .
CONTESTANT No .
2 : Anyway , I haven ’ t filed a tax return in , like , fifteen years and I probably owe much more than I could ever possibly raise in back taxes and penalties .
TRUMP : I think we have a winner here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Dennis , you ’ re doing great .
CONTESTANT No .
3 : Excuse me , I couldn ’ t help overhearing and I just wanted to ask Dennis a question .
What ’ s your secret ?
CONTESTANT No .
2 : Just bad luck , I guess .
And the drugs .
CONTESTANT No .
3 : ( writing it down ) And these were opioids , you say ?
TRUMP : What is your name ?
CONTESTANT No .
3 : I ’ m your Secretary of Commerce , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wife and mother , I have so much respect for commerce .
CONTESTANT No .
3 : Technically , I ’ m the former Secretary of Commerce .
President Biden has appointed— TRUMP : ( fingers in ears and humming ) Mmm , mmm , not gon na hear it .
You ’ re the Secretary of Commerce until I fire you .
You ’ re fired .
The second guy , you ’ re the winner .
O.K.
, quick , let ’ s do another one , I get paid by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ V.O . )
: This has been a Mark Burnett production !

PR Newswire, Jan. 1, 2021: FOX ANNOUNCES REBOOT OF CLASSIC DONALD TRUMP REALITY SHOW FEATURING ORDINARY AMERICANS COMPETING TO PAY THE LOWEST TAXES. The Fox network announced today that it is launching a new version of President Donald Trump’s hit reality show “The Apprentice,” to be hosted by the President as he awaits his return to the White House, while the fraudulent results of the recent election are overturned by the Supreme Court. The première episode will air on January 20, 2021, as an alternative to watching the hoax Inauguration.
KIMBERLY GUILFOYLE (screaming V.O.): Ladies and gentlemen, leaders and fighters for freedom and liberty and the American Dream, live from the Southern White House in Palm Beach, Florida, it’s “The Apprentice 2021: Tax Masters”!
PRESIDENT TRUMP: O.K., let’s go. What’s your name?
CONTESTANT No. 1: Hello, I’m Agnes Wallace.
TRUMP: “Sir.”
CONTESTANT No. 1: Oh, yes, sorry, they told me about that backstage. My name, sir, is, sir, Agnes Wallace, sir.
TRUMP: And what do you do, Agnes?
CONTESTANT No. 1: I’m a schoolteacher. Sir. At a public school in Chicago and—
TRUMP: Uh-huh. So you’re a loser? I’m not sure what we can do, but let’s take a look. Are these your tax returns? (pages through document) It says here that you spent seven hundred and fifty dollars on school supplies. I like that number, at least.
CONTESTANT No. 1: Yes, the school didn’t have paintbrushes and other art supplies for the kids so I bought them with my own money.
TRUMP: Sucker. You spent seven hundred and fifty dollars on crayons?
CONTESTANT No. 1: Yes. $761.80, to be exact.
TRUMP: So you actually reported less than you spent? (shaking head) Wow. You’re hopeless. All right, so, first off, let’s add a zero. Seventy-five hundred dollars for art supplies.
CONTESTANT No. 1: I don’t think anyone will believe that I spent seventy-five hundred dollars on art supplies.
TRUMP: Well, in that case, there’s no reason not to add two zeroes. Seventy-five thousand dollars on art supplies. Since you paid forty-two thousand dollars in taxes, you deduct the seventy-five thousand dollars you spent on art supplies as a business expense, and you’ll be entitled to a refund of, I don’t know, twenty-five thousand dollars or something—fifty to fifty thousand dollars.
CONTESTANT No. 1: But I can’t legally deduct the art supplies as a business expense.
TRUMP: Why not?
CONTESTANT No. 1: Because I work at a public school. It’s not a business.
TRUMP: Yeah, well, you see, that’s the problem right there. O.K., Abner—
CONTESTANT No. 1: It’s Agnes, sir.
TRUMP: You look like an Abner. Ivanka, tell him what he needs to do.
IVANKA: Abner, you have to incorporate your business. . . . What do you do again?
CONTESTANT No. 1: I’m a teacher, Ma’am.
IVANKA: Right. Teacher. As a wife and mother, I have so much respect for . . . what was it again?
CONTESTANT No. 1: Teachers.
IVANKA: Yes. So your business can provide “teaching services” and hire you as a “teaching consultant.” That’s the way we usually do it. And then everything is tax-deductible—your plane . . .
CONTESTANT No. 1: I don’t have a car. I can’t afford a plane.
TRUMP: You really should. It’ll improve your productivity by a thousand per cent. Add a zero. Ten thousand per cent.
IVANKA: And you can deduct the cost of buying your golf courses provided that you play golf regularly but not so regularly that they start making money.
CONTESTANT No. 1: I don’t have any golf courses. I’ve never even played golf.
TRUMP: That’s another big problem right there. If you and your fellow-citizens had been a little more interested in playing golf and a little less interested in teaching, this country wouldn’t be such a disaster.
IVANKA: Do you deduct your hair styling?
CONTESTANT No. 1: I cut my own hair.
IVANKA: We can see that.
TRUMP: O.K., this is getting boring. I told Mark I didn’t want any crazy people. How about this? You can license my name for your teaching-services company. Call it “Trump Teach U.” My attorney is waiting outside with the paperwork. You’re fired. Get out.
CONTESTANT No. 2: Hello, sir. I’m Dennis McClosky.
TRUMP: O.K., Dennis, what’s your story?
CONTESTANT No. 2: Well, I’m in a bit of a mess. You see, a few years back, a small business I owned went bankrupt.
TRUMP: Good, good. Go on.
CONTESTANT No. 2: And then I got divorced.
TRUMP: Excellent. I like what I’m hearing.
CONTESTANT No. 2: I got hooked on cocaine.
TRUMP: Right. Could you make it “I got hooked on opioids”? A lot of people are saying that opioids are a big problem.
CONTESTANT No. 2: Anyway, I haven’t filed a tax return in, like, fifteen years and I probably owe much more than I could ever possibly raise in back taxes and penalties.
TRUMP: I think we have a winner here. Don’t change a thing, Dennis, you’re doing great.
CONTESTANT No. 3: Excuse me, I couldn’t help overhearing and I just wanted to ask Dennis a question. What’s your secret?
CONTESTANT No. 2: Just bad luck, I guess. And the drugs.
CONTESTANT No. 3: (writing it down) And these were opioids, you say?
TRUMP: What is your name?
CONTESTANT No. 3: I’m your Secretary of Commerce, Wilbur Ross.
TRUMP: Secretary of what?
CONTESTANT No. 3: Commerce.
IVANKA: As a wife and mother, I have so much respect for commerce.
CONTESTANT No. 3: Technically, I’m the former Secretary of Commerce. President Biden has appointed—
TRUMP: (fingers in ears and humming) Mmm, mmm, not gonna hear it. You’re the Secretary of Commerce until I fire you. You’re fired. The second guy, you’re the winner. O.K., quick, let’s do another one, I get paid by the episode.
KIMBERLY GUILFOYLE (screaming V.O.): This has been a Mark Burnett production!


newyorker--2020-10-02--“The Nature of Color” at the Reopened American Museum of Natural History

Leaf-peeping isn ’ t the only way to bring color into your life this fall .
One of the special @ @ @ @ @ of Natural History , which is now open Wednesday through Sunday , is “ The @ @ @ @ @ pictured above ) .
In a series of installations , some of which are interactive @ @ @ @ @ everything from the electromagnetic spectrum to the fact that purple dye can be derived from @ @ @ @ @ be reserved on the museum ’ s Web site , at amnh.org .

Leaf-peeping isn’t the only way to bring color into your life this fall. One of the special exhibitions at the American Museum of Natural History, which is now open Wednesday through Sunday, is “The Nature of Color” (pictured above). In a series of installations, some of which are interactive, visitors can learn about everything from the electromagnetic spectrum to the fact that purple dye can be derived from snails. Timed-entry tickets must be reserved on the museum’s Web site, at amnh.org.


newyorker--2020-10-02--The Futility of Rolling Stone’s Best-Albums List

In 2003 , Wenner and Rolling Stone engaged in a complementary act of canon-building with a list of the “ 500 Greatest Albums of All Time , ” a massive undertaking .
The list ’ s flaws were apparent from the beginning .
“ Predictably , ” Edna Gundersen wrote , in USA Today that year , “ the list is weighted toward testosterone-fueled vintage rock.
” Here was an institution , Rolling Stone , made up primarily of white men , saying that most of the best music ever was made by white men , and leaning on their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so .
A new Rolling Stone list was revealed last week , with a hundred and fifty-four new entries and some major moves in the rankings .
It reflects an admirable attempt by Rolling Stone to evolve with the times and exhibit a more comprehensive consideration of music history .
The resulting list was clearly animated by a critical push toward poptimism and an attempt to diversify the critical class .
In a column in the Guardian , from 2018 , titled “ Bland on Blonde : Why the Old Rock Music Canon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hann accurately summarized the problems with the current canon : the inherent superiority of rock assumed in the long-standing hierarchy of popular music ; the domination of the conversation by white men ; and the construction of the canon with albums , a format that many of us still value but which is , quite frankly , obsolete .
Hann predicted the rapid fading of the rockist canon and the rise of a new one defined by a more inclusive critical tribunal .
By then , the shift was already taking place .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ project called Turning the Tables , a series that put women and their art at the center of a new canon and , by extension , the history of popular music and culture .
“ We came to a conclusion that , in 2017 , will likely strike no one as a surprise : that the general history of popular music is told through the great works of men , and that without a serious revision of the canon , women will always remain on the margins , ” the critic Ann Powers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of purpose : “ The point is to offer a view of popular music history with women ’ s work at the center.
” Powers theorized that a foundational canon by women about women—one that wasn ’ t forced to play by established , patriarchal rules—would focus on the collective and not on a pecking order .
She cited the poet and feminist Robin Morgan , who , in “ Sisterhood Is Powerful , ” from 1970 , defined the women ’ s movement as non-hierarchical , and , therefore , almost antithetical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ critical uprising continued well into this year , with similar projects .
As a supplement to massive best-of tent-pole list packages , fashioned in the Rolling Stone 500 ’ s image , Pitchfork continues its exhaustive examinations of scenes and artists , including career recaps for Stevie Nicks , Joni Mitchell , and Nina Simone , and introductions to urbano , dancehall , outlaw country , and girl groups .
The Zora Music Canon took the Turning the Tables series to its logical conclusion and focussed on Black women .
Black Music Reframed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Black writers contextualize Black music—which is to say , American music .
NPR ’ s celebration of Southern rap sought to bring balance to a largely bicoastal hip-hop discourse .
Notably , most of these projects went unranked .
It isn ’ t just that critics are now rethinking what warrants inclusion ; they are also rethinking the list itself and who it serves .
Remaking the Rolling Stone 500 in this image required not just adaptation but a bit of soul-searching for the magazine .
The publication historically mirrored the sexism of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and was restricted by the narrow perspective shared among its mostly white staff .
In an oral history of the women behind the transformational Rolling Stone run in the mid-seventies , the copy chief Barbara Downey Landau recalled a sign hanging over the desk of Wenner ’ s secretary that read “ Boys ’ Club , ” in huge letters .
The former associate editor Christine Doudna described it as “ a guy ’ s magazine ” with a very male sensibility .
The effects of that framework lingered through the release of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is also a persistent perception of Rolling Stone as a stodgy institution standing on hard-line rockist ideals that seems tough for some to shake—it ’ s the magazine that gives Bruce Springsteen five stars for everything , that championed U2 ’ s invasive iPhone experiment as the best album of 2014 , and that will find any excuse to write about the Beatles .
( Ten years after writing about why the band broke up , they did it again . )
All of those things are true , but the characterization isn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Stone critic Rob Sheffield has enthusiastically received next-generation stars like the One Direction front man turned rock proxy Harry Styles or the K-pop supergroup BTS .
Lil Baby and Bad Bunny were recent cover stars .
The magazine ’ s best album of 2019 was Ariana Grande ’ s “ thank u , next.
” Despite these choices , many readers still see Rolling Stone as the standard-bearer for the antiquated “ rock ” mainstream .
The way forward for Rolling Stone was to consult a wider array of music enthusiasts , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The biggest change with the 2020 list is the diversified voting pool—more than three hundred artists , journalists , and industry figures from across genres participated .
Two hundred and seventy-three people voted for the original list , but , finally , the demographics of the voters has been expanded .
The Alabama Shakes front person Brittany Howard voted .
The Cash Money Records executive Ronald ( Slim ) Williams voted .
I voted .
From Beyoncé , Alice Bag , and Billie Eilish to Lin-Manuel Miranda , Herbie Hancock , and Gene @ @ @ @ @ @ @ emphasis on variety .
Poptimism is clearly making headway : more rap , more Robyn , more Shakira , more Lady Gaga .
Britney Spears ’ s “ Blackout ” outranks albums by Neil Young , the Grateful Dead , and Ornette Coleman .
But aspirations to fundamentally change the list , and list-making , are mostly thwarted by methodology .
Even with new voters , the list still favors “ classic ” rock music and older music , though their presence doesn ’ t feel as overwhelming .
The new albums deemed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would fall in line with review aggregators such as Metacritic .
Because a ballot has only fifty slots , there is a tendency to prioritize music that feels important or influential in some way , even if those value judgments don ’ t necessarily say anything about quality or taste .
It feels like splitting hairs trying to separate “ Purple Rain ” and “ Sign o ’ the Times , ” but it also feels like overkill voting for them both .
I didn ’ t vote for any Beatles albums because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ covered .
I did vote for Joanna Newsom ’ s “ Ys , ” to no avail .
A more effective balloting strategy would probably be to front-load albums that you want to make the list , regardless of how you might feel about their order or place in history .
There is an argument that participants could be voting for different reasons , and with differing intentions ; some trying simply to promote music they love , others trying to establish new criteria by which great music is measured .
The list-maker @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also doesn ’ t leave much space for thinking about albums that don ’ t fit neatly into narratives , such as those of undervalued or misunderstood musicians like Patrice Rushen or Mtume , whose canonical doom was sealed by lukewarm contemporary reviews .
There isn ’ t a way to recognize marginal or ephemeral albums that don ’ t take myth-making so seriously : DJ Drama tapes , DJ Screw mixes , footwork and noise albums , drone metal like Sunn O ) ) ) , with epic ten-minute songs .
A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
As a result , the most heard albums still get upheld for simply being the most heard .
The 2020 list does move away from the stranglehold that boomer rock had over the 2003 list : sixty per cent of the original ’ s top ten was composed of the Beatles and Bob Dylan , and the highest rap album sat at forty-eighth .
Now two rap albums released in the past decade rank higher than the original list ’ s greatest album of all time : the Beatles ’ “ Sgt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Band ” ( now ranked twenty-fourth ) .
But , though some patterns have broken , the new results aren ’ t exactly a deviation from the norm .
Joni Mitchell ’ s “ Blue ” is still the highest-ranked album by a woman ; it ’ s just third now , not thirtieth .
( It was third on my ballot . )
The Beach Boys ’ “ Pet Sounds ” stayed at No .
2 ( No .
7 for me ) , and the new No .
1 , Marvin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Going On , ” was No .
6 before ( No .
8 for me ) .
The other albums that moved into the top ten aren ’ t exactly outliers : Nirvana ’ s “ Nevermind , ” Fleetwood Mac ’ s “ Rumours , ” Stevie Wonder ’ s “ Songs in the Key of Life , ” Lauryn Hill ’ s “ The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill , ” and Prince and the Revolution ’ s “ Purple Rain , ” which topped my ballot .
These are some of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Three of them won Grammys for Album of the Year .
All were inducted into the National Recording Registry by the Library of Congress .

The canonizing of popular music began in earnest in 1983, when a legendary gatekeeper, the Atlantic Records executive Ahmet Ertegun, convened a cabal of music-industry professionals to create the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. The hall was erected with the intent to venerate and deify, and the selections into it reflected the hubris of its creators. “Virtually no mistakes were made,” the Rolling Stone publisher Jann Wenner said, referring to the choices, when he stepped down as chairman, last year.
In 2003, Wenner and Rolling Stone engaged in a complementary act of canon-building with a list of the “500 Greatest Albums of All Time,” a massive undertaking. The list’s flaws were apparent from the beginning. “Predictably,” Edna Gundersen wrote, in USA Today that year, “the list is weighted toward testosterone-fueled vintage rock.” Here was an institution, Rolling Stone, made up primarily of white men, saying that most of the best music ever was made by white men, and leaning on their authority as a counterculture icon to do so. A new Rolling Stone list was revealed last week, with a hundred and fifty-four new entries and some major moves in the rankings. It reflects an admirable attempt by Rolling Stone to evolve with the times and exhibit a more comprehensive consideration of music history. The resulting list was clearly animated by a critical push toward poptimism and an attempt to diversify the critical class.
In a column in the Guardian, from 2018, titled “Bland on Blonde: Why the Old Rock Music Canon Is Finished,” the critic Michael Hann accurately summarized the problems with the current canon: the inherent superiority of rock assumed in the long-standing hierarchy of popular music; the domination of the conversation by white men; and the construction of the canon with albums, a format that many of us still value but which is, quite frankly, obsolete. Hann predicted the rapid fading of the rockist canon and the rise of a new one defined by a more inclusive critical tribunal.
By then, the shift was already taking place. In 2017, NPR started a reclamation project called Turning the Tables, a series that put women and their art at the center of a new canon and, by extension, the history of popular music and culture. “We came to a conclusion that, in 2017, will likely strike no one as a surprise: that the general history of popular music is told through the great works of men, and that without a serious revision of the canon, women will always remain on the margins,” the critic Ann Powers wrote. She later added a statement of purpose: “The point is to offer a view of popular music history with women’s work at the center.” Powers theorized that a foundational canon by women about women—one that wasn’t forced to play by established, patriarchal rules—would focus on the collective and not on a pecking order. She cited the poet and feminist Robin Morgan, who, in “Sisterhood Is Powerful,” from 1970, defined the women’s movement as non-hierarchical, and, therefore, almost antithetical to the ranked list-making process.
This critical uprising continued well into this year, with similar projects. As a supplement to massive best-of tent-pole list packages, fashioned in the Rolling Stone 500’s image, Pitchfork continues its exhaustive examinations of scenes and artists, including career recaps for Stevie Nicks, Joni Mitchell, and Nina Simone, and introductions to urbano, dancehall, outlaw country, and girl groups. The Zora Music Canon took the Turning the Tables series to its logical conclusion and focussed on Black women. Black Music Reframed, by uDiscover, focussed on letting Black writers contextualize Black music—which is to say, American music. NPR’s celebration of Southern rap sought to bring balance to a largely bicoastal hip-hop discourse. Notably, most of these projects went unranked. It isn’t just that critics are now rethinking what warrants inclusion; they are also rethinking the list itself and who it serves.
Remaking the Rolling Stone 500 in this image required not just adaptation but a bit of soul-searching for the magazine. The publication historically mirrored the sexism of the music scene that it covered, and was restricted by the narrow perspective shared among its mostly white staff. In an oral history of the women behind the transformational Rolling Stone run in the mid-seventies, the copy chief Barbara Downey Landau recalled a sign hanging over the desk of Wenner’s secretary that read “Boys’ Club,” in huge letters. The former associate editor Christine Doudna described it as “a guy’s magazine” with a very male sensibility. The effects of that framework lingered through the release of the 2003 list and beyond.
There is also a persistent perception of Rolling Stone as a stodgy institution standing on hard-line rockist ideals that seems tough for some to shake—it’s the magazine that gives Bruce Springsteen five stars for everything, that championed U2’s invasive iPhone experiment as the best album of 2014, and that will find any excuse to write about the Beatles. (Ten years after writing about why the band broke up, they did it again.) All of those things are true, but the characterization isn’t entirely fair. The Rolling Stone critic Rob Sheffield has enthusiastically received next-generation stars like the One Direction front man turned rock proxy Harry Styles or the K-pop supergroup BTS. Lil Baby and Bad Bunny were recent cover stars. The magazine’s best album of 2019 was Ariana Grande’s “thank u, next.” Despite these choices, many readers still see Rolling Stone as the standard-bearer for the antiquated “rock” mainstream.
The way forward for Rolling Stone was to consult a wider array of music enthusiasts, in the hope of covering blind spots. The biggest change with the 2020 list is the diversified voting pool—more than three hundred artists, journalists, and industry figures from across genres participated. Two hundred and seventy-three people voted for the original list, but, finally, the demographics of the voters has been expanded. The Alabama Shakes front person Brittany Howard voted. The Cash Money Records executive Ronald (Slim) Williams voted. I voted. From Beyoncé, Alice Bag, and Billie Eilish to Lin-Manuel Miranda, Herbie Hancock, and Gene Simmons, the 2020 list puts greater emphasis on variety. Poptimism is clearly making headway: more rap, more Robyn, more Shakira, more Lady Gaga. Britney Spears’s “Blackout” outranks albums by Neil Young, the Grateful Dead, and Ornette Coleman. But aspirations to fundamentally change the list, and list-making, are mostly thwarted by methodology.
Even with new voters, the list still favors “classic” rock music and older music, though their presence doesn’t feel as overwhelming. The new albums deemed worthy of inclusion are consensus picks that would fall in line with review aggregators such as Metacritic. Because a ballot has only fifty slots, there is a tendency to prioritize music that feels important or influential in some way, even if those value judgments don’t necessarily say anything about quality or taste. It feels like splitting hairs trying to separate “Purple Rain” and “Sign o’ the Times,” but it also feels like overkill voting for them both. I didn’t vote for any Beatles albums because I assumed their contingent had them well covered. I did vote for Joanna Newsom’s “Ys,” to no avail. A more effective balloting strategy would probably be to front-load albums that you want to make the list, regardless of how you might feel about their order or place in history. There is an argument that participants could be voting for different reasons, and with differing intentions; some trying simply to promote music they love, others trying to establish new criteria by which great music is measured.


newyorker--2020-10-02--“The Glorias” and “Save Yourselves!,” Reviewed

As Taymor demonstrated in “ Frida ” ( 2002 ) , her film about Frida Kahlo , she treats the bio-pic as the most accommodating of forms , and the new film , which she co-wrote with Sarah Ruhl , is no less quixotic .
It doesn ’ t trudge in one direction , from the heroine ’ s childhood onward ; instead , it mocks the clock , ticking to and fro among the various Glorias .
Thus , we cut straight from Vikander ’ s Gloria , ordering a hot-fudge sundae for breakfast , the better to soothe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ creepy boss , back to Armstrong ’ s Gloria , dawdling over her vegetables at dinner and being rescued by a friendly scoop of ice cream from her father , Leo ( Timothy Hutton ) .
Occasionally , we see the different Glorias sitting on the same bus , chatting with one another : a handy conceit , if you ’ ve ever wished to quiz your older self on things to come , or to scold the younger you for being a klutz .
The film arises from Steinem ’ s 2015 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Road , ” in which she admits to a constitutional restlessness , bred by an itinerant childhood .
Her father—happy to be known by his business moniker , “ Steinemite !
” —was a Micawber of the Midwest .
He shipped himself and , as often as not , his family from place to place , buying odds and ends and selling them as antiques .
He vaults off the page , already halfway to a movie , and Hutton , usually a reticent performer , grabs his chance , expanding into a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ giving Gloria cash to play the slots in Las Vegas and , only after she ’ s won , confessing that that was his last fifty dollars .
He ’ s always up on his luck .
Vikander , likewise , is a curious choice .
There ’ s something dreamy and withdrawn about her , but what made her mesmerizing as the android in “ Ex Machina ” ( 2014 ) , thinking herself into sentient life like Pinocchio with a Ph.D. , doesn ’ t entirely square with Steinem ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ humor , to which this movie gives worryingly short shrift .
“ A Bunny ’ s Tale , ” Steinem ’ s famous 1963 essay about her stint as a Playboy Bunny , remains forensically witty , drilling down into the unglamorous minutiae of wages , tips , foot pains , and medical inspections , and it ’ s duly dramatized in Taymor ’ s film , yet the onscreen Gloria seems to drift through the ordeal , fluffy tail and all , with a distant and disbelieving air .
This is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ half hours , and it ’ s gradually gripped by a structural panic : So many tales to tell !
How to cram them in ?
One instructive episode follows another , with characters wheeled on to say their piece .
At the March on Washington , in August , 1963 , Steinem stands beside a woman who says to her , “ That ’ s Dorothy Height , up on the speakers ’ platform .
She ’ s head of the National Council of Negro Women .
Why isn ’ t she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Baker , who trained all the SNCC young people ?
” The woman adds , “ Or Fannie Lou Hamer ?
She got beat up in jail and then sterilized in a Mississippi hospital.
” Most of this comes verbatim from “ My Life on the Road , ” and is cause for indignation .
But too much truth has an annoying habit of sounding unreal when recounted on film , and viewers know when information is being foisted upon them .
The result is that what should be most uplifting , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at risk of clunkiness .
As Steinem , inquisitive to the core , puts perfectly reasonable questions to the women she meets ( “ I read that the Cherokee Nation was once matrilineal—is that true ?
” ) , I couldn ’ t help being reminded of a sleuth in a B-movie mystery .
( “ And where were you , the disinherited stepson with a gambling addiction and access to commercial poisons , on the night of the murder ?
” ) Taymor is aware , I reckon , that her narrative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s why she suddenly pumps it up with fantasy sequences—one based on the Hindu goddess Kali , and another on the tornado from “ The Wizard of Oz , ” tricked out with a witchy line from “ Macbeth ” and tinted a hellish red .
Fancy stuff , but it ain ’ t enough , and the road goes ever on .
Given that Gloria Steinem is so awe-inspiring a figure , to so many people , is it any wonder that a film about her should end up being overawed ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of sports , but that is no reason not to take a pop .
It is with a mischievous delight that Alex H. Fischer and Eleanor Wilson , who wrote and directed “ Save Yourselves !
, ” zero in on the distinguishing features of the species .
Jack has a nonsensical mustache and a jar of sourdough starter .
When he showers with Su , she tells him to “ acquaint yourself with the soaps.
” As they converse , the English language drips and slips like lather .
She says , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” He says , “ I ’ m proud of us.
” At a party , they meet a friend who is working on “ 3-D-printed surfboards , made out of algae , ” and who offers them the use of a cabin upstate .
He also provides a crystal from Patagonia , to be gripped in times of stress .
So our heroes head for the country , bringing the bare necessities , including microgreens and quinoa .
They stop to let a chicken cross the road , without bothering to inquire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their phones .
“ Bye , world !
” Su cries , like a nun stepping into a convent .
Here ’ s the joke : immediately , that world begins to change .
Strange trails arc through the sky , as if fireworks were being set off in daylight .
Later , after Su and Jack arrive at the cabin , the night resounds with rubbery pings and twangs .
Frogs , perhaps , or something with an even longer hop ?
Without warning , “ Save Yourselves !
, ” which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comedy , changes its spots and turns into an alien-invasion flick .
Hey , why not ?
The aliens in question are not housed in gigantic tripods or armed with slavering fangs .
Rather , they resemble a cross between a sea urchin and a scatter cushion .
Su and Jack refer to them as poufs .
They emit either a cute chirrup or , when provoked , a thin red line , which lashes out and sticks to whatever ’ s in the way , such as a wall or the inconvenient @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has to chop through one of the lines , and it ’ s as if she were cutting the umbilical cord of a devil . )
The only person who might bond with the poufs is Spider-Man , thanks to his equally adhesive powers , but he ’ s unavailable , and everyone else is in peril .
Not that Su and Jack know , or particularly care , about anyone else—not , at least , until they acquire an unexpected plus-one .
Do not be fooled by the sci-fi trimmings of this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ manner , it ’ s a sort of “ Deliverance ” for the digital age , deriding the ability of tame souls , at a supposedly advanced stage of civilization , to cope with the unknown .
Listen to Jack , as he ponders the need to fight : “ I think there ’ s more weapony stuff in the basement.
” As for food , “ I ’ ve been wanting to YouTube ‘ How to make a trap to catch a rabbit ’ so bad , ” he says .
Such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ competent hunter-gatherer has become a slave to Firefox .
Like an old “ Thin Man ” comedy , “ Save Yourselves !
” rests on its central pairing .
Reynolds is one of those tall actors , like John Cleese or Jeff Goldblum , whose height is intrinsically funny ; regular-sized experiences just don ’ t fit such folk , and they constantly seem to duck and tilt , as if to squeeze through invisible doors .
Mani , as Su , is less gawky , and much better at driving with a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shows that she , too , exists in a state of sweet perplexity .
“ I ’ m afraid of our lives getting stagnant , ” she says .
Well , no fear of that now .
You have to say this for Su and Jack : they may be completely useless , but they ’ re also harmless and charmingly well matched .
If they were to be abducted by the poufs and sucked into unfathomable space , it couldn ’ t happen to a nicer couple .
♦

There are five Gloria Steinems in “The Glorias,” a new movie directed by Julie Taymor. We have Ryan Kiera Armstrong as the young Gloria, growing up in the early nineteen-forties; Lulu Wilson as a more knowing Gloria, approaching her teens; Alicia Vikander as Gloria the student, the writer, and the budding activist; Julianne Moore as Gloria in full bloom, a co-founder of Ms. magazine, alternately hailed and patronized for her devotion to the feminist movement; and, last of all, Steinem as herself, cheerfully addressing the crowd at the Women’s March on Washington, in 2017—Gloria in excelsis, amid a firmament of pink hats.
As Taymor demonstrated in “Frida” (2002), her film about Frida Kahlo, she treats the bio-pic as the most accommodating of forms, and the new film, which she co-wrote with Sarah Ruhl, is no less quixotic. It doesn’t trudge in one direction, from the heroine’s childhood onward; instead, it mocks the clock, ticking to and fro among the various Glorias. Thus, we cut straight from Vikander’s Gloria, ordering a hot-fudge sundae for breakfast, the better to soothe her rage at being propositioned by a creepy boss, back to Armstrong’s Gloria, dawdling over her vegetables at dinner and being rescued by a friendly scoop of ice cream from her father, Leo (Timothy Hutton). Occasionally, we see the different Glorias sitting on the same bus, chatting with one another: a handy conceit, if you’ve ever wished to quiz your older self on things to come, or to scold the younger you for being a klutz.
The film arises from Steinem’s 2015 memoir, “My Life on the Road,” in which she admits to a constitutional restlessness, bred by an itinerant childhood. Her father—happy to be known by his business moniker, “Steinemite!”—was a Micawber of the Midwest. He shipped himself and, as often as not, his family from place to place, buying odds and ends and selling them as antiques. He vaults off the page, already halfway to a movie, and Hutton, usually a reticent performer, grabs his chance, expanding into a florid and unfamiliar buoyancy. Watch Leo giving Gloria cash to play the slots in Las Vegas and, only after she’s won, confessing that that was his last fifty dollars. He’s always up on his luck.
Vikander, likewise, is a curious choice. There’s something dreamy and withdrawn about her, but what made her mesmerizing as the android in “Ex Machina” (2014), thinking herself into sentient life like Pinocchio with a Ph.D., doesn’t entirely square with Steinem’s combative edge—or with her unbluntable sense of humor, to which this movie gives worryingly short shrift. “A Bunny’s Tale,” Steinem’s famous 1963 essay about her stint as a Playboy Bunny, remains forensically witty, drilling down into the unglamorous minutiae of wages, tips, foot pains, and medical inspections, and it’s duly dramatized in Taymor’s film, yet the onscreen Gloria seems to drift through the ordeal, fluffy tail and all, with a distant and disbelieving air.
This is a long movie, nudging two and a half hours, and it’s gradually gripped by a structural panic: So many tales to tell! How to cram them in? One instructive episode follows another, with characters wheeled on to say their piece. At the March on Washington, in August, 1963, Steinem stands beside a woman who says to her, “That’s Dorothy Height, up on the speakers’ platform. She’s head of the National Council of Negro Women. Why isn’t she speaking? And where’s Ella Baker, who trained all the SNCC young people?” The woman adds, “Or Fannie Lou Hamer? She got beat up in jail and then sterilized in a Mississippi hospital.”
Most of this comes verbatim from “My Life on the Road,” and is cause for indignation. But too much truth has an annoying habit of sounding unreal when recounted on film, and viewers know when information is being foisted upon them. The result is that what should be most uplifting, in “The Glorias,” is most at risk of clunkiness. As Steinem, inquisitive to the core, puts perfectly reasonable questions to the women she meets (“I read that the Cherokee Nation was once matrilineal—is that true?”), I couldn’t help being reminded of a sleuth in a B-movie mystery. (“And where were you, the disinherited stepson with a gambling addiction and access to commercial poisons, on the night of the murder?”) Taymor is aware, I reckon, that her narrative is starting to sag; that’s why she suddenly pumps it up with fantasy sequences—one based on the Hindu goddess Kali, and another on the tornado from “The Wizard of Oz,” tricked out with a witchy line from “Macbeth” and tinted a hellish red. Fancy stuff, but it ain’t enough, and the road goes ever on. Given that Gloria Steinem is so awe-inspiring a figure, to so many people, is it any wonder that a film about her should end up being overawed?
There is a memorable image, in “Save Yourselves!,” of Su (Sunita Mani) and Jack (John Reynolds) preparing to take a break. Both of them are wearing shorts and tops. On the left side of the frame, we find Su standing upright, talking on her cell phone, and extending a foot like a dancer; on the right is Jack, also holding a phone but sitting at a desk, facing a laptop and a desktop computer. Though Su and Jack are together, enclosed in the camera’s gaze, they somehow look marooned in their respective spaces. And there’s the rub. As they inform their professional colleagues, they will be going not just away from Brooklyn but—heaven help them—offline, for one whole week. Such is the ultimate sacrifice, if you seek to reboot your love: only disconnect.
Targeting hipsters is hardly the most challenging of sports, but that is no reason not to take a pop. It is with a mischievous delight that Alex H. Fischer and Eleanor Wilson, who wrote and directed “Save Yourselves!,” zero in on the distinguishing features of the species. Jack has a nonsensical mustache and a jar of sourdough starter. When he showers with Su, she tells him to “acquaint yourself with the soaps.” As they converse, the English language drips and slips like lather. She says, “I want to be better people.” He says, “I’m proud of us.” At a party, they meet a friend who is working on “3-D-printed surfboards, made out of algae,” and who offers them the use of a cabin upstate. He also provides a crystal from Patagonia, to be gripped in times of stress.
So our heroes head for the country, bringing the bare necessities, including microgreens and quinoa. They stop to let a chicken cross the road, without bothering to inquire into its motivation, and switch off their phones. “Bye, world!” Su cries, like a nun stepping into a convent. Here’s the joke: immediately, that world begins to change. Strange trails arc through the sky, as if fireworks were being set off in daylight. Later, after Su and Jack arrive at the cabin, the night resounds with rubbery pings and twangs. Frogs, perhaps, or something with an even longer hop? Without warning, “Save Yourselves!,” which was set fair as a sharp romantic comedy, changes its spots and turns into an alien-invasion flick. Hey, why not?
The aliens in question are not housed in gigantic tripods or armed with slavering fangs. Rather, they resemble a cross between a sea urchin and a scatter cushion. Su and Jack refer to them as poufs. They emit either a cute chirrup or, when provoked, a thin red line, which lashes out and sticks to whatever’s in the way, such as a wall or the inconvenient head of a human. (Su has to chop through one of the lines, and it’s as if she were cutting the umbilical cord of a devil.) The only person who might bond with the poufs is Spider-Man, thanks to his equally adhesive powers, but he’s unavailable, and everyone else is in peril. Not that Su and Jack know, or particularly care, about anyone else—not, at least, until they acquire an unexpected plus-one.
Do not be fooled by the sci-fi trimmings of this film. Despite its light and amiable manner, it’s a sort of “Deliverance” for the digital age, deriding the ability of tame souls, at a supposedly advanced stage of civilization, to cope with the unknown. Listen to Jack, as he ponders the need to fight: “I think there’s more weapony stuff in the basement.” As for food, “I’ve been wanting to YouTube ‘How to make a trap to catch a rabbit’ so bad,” he says. Such is the ascent of man: the competent hunter-gatherer has become a slave to Firefox.
Like an old “Thin Man” comedy, “Save Yourselves!” rests on its central pairing. Reynolds is one of those tall actors, like John Cleese or Jeff Goldblum, whose height is intrinsically funny; regular-sized experiences just don’t fit such folk, and they constantly seem to duck and tilt, as if to squeeze through invisible doors. Mani, as Su, is less gawky, and much better at driving with a stick shift, yet her wide-eyed stare shows that she, too, exists in a state of sweet perplexity. “I’m afraid of our lives getting stagnant,” she says. Well, no fear of that now. You have to say this for Su and Jack: they may be completely useless, but they’re also harmless and charmingly well matched. If they were to be abducted by the poufs and sucked into unfathomable space, it couldn’t happen to a nicer couple. ♦


newyorker--2020-10-02--Chilaquiles Straight from a Chef’s Home Kitchen

In December , Juan Sánchez , who was then a chef at Made Nice , Eleven Madison Park ’ s casual sister restaurant , started an Instagram account : @ citlali_cocina .
After five years in New York , Sánchez had noticed that the city ’ s Mexican food was mostly confined to the styles of a few regions , including Puebla , in central Mexico , and Oaxaca , in the south .
Citlali Cocina would be a small way to highlight the cuisine of his home town , Guadalajara , and a place to collect ideas for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The first photo he posted was a glamour shot of a quesadilla , a pale corn tortilla topped with thick , melty strands of quesillo , a stretchy cheese , and a leaf of epazote , an aromatic herb , sprinkled with tequesquite , a mineral salt used since the pre-Hispanic era .
A video followed : glistening chunks of birria de res , beef marinated in chilis , spices , and herbs , covered in banana leaves , and cooked for four hours .
On Christmas Eve , there appeared a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a poached egg , coarsely crumbled white cheese , and wispy greens , under which peeked the corners of tortilla chips coated in red salsa .
Beside it was a mug containing a dark , glossy beverage .
“ There ’ s nothing like waking up to a warm hug of chilaquiles and café de olla , ” the caption read .
How could Sánchez have known that he was describing his future business model ?
In March , Sánchez was furloughed from Made Nice and began to while away quarantine by drafting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he had decided that he didn ’ t have to wait to open a restaurant , and in August he turned the kitchen in his Greenpoint apartment semi-professional , accepting orders for pickup once a week , between 11 A.M. and 2 P.M. on Sundays .
There was only one thing on the menu : warm hugs in the form of chilaquiles .
Chilaquiles is a dish popular all over Mexico , in endless iterations , especially for breakfast or brunch .
( It can work wonders on a hangover . )
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mexican tortillas as pain perdu is to French bread—cut up and fried into chips , then tossed in salsa on the stove or in the oven ; the less time cooked , the crispier the final dish .
There ’ s nothing about Sánchez ’ s version that makes it particularly Guadalajaran .
His recipe is as unique to him as his accent , which sounds distinctly Mexican but also a bit Liverpudlian ; he lived in England for two years .
He gets his corn tortillas from the Bronx , cuts them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out for a few days , fries them until crunchy , and cooks them in salsa on the stove only briefly .
Sánchez ’ s smoky-sweet salsa is made with tomatillos , mild , fruity guajillo chilis , and dried chiles de árbol , for heat .
Once coated , the chips get topped with queso fresco , chopped white onion , and a sprinkling of delicate greens or edible flowers from the farmers ’ market .
For a few extra dollars , he ’ ll add avocado , a poached or over-easy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ skin-on boneless chicken breast .
It ’ s a truly glorious combination .
Sánchez doesn ’ t currently offer café de olla , which is coffee steeped with cinnamon and unrefined cane sugar , though he may yet—he is slowly starting to expand his menu .
In the meantime , you can get café de olla at For All Things Good , a brand-new Bed-Stuy café and molino , or mill .
The mill grinds corn , imported from Mexico , to make its own masa , which is sold uncooked and is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ When the tortillas grow stale , they ’ re made into chips , some of which are destined for chilaquiles .
In this version , the chips are cooked much longer in the salsa , so that they start to take on the texture of porridge , and the cheese is a disk of queso Chihuahua , griddled until it wears a beautiful skirt of lacy frico .
It ’ s different , but no less comforting or delicious .
New York needs all the chilaquiles it can get .
( Citlali Cocina @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Good chilaquiles $ 10 . )
♦

In December, Juan Sánchez, who was then a chef at Made Nice, Eleven Madison Park’s casual sister restaurant, started an Instagram account: @citlali_cocina. After five years in New York, Sánchez had noticed that the city’s Mexican food was mostly confined to the styles of a few regions, including Puebla, in central Mexico, and Oaxaca, in the south. Citlali Cocina would be a small way to highlight the cuisine of his home town, Guadalajara, and a place to collect ideas for the restaurant that he hoped to open someday.
Sánchez gets his corn tortillas from the Bronx and cuts them into postage-stamp-size squares before frying them. His salsa is made with tomatillos and two kinds of chilis. Photograph by Caroline Tompkins for The New Yorker
The first photo he posted was a glamour shot of a quesadilla, a pale corn tortilla topped with thick, melty strands of quesillo, a stretchy cheese, and a leaf of epazote, an aromatic herb, sprinkled with tequesquite, a mineral salt used since the pre-Hispanic era. A video followed: glistening chunks of birria de res, beef marinated in chilis, spices, and herbs, covered in banana leaves, and cooked for four hours.
On Christmas Eve, there appeared a tantalizing image of a bowl piled with a poached egg, coarsely crumbled white cheese, and wispy greens, under which peeked the corners of tortilla chips coated in red salsa. Beside it was a mug containing a dark, glossy beverage. “There’s nothing like waking up to a warm hug of chilaquiles and café de olla,” the caption read. How could Sánchez have known that he was describing his future business model?
Sánchez, who was furloughed from his job as a chef in March, hopes to own his own restaurant someday but, in the meantime, has turned his Greenpoint apartment kitchen semi-professional. Photograph by Caroline Tompkins for The New Yorker
In March, Sánchez was furloughed from Made Nice and began to while away quarantine by drafting a dream menu. By summer, he had decided that he didn’t have to wait to open a restaurant, and in August he turned the kitchen in his Greenpoint apartment semi-professional, accepting orders for pickup once a week, between 11 A.M. and 2 P.M. on Sundays. There was only one thing on the menu: warm hugs in the form of chilaquiles.
Chilaquiles is a dish popular all over Mexico, in endless iterations, especially for breakfast or brunch. (It can work wonders on a hangover.) The common denominator is stale tortillas—chilaquiles is to Mexican tortillas as pain perdu is to French bread—cut up and fried into chips, then tossed in salsa on the stove or in the oven; the less time cooked, the crispier the final dish.
There’s nothing about Sánchez’s version that makes it particularly Guadalajaran. His recipe is as unique to him as his accent, which sounds distinctly Mexican but also a bit Liverpudlian; he lived in England for two years. He gets his corn tortillas from the Bronx, cuts them into postage-stamp-size squares, lets them dry out for a few days, fries them until crunchy, and cooks them in salsa on the stove only briefly.
Sánchez currently offers his chilaquiles for pickup once a week but hopes to expand his hours in the near future. Photograph by Caroline Tompkins for The New Yorker
Sánchez’s smoky-sweet salsa is made with tomatillos, mild, fruity guajillo chilis, and dried chiles de árbol, for heat. Once coated, the chips get topped with queso fresco, chopped white onion, and a sprinkling of delicate greens or edible flowers from the farmers’ market. For a few extra dollars, he’ll add avocado, a poached or over-easy egg, and a perfectly cooked, skin-on boneless chicken breast. It’s a truly glorious combination.
Sánchez doesn’t currently offer café de olla, which is coffee steeped with cinnamon and unrefined cane sugar, though he may yet—he is slowly starting to expand his menu. In the meantime, you can get café de olla at For All Things Good, a brand-new Bed-Stuy café and molino, or mill. The mill grinds corn, imported from Mexico, to make its own masa, which is sold uncooked and is also used to press house-made tortillas. When the tortillas grow stale, they’re made into chips, some of which are destined for chilaquiles.
Pickup times are carefully scheduled to maintain social distancing between customers. Photograph by Caroline Tompkins for The New Yorker
In this version, the chips are cooked much longer in the salsa, so that they start to take on the texture of porridge, and the cheese is a disk of queso Chihuahua, griddled until it wears a beautiful skirt of lacy frico. It’s different, but no less comforting or delicious. New York needs all the chilaquiles it can get. (Citlali Cocina chilaquiles $10. For All Things Good chilaquiles $10.) ♦


newyorker--2020-10-02--How Donald Trump and William Barr are Benefitting from the Catholic Right’s Consolidation of Power

The N.C.P.B.
, which has been held annually since 2004—typically in a hotel ballroom in Washington , D.C.—is a gathering of Catholic conservatives who work in law , business , politics , education , and philanthropy .
Regular participants include Pat Cipollone , a White House counsel to President Trump ; Carl A. Anderson , the Supreme Knight of the Knights of Columbus ; and John Meyer , the executive director of the Napa Institute , a deep-pocketed center for Catholic conservatism .
Past speakers include Paul Ryan , Rick Santorum , Newt Gingrich , and the late Justice Antonin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Catholic priest , gave the invocation at this year ’ s event .
John Carr , my colleague at Georgetown University , who was formerly a key figure in the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops , described the N.C.P.B .
this way : “ It ’ s not particularly national , not fully Catholic , not primarily prayer , and this year not even breakfast .
It ’ s a partisan exercise where supporters of Donald Trump are more at home than defenders of Pope Francis.
” This year , the N.C.P.B @ @ @ @ @ @ @ victory lap and a campaign event .
The two judges then considered the leading prospects to fill the seat of the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg—Barbara Lagoa , of the Eleventh Circuit , and Amy Coney Barrett , of the Seventh Circuit , who on Saturday became Trump ’ s official nominee—are Catholic conservatives whose views reflect those of the Federalist Society .
( If Barrett is confirmed , the Court will have five conservative Catholic Justices , the culmination of the Federalist Society ’ s forty-year effort to tilt the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Trump was a “ special guest ” at the breakfast , delivering prepared remarks from the White House .
He has courted conservative Catholics in 2020 as avidly as he courted evangelical Christians in 2016 .
This Wednesday , Secretary of State Mike Pompeo , an evangelical Christian , went to Rome hoping to gain an audience with Pope Francis in order to discuss the Pope ’ s engagement with China , which has angered Catholic conservatives .
No audience was granted , though .
Pompeo took part in a symposium that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Holy See , Callista Gingrich , and her husband , Newt , who is a co-chair of the advocacy group Catholics for Trump .
On Thursday , Pompeo met with Cardinal Pietro Parolin , the Vatican Secretary of State .
Had Pompeo sought a meeting with Francis as a play for Catholic voters back home ?
Parolin said that he had no evidence , “ but it is a thought that can be made.
” The Christian anti-Trump group Vote Common Good maintains that , if Hillary Clinton had done five-per-cent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Michigan , she would have defeated Trump in both states ; polling experts suggest that the votes of undecided Catholic voters in those states , and also in Wisconsin and Florida , may determine the outcome of this year ’ s election .
For an onlooker , the N.C.P.B .
event was a disquieting piece of political theatre .
It suggested that the conventional wisdom about the relationship between the religious right and Trump—an impious , twice-divorced con man , liar , and bigot—misses the point .
The relationship is not mainly a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their eyes to the President ’ s personal misdeeds as they look to him to deliver anti-abortion Justices , arrange funding for Christian charter schools , and offer bromides in support of religious liberty ; it ’ s more like a bear hug .
For conservative Catholics , it is also a reversion to history .
Their long project attempts to establish a synthesis between the hierarchical order of Catholic truths and what they call the “ American experiment in ordered liberty.
” In supporting Trump and Barr , they also are squarely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a force of resistance to democratic governance—one that runs from pre-Revolutionary France to Franco ’ s Spain and nineteen-sixties Latin America .
They share a contempt for liberalism and a corresponding belief in public order as the basis for civil society .
In Barr ’ s view , unhindered executive power is an appropriate and just tool in the war on liberalism .
Speaking last year , at the University of Notre Dame , he decried secular America ’ s “ unremitting assault on religion and traditional values ” and its departure from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he claimed , using a familiar twist of religious originalism , had held that “ free government was only suitable and sustainable for a religious people.
” In March , 2016 , three dozen prominent Catholic conservatives called Trump “ manifestly unfit ” to be President .
But the movement ’ s subsequent embrace of him shows that Catholic conservatives ’ lofty political philosophy is prone , in practice , to sponsor a kind of autocracy in which the autocrat at the head of the government is blessed by the autocracy that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barr and his cohort are inviting the kind of government that the Founders drafted a Declaration of Independence and fought a war to reject .
Trump ’ s former chief strategist Steve Bannon , himself a Catholic conservative , championed that kind of autocracy while serving as an adviser to Viktor Orbán , the Prime Minister of Hungary , and to the right-wing , religious-nationalist Vox party , in Spain .
( Bannon recently pleaded not guilty to federal fraud charges . )
Barr ’ s pin-striped suits are more finely tailored than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cloth the two men come from is the same .
It doesn ’ t seem to matter to Barr that his directives defy what originalists might call the “ plain meaning ” of Christianity .
Under Barr , federal executions have resumed ; the Catholic Church opposes the death penalty .
He has deterred people who have endured state-sponsored torture from coming to the United States as political refugees ; the New Testament urges believers to welcome the stranger , “ for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.
” He has misrepresented the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about directing federal agents to dispel peaceful protesters in Washington ’ s Lafayette Square with tear gas ( “ My attitude was get it done , but I didn ’ t say , ‘ Go do it ’ ” ) ; the Ninth Commandment , which Jesus reiterates in the Gospels , warns against bearing false witness .
Yet , at the N.C.P.B.
, Leo introduced Barr as “ truly a Catholic public servant ” who embodies “ integrity , honesty , humility , sincere and wise counsel , ” and follows the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ powers of the state.
” Other Catholics disagreed , focussing on the issue of capital punishment .
Sister Helen Prejean , the anti-death-penalty activist , tweeted , “ I raise my voice in fervent opposition to the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast ’ s scandalous offer of an award to Attorney General Barr for his ‘ exemplary Christlike ’ behavior .
.
.
.
What is Christlike about a Catholic believer using his discretionary power as Attorney General to undertake a series of speedy federal executions ?
” Two hundred other Catholic leaders signed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ letter drew more than twenty thousand signatures .
The day before the event , the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops put out a statement : “ In the last sixty years , before the Trump administration restarted federal executions , there were only four federal executions .
Since July , there have been five , which is already more federal executions than were carried out in any year in the last century .
There are two more federal executions scheduled this week .
We say to President Trump and Attorney General Barr : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did not stop .
William LeCroy was put to death last Tuesday ; Christopher Vialva was executed on Thursday .
Krisanne Vaillancourt Murphy , the executive director of the Catholic Mobilizing Network , called the N.C.P.B .
“ a twisted halftime show between executions.
” The death penalty is the issue on which Catholic conservatives are most directly at odds with not only Pope Francis but with his immediate predecessors , Benedict XVI and John Paul II .
In 2015 , in an address to a joint session of Congress , Francis declared @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every stage of its development , ” and that , accordingly , the Church must advocate “ for the global abolition of the death penalty.
” Three years later , drawing on precedents set by John Paul and Benedict , Francis made opposition to the death penalty official in the Catechism of the Catholic Church .
Catholic conservatives derided the move as an act of progressive papal overreach .
Barr has translated their defiance into Justice Department policy .
The four Supreme Court Justices affiliated with the Federalist Society have concurred , ruling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the Seventh Circuit .
( The federal death chamber , where the seven executions so far this year were carried out , is in Terre Haute , Indiana , a territory of the Seventh Circuit . )
The death penalty also best exemplifies the autocratic roots of Barr ’ s view that the chief executive is free to administer justice as he sees fit .
Capital punishment is the ultimate expression of the state ’ s redress to violence in the name of “ law and order , ” and it casts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of violence in the same light : as necessary to quell the forces of anarchy .
Last week , Barr declared New York City , Seattle , and Portland , Oregon , “ anarchist jurisdictions ” that must apply law-and-order tactics on his terms or risk losing federal funding .

Midway through this year’s National Catholic Prayer Breakfast, which was live-streamed last Wednesday morning, the screen shifted from an image of the event’s president, Leonard Leo, to the recipient of this year’s lifetime-achievement award, William Barr. Barr, of course, is the U.S. Attorney General. Leo is the co-chair of the Federalist Society, an organization of attorneys and legal educators that promotes the careers of judges who subscribe to principles of political conservatism and “textual originalism.” Both men are lifelong Roman Catholics. In this moment, they are the two of the most influential Catholic conservatives in the United States.
The N.C.P.B., which has been held annually since 2004—typically in a hotel ballroom in Washington, D.C.—is a gathering of Catholic conservatives who work in law, business, politics, education, and philanthropy. Regular participants include Pat Cipollone, a White House counsel to President Trump; Carl A. Anderson, the Supreme Knight of the Knights of Columbus; and John Meyer, the executive director of the Napa Institute, a deep-pocketed center for Catholic conservatism. Past speakers include Paul Ryan, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, and the late Justice Antonin Scalia, whose son Paul, a Catholic priest, gave the invocation at this year’s event. John Carr, my colleague at Georgetown University, who was formerly a key figure in the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, described the N.C.P.B. this way: “It’s not particularly national, not fully Catholic, not primarily prayer, and this year not even breakfast. It’s a partisan exercise where supporters of Donald Trump are more at home than defenders of Pope Francis.”
This year, the N.C.P.B. had the air of both a victory lap and a campaign event. The two judges then considered the leading prospects to fill the seat of the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg—Barbara Lagoa, of the Eleventh Circuit, and Amy Coney Barrett, of the Seventh Circuit, who on Saturday became Trump’s official nominee—are Catholic conservatives whose views reflect those of the Federalist Society. (If Barrett is confirmed, the Court will have five conservative Catholic Justices, the culmination of the Federalist Society’s forty-year effort to tilt the courts to the right.) And President Trump was a “special guest” at the breakfast, delivering prepared remarks from the White House. He has courted conservative Catholics in 2020 as avidly as he courted evangelical Christians in 2016. This Wednesday, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, an evangelical Christian, went to Rome hoping to gain an audience with Pope Francis in order to discuss the Pope’s engagement with China, which has angered Catholic conservatives. No audience was granted, though. Pompeo took part in a symposium that night hosted by the U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See, Callista Gingrich, and her husband, Newt, who is a co-chair of the advocacy group Catholics for Trump. On Thursday, Pompeo met with Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the Vatican Secretary of State. Had Pompeo sought a meeting with Francis as a play for Catholic voters back home? Parolin said that he had no evidence, “but it is a thought that can be made.” The Christian anti-Trump group Vote Common Good maintains that, if Hillary Clinton had done five-per-cent better among white Catholics in Pennsylvania and Michigan, she would have defeated Trump in both states; polling experts suggest that the votes of undecided Catholic voters in those states, and also in Wisconsin and Florida, may determine the outcome of this year’s election.
For an onlooker, the N.C.P.B. event was a disquieting piece of political theatre. It suggested that the conventional wisdom about the relationship between the religious right and Trump—an impious, twice-divorced con man, liar, and bigot—misses the point. The relationship is not mainly a transactional one, in which believers close their eyes to the President’s personal misdeeds as they look to him to deliver anti-abortion Justices, arrange funding for Christian charter schools, and offer bromides in support of religious liberty; it’s more like a bear hug. For conservative Catholics, it is also a reversion to history. Their long project attempts to establish a synthesis between the hierarchical order of Catholic truths and what they call the “American experiment in ordered liberty.” In supporting Trump and Barr, they also are squarely in the tradition of arch-conservative Catholicism as a force of resistance to democratic governance—one that runs from pre-Revolutionary France to Franco’s Spain and nineteen-sixties Latin America. They share a contempt for liberalism and a corresponding belief in public order as the basis for civil society.
In Barr’s view, unhindered executive power is an appropriate and just tool in the war on liberalism. Speaking last year, at the University of Notre Dame, he decried secular America’s “unremitting assault on religion and traditional values” and its departure from the ideals of the Founders, who, he claimed, using a familiar twist of religious originalism, had held that “free government was only suitable and sustainable for a religious people.” In March, 2016, three dozen prominent Catholic conservatives called Trump “manifestly unfit” to be President. But the movement’s subsequent embrace of him shows that Catholic conservatives’ lofty political philosophy is prone, in practice, to sponsor a kind of autocracy in which the autocrat at the head of the government is blessed by the autocracy that is the Church. In effect, Barr and his cohort are inviting the kind of government that the Founders drafted a Declaration of Independence and fought a war to reject. Trump’s former chief strategist Steve Bannon, himself a Catholic conservative, championed that kind of autocracy while serving as an adviser to Viktor Orbán, the Prime Minister of Hungary, and to the right-wing, religious-nationalist Vox party, in Spain. (Bannon recently pleaded not guilty to federal fraud charges.) Barr’s pin-striped suits are more finely tailored than Bannon’s dockwear, but the cloth the two men come from is the same.
It doesn’t seem to matter to Barr that his directives defy what originalists might call the “plain meaning” of Christianity. Under Barr, federal executions have resumed; the Catholic Church opposes the death penalty. He has deterred people who have endured state-sponsored torture from coming to the United States as political refugees; the New Testament urges believers to welcome the stranger, “for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.” He has misrepresented the conclusions of the Mueller report and dissembled about directing federal agents to dispel peaceful protesters in Washington’s Lafayette Square with tear gas (“My attitude was get it done, but I didn’t say, ‘Go do it’ ”); the Ninth Commandment, which Jesus reiterates in the Gospels, warns against bearing false witness. Yet, at the N.C.P.B., Leo introduced Barr as “truly a Catholic public servant” who embodies “integrity, honesty, humility, sincere and wise counsel,” and follows the Church in “respecting limits on the powers of the state.”
Other Catholics disagreed, focussing on the issue of capital punishment. Sister Helen Prejean, the anti-death-penalty activist, tweeted, “I raise my voice in fervent opposition to the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast’s scandalous offer of an award to Attorney General Barr for his ‘exemplary Christlike’ behavior. . . . What is Christlike about a Catholic believer using his discretionary power as Attorney General to undertake a series of speedy federal executions?” Two hundred other Catholic leaders signed a letter of protest; a second letter drew more than twenty thousand signatures. The day before the event, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops put out a statement: “In the last sixty years, before the Trump administration restarted federal executions, there were only four federal executions. Since July, there have been five, which is already more federal executions than were carried out in any year in the last century. There are two more federal executions scheduled this week. We say to President Trump and Attorney General Barr: Enough. Stop these executions.” They did not stop. William LeCroy was put to death last Tuesday; Christopher Vialva was executed on Thursday. Krisanne Vaillancourt Murphy, the executive director of the Catholic Mobilizing Network, called the N.C.P.B. “a twisted halftime show between executions.”


newyorker--2020-10-02--Donald Trump Tests Positive for the Coronavirus, and a Nation Anticipates Chaos

Trump ’ s physician , Sean Conley , issued a statement saying that Trump and the First Lady were both “ well at this time.
” Trump had reportedly been hoarse during the day on Thursday , but his circle ascribed that to the rigors of rallies and other public events .
“ Rest assured I expect the President to continue carrying out his duties without disruption while recovering , ” Conley wrote , “ and I will keep you updated on any future developments.
” From the very beginning of the pandemic , Trump has denied or diminished the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outbreak in China to its spread to Europe and beyond .
In interviews with Bob Woodward , for the journalist ’ s book “ Rage , ” Trump admitted that he well understood from advisers how lethal and fast-spreading the disease could be , but in public statements he downplayed the danger , saying repeatedly that the virus would disappear with the summer ’ s warm weather and that there was little to worry about .
To the despair of the scientific and medical communities , which have uniformly said that the disease @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protective masks and maintain a social distance , Trump has repeatedly flouted their advice and touted disreputable treatments .
As recently as Tuesday ’ s Presidential debate , in Cleveland , Trump mocked his opponent , Joe Biden , for wearing masks and practicing social distancing .
“ I don ’ t wear masks like him , ” Trump said sarcastically of Biden , at the debate .
“ Every time you see him , he ’ s got a mask .
He could be speaking two hundred feet away from him , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mask I ’ ve ever seen.
” Covid-19 has proved particularly lethal for older people , especially those who are obese and have preëxisting conditions .
Trump is seventy-four and overweight .
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , eight out of ten Covid-19-related deaths in the United States have been of people sixty-five and older .
Trump ’ s doctors say that he is generally healthy—though , on November 16 , 2019 , Trump was taken to Walter Reed National Military Medical Center , and Vice-President Mike Pence was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for that hospital visit remain obscure .
At one point , the President went out of his way to deny that he had suffered “ mini-strokes.
” The news that Donald and Melania Trump had tested positive for the coronavirus broke in stages .
On Thursday evening , the White House confirmed that Trump ’ s trusted aide Hope Hicks had contracted the virus , and for hours thereafter cable news networks played a clip of the President ’ s advisers , and then Trump himself , all unmasked , walking across the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to board Marine One , the President ’ s helicopter ; they were heading to a campaign rally in Minnesota .
While that tape played in an eerie loop , commentators and doctors described just how perilous it was for people to be in such close proximity to one another while not wearing masks .
At political rallies across the country , and on the Republican National Convention ’ s climactic night , at which the President delivered his speech accepting the Republican Party ’ s Presidential nomination , Trump and the great @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which he has called a sign of “ weakness.
” At a rally in Dayton , last month , Trump said that the virus affects “ virtually nobody.
” After the news became public that Hicks had the virus , Trump told the Fox News host Sean Hannity , “ When soldiers and law enforcement comes up to her , you know , she wants to treat them great .
Not say , ‘ Stay away , I can ’ t get near you.
’ It ’ s a very , very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most people in Washington and on the East Coast had gone to bed , the President issued his tweet about his own diagnosis .
In the coming days , it is likely that commentators will respond to the demands of both decency and a sincere desire to wish anyone with a serious illness well and a quick recovery .
They will also assess the perils ahead .
The uncertainties range from whether the President ’ s condition becomes such that , under the Twenty-fifth Amendment , his powers need to be transferred to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what will happen in the Presidential race .
The Twenty-fifth Amendment , which was ratified in 1967 , was invoked most recently by George W. Bush , in 2002 and 2007 , when he underwent colonoscopies ; he briefly handed over power in those instances to his Vice-President , Dick Cheney .
In polls , Biden leads Trump nationally and in many battleground states , and in recent weeks the President has responded to his political predicament with incendiary attacks on his opponent , conspiracy theories about the fairness of the ballot , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ followers—such as the Proud Boys , a far-right militia group—to “ stand back and stand by.
” Punctuating it all is his chilling refusal to say that he would definitely accept the results of the election and accede to a peaceful transfer of power— “ we ’ ll see what happens ” is a common statement .
If both Trump and Pence were to be incapacitated , the rules of succession in the U.S. Constitution dictate that the Speaker of the House is next in line to take over the powers of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , is a Democrat and Trump ’ s political adversary , Nancy Pelosi .
Trump has repeatedly derided Pelosi , and the relationship between the two has grown so poisonous that they have not had any serious contact in months .
For some time , commentators have routinely discussed what “ the October surprise ” would be .
It was assumed that an autumn drama would entail the President challenging the legitimacy of the ballot , and he has done that repeatedly .
At the debate , he retailed false and exaggerated stories @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seeming effort to sow confusion and cast doubt on a contest that he appears to be losing .
But now that “ October surprise ” is here , and it involves something no less alarming—the state of the President ’ s health and that of his wife and senior advisers , and what it all will mean for the governance of the United States , a nation that has been suffering multiple crises for so many months .
In a speech that he delivered virtually on Thursday night , for the seventy-fifth annual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ I just want to say that the end of the pandemic is in sight , and next year will be one of the greatest years in the history of our country.
” More on the Coronavirus • To protect American lives and revive the economy , Donald Trump and Jared Kushner should listen to Anthony Fauci rather than trash him .
• We should look to students to conceive of appropriate school-reopening plans .
It is not too late to ask what they really want .
• A pregnant pediatrician on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ • Trump is helping tycoons who have donated to his reëlection campaign exploit the pandemic to maximize profits .
• Meet the high-finance mogul in charge of our economic recovery .
• The coronavirus is likely to reshape architecture .
What kinds of space are we willing to live and work in now ?

President Donald Trump and his wife, Melania, have tested positive for the coronavirus, an announcement which is bound to throw the Presidential race into a state of grave uncertainty, if not chaos. The novel coronavirus pandemic has killed more than two hundred thousand Americans and more than a million people worldwide. On Friday morning, at 12:54 A.M. Eastern time, Trump tweeted, “Tonight, @FLOTUS and I tested positive for COVID-19. We will begin our quarantine and recovery process immediately. We will get through this TOGETHER!”
Trump’s physician, Sean Conley, issued a statement saying that Trump and the First Lady were both “well at this time.” Trump had reportedly been hoarse during the day on Thursday, but his circle ascribed that to the rigors of rallies and other public events. “Rest assured I expect the President to continue carrying out his duties without disruption while recovering,” Conley wrote, “and I will keep you updated on any future developments.”
From the very beginning of the pandemic, Trump has denied or diminished the seriousness of Covid-19, from its initial outbreak in China to its spread to Europe and beyond. In interviews with Bob Woodward, for the journalist’s book “Rage,” Trump admitted that he well understood from advisers how lethal and fast-spreading the disease could be, but in public statements he downplayed the danger, saying repeatedly that the virus would disappear with the summer’s warm weather and that there was little to worry about. To the despair of the scientific and medical communities, which have uniformly said that the disease can be best contained if people wear protective masks and maintain a social distance, Trump has repeatedly flouted their advice and touted disreputable treatments. As recently as Tuesday’s Presidential debate, in Cleveland, Trump mocked his opponent, Joe Biden, for wearing masks and practicing social distancing. “I don’t wear masks like him,” Trump said sarcastically of Biden, at the debate. “Every time you see him, he’s got a mask. He could be speaking two hundred feet away from him, and he shows up with the biggest mask I’ve ever seen.”
Covid-19 has proved particularly lethal for older people, especially those who are obese and have preëxisting conditions. Trump is seventy-four and overweight. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, eight out of ten Covid-19-related deaths in the United States have been of people sixty-five and older. Trump’s doctors say that he is generally healthy—though, on November 16, 2019, Trump was taken to Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, and Vice-President Mike Pence was reportedly placed on standby. The reasons for that hospital visit remain obscure. At one point, the President went out of his way to deny that he had suffered “mini-strokes.”
The news that Donald and Melania Trump had tested positive for the coronavirus broke in stages. On Thursday evening, the White House confirmed that Trump’s trusted aide Hope Hicks had contracted the virus, and for hours thereafter cable news networks played a clip of the President’s advisers, and then Trump himself, all unmasked, walking across the South Lawn of the White House, to board Marine One, the President’s helicopter; they were heading to a campaign rally in Minnesota. While that tape played in an eerie loop, commentators and doctors described just how perilous it was for people to be in such close proximity to one another while not wearing masks. At political rallies across the country, and on the Republican National Convention’s climactic night, at which the President delivered his speech accepting the Republican Party’s Presidential nomination, Trump and the great majority of his supporters flouted wearing masks, which he has called a sign of “weakness.” At a rally in Dayton, last month, Trump said that the virus affects “virtually nobody.”
After the news became public that Hicks had the virus, Trump told the Fox News host Sean Hannity, “When soldiers and law enforcement comes up to her, you know, she wants to treat them great. Not say, ‘Stay away, I can’t get near you.’ It’s a very, very tough disease.” Hours later, after most people in Washington and on the East Coast had gone to bed, the President issued his tweet about his own diagnosis.
In the coming days, it is likely that commentators will respond to the demands of both decency and a sincere desire to wish anyone with a serious illness well and a quick recovery. They will also assess the perils ahead. The uncertainties range from whether the President’s condition becomes such that, under the Twenty-fifth Amendment, his powers need to be transferred to his Vice-President, Mike Pence, to what will happen in the Presidential race. The Twenty-fifth Amendment, which was ratified in 1967, was invoked most recently by George W. Bush, in 2002 and 2007, when he underwent colonoscopies; he briefly handed over power in those instances to his Vice-President, Dick Cheney.
In polls, Biden leads Trump nationally and in many battleground states, and in recent weeks the President has responded to his political predicament with incendiary attacks on his opponent, conspiracy theories about the fairness of the ballot, and unsubtle calls to his most dangerous followers—such as the Proud Boys, a far-right militia group—to “stand back and stand by.” Punctuating it all is his chilling refusal to say that he would definitely accept the results of the election and accede to a peaceful transfer of power—“we’ll see what happens” is a common statement.
If both Trump and Pence were to be incapacitated, the rules of succession in the U.S. Constitution dictate that the Speaker of the House is next in line to take over the powers of the Presidency. The Speaker, of course, is a Democrat and Trump’s political adversary, Nancy Pelosi. Trump has repeatedly derided Pelosi, and the relationship between the two has grown so poisonous that they have not had any serious contact in months.
For some time, commentators have routinely discussed what the October surprise would be. It was assumed that an autumn drama would entail the President challenging the legitimacy of the ballot, and he has done that repeatedly. At the debate, he retailed false and exaggerated stories about mail-in ballots, all in a seeming effort to sow confusion and cast doubt on a contest that he appears to be losing. But now that October surprise is here, and it involves something no less alarming—the state of the President’s health and that of his wife and senior advisers, and what it all will mean for the governance of the United States, a nation that has been suffering multiple crises for so many months. In a speech that he delivered virtually on Thursday night, for the seventy-fifth annual Al Smith dinner, the President said, “I just want to say that the end of the pandemic is in sight, and next year will be one of the greatest years in the history of our country.”
More on the Coronavirus


newyorker--2020-10-02--Highlights from the Third Week of the New York Film Festival

A sense of form is like an ear for melody , a mind for math , or a sense of humor .
It ’ s innate , natural , instinctive , and though it can be developed it can ’ t be willed into being , as proved by the stilted work of filmmakers who try to do so .
One of the great formalists of our time , the South Korean director Hong Sang-soo , is also a prolific , fluent , even impulsive director , and his sense of form is as spontaneous , personal , expressive , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or the curve of a pot on the wheel , as seen in his latest film , “ The Woman Who Ran , ” which has its virtual screening Friday night at the New York Film Festival .
Its protagonist , a thirtysomething woman named Gam-hee ( Kim Min-hee , Hong ’ s partner and frequent collaborator ) , takes advantage of her husband ’ s business trip to visit two female friends—all about the same age and at the same stage of life—in Seoul and its outskirts , and bumps into a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The result is a series of virtually Socratic dialogues ( set amid a quietly rich framework of dramatic action ) on the subject of life and love .
The women talk about money , animals , real estate , food , and art ; they talk about their relationships with the men in their lives , and what emerges is an effort to negotiate a minefield of daily life among the overgrown babies , aggressive fools , and pompous asses of the male of the species .
Hong stages the talk and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ calibrated shifts of perspective , which mingle exquisite sensitivity and bone-dry derision—and which wryly deploy the practicalities of surveillance cameras and domestic architecture .
Yet there ’ s an extraordinary Socratic irony built into the setup itself , a view of a happy marriage from the other end of the telescope , and the price of such happiness .
The film ’ s placid surfaces and unexceptional events glint with sharp-edged observations and shudder with vast passions .
Three entries in “ Small Axe , ” Steve McQueen ’ s quintet of new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people in the U.K. , set between 1969 and 1982 , are playing in the festival ; I ’ ve seen two , and they leave me impatient for the rest .
“ Lovers Rock , ” which opened the festival two weeks ago , returns Saturday , and its dramatic power is matched by its stylistic audacity .
It ’ s set in 1980 , mostly at a dance party planned in a West London house on a Saturday night , and most of the action is centered on the dancing itself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ drama and erotic contention woven throughout—the central one involves the incipient relationship between a young woman named Martha ( Amarah-Jae St. Aubyn ) and a young man named Franklyn ( Micheal Ward ) —and also of tensions and dangers .
From the eager anticipations and preparations for the dance ( primping , schlepping , cooking , travelling ) to the first tests of the sound system , the movie has an extraordinary sensory energy that is itself dramatic .
Once the party gets going , the sequences on the dance floor , set @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have an extraordinary blend of joy and passion , fervor and grace , which is evoked as much by the action as by the bold and discerning cinematography of Shabier Kirchner , whose camera drifts and floats and glides and weaves among the dancers with its own enthused and entranced gaze .
( Several scenes of singing that keeps going when the records stop offer even more surprising exhilarations . )
When the drama intensifies , and when the romance turns lyrical , McQueen conjures images to mesh with the performances ; the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and collective emotion go beyond private festivities to evoke the very notion of community .
In “ Mangrove ” ( also returning Saturday ) , McQueen dramatizes the real-life story of Frank Crichlow ( played by Shaun Parkes ) , who was born in Trinidad and lived in the London neighborhood of Notting Hill ; there , in 1969 , he opened a restaurant called Mangrove that was meant to serve as a social hub for the West Indian community—and that became the target of relentless police harassment .
McQueen ( who co-wrote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the brazen racism endemic to the British police force and the wanton violence that perpetuates it , and keenly delineates the political organization already well under way in the West Indian community—and , in particular , in Crichlow ’ s circle of friends and family—to resist it and demand change .
When police attack a peaceful protest , it ’ s demonstrators—only Black ones—who are arrested and charged with rioting .
The ensuing action turns “ Mangrove ” into a courtroom drama in which the bigotry of British society at large is displayed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ indifference .
For all the story ’ s historical and dramatic specificity , it ’ s the story of a system , and its exposure of the nodal points of systematic oppression ( and of the exhausting exertions that it imposes on its targeted victims ) has a vast historical scope—and an analytic power that reflects all too grimly on the present day .

A sense of form is like an ear for melody, a mind for math, or a sense of humor. It’s innate, natural, instinctive, and though it can be developed it can’t be willed into being, as proved by the stilted work of filmmakers who try to do so. One of the great formalists of our time, the South Korean director Hong Sang-soo, is also a prolific, fluent, even impulsive director, and his sense of form is as spontaneous, personal, expressive, and immediately physical as a dance step or the curve of a pot on the wheel, as seen in his latest film, “The Woman Who Ran,” which has its virtual screening Friday night at the New York Film Festival. Its protagonist, a thirtysomething woman named Gam-hee (Kim Min-hee, Hong’s partner and frequent collaborator), takes advantage of her husband’s business trip to visit two female friends—all about the same age and at the same stage of life—in Seoul and its outskirts, and bumps into a third, her ex’s wife. The result is a series of virtually Socratic dialogues (set amid a quietly rich framework of dramatic action) on the subject of life and love. The women talk about money, animals, real estate, food, and art; they talk about their relationships with the men in their lives, and what emerges is an effort to negotiate a minefield of daily life among the overgrown babies, aggressive fools, and pompous asses of the male of the species. Hong stages the talk and the action that surrounds it with keenly calibrated shifts of perspective, which mingle exquisite sensitivity and bone-dry derision—and which wryly deploy the practicalities of surveillance cameras and domestic architecture. Yet there’s an extraordinary Socratic irony built into the setup itself, a view of a happy marriage from the other end of the telescope, and the price of such happiness. The film’s placid surfaces and unexceptional events glint with sharp-edged observations and shudder with vast passions.
Hong Sang-soo’s “The Woman Who Ran,” which stars Kim Min-hee, Hong’s partner and frequent collaborator, is replete with Socratic dialogues on life and love. Photograph from Cinema Guild
Three entries in “Small Axe,” Steve McQueen’s quintet of new dramas about the lives of West Indian people in the U.K., set between 1969 and 1982, are playing in the festival; I’ve seen two, and they leave me impatient for the rest. “Lovers Rock,” which opened the festival two weeks ago, returns Saturday, and its dramatic power is matched by its stylistic audacity. It’s set in 1980, mostly at a dance party planned in a West London house on a Saturday night, and most of the action is centered on the dancing itself. There are multiple threads of romantic drama and erotic contention woven throughout—the central one involves the incipient relationship between a young woman named Martha (Amarah-Jae St. Aubyn) and a young man named Franklyn (Micheal Ward)—and also of tensions and dangers. From the eager anticipations and preparations for the dance (primping, schlepping, cooking, travelling) to the first tests of the sound system, the movie has an extraordinary sensory energy that is itself dramatic. Once the party gets going, the sequences on the dance floor, set both to reggae and to disco, have an extraordinary blend of joy and passion, fervor and grace, which is evoked as much by the action as by the bold and discerning cinematography of Shabier Kirchner, whose camera drifts and floats and glides and weaves among the dancers with its own enthused and entranced gaze. (Several scenes of singing that keeps going when the records stop offer even more surprising exhilarations.) When the drama intensifies, and when the romance turns lyrical, McQueen conjures images to mesh with the performances; the film’s rare intensity of mood and collective emotion go beyond private festivities to evoke the very notion of community.
In “Mangrove” (also returning Saturday), McQueen dramatizes the real-life story of Frank Crichlow (played by Shaun Parkes), who was born in Trinidad and lived in the London neighborhood of Notting Hill; there, in 1969, he opened a restaurant called Mangrove that was meant to serve as a social hub for the West Indian community—and that became the target of relentless police harassment. McQueen (who co-wrote the script with Alastair Siddons) displays the brazen racism endemic to the British police force and the wanton violence that perpetuates it, and keenly delineates the political organization already well under way in the West Indian community—and, in particular, in Crichlow’s circle of friends and family—to resist it and demand change. When police attack a peaceful protest, it’s demonstrators—only Black ones—who are arrested and charged with rioting. The ensuing action turns “Mangrove” into a courtroom drama in which the bigotry of British society at large is displayed in the judicial system’s haughty indifference. For all the story’s historical and dramatic specificity, it’s the story of a system, and its exposure of the nodal points of systematic oppression (and of the exhausting exertions that it imposes on its targeted victims) has a vast historical scope—and an analytic power that reflects all too grimly on the present day.