Sneakeater Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Maybe Chef Bertineau will be famous now. Wouldn't that be nice. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
plattetude Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 (It's by Bill Buford. But that isn't the point.) Well, now that he's done playing with King Crimson... Oh, Buford. Right. Nevermind. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sneakeater Posted April 28, 2015 Share Posted April 28, 2015 Just one little consonant . . . . Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Wilfrid Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 I'll happily read it, but I still haven't forgiven Buford for claiming that coulibiac was practically extinct before Daniel Boulud decided to make it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sneakeater Posted April 29, 2015 Share Posted April 29, 2015 I'm sure this article will say the same thing about Cassoulet. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Wilfrid Posted April 30, 2015 Share Posted April 30, 2015 Not sure Gopnik on Trollope is going to go well. He's just told me that "passionate" readers of George Eliot tend to concentrate just on Middlemarch. eta: Okay, he gets Eliot in the penultimate paragraph. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Wilfrid Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 The New Yorker star struck? The rather short piece turned in by Knausgaard on the Breivik killings is an amazing string of cliches--"horrific deed"..."the shock in Norway was total." It's also quite unusual for a front of magazine piece to contain zero reporting. He does himself no favors by citing "Eichmann in Jerusalem," which for all its pros and cons at least included first-hand reporting. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
AaronS Posted May 23, 2015 Share Posted May 23, 2015 anyone who found the new yorker piece wilfrid mentions above insufficiently self indulgent would have enjoyed the k o k/james woods/paris review event in red hook tonight. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Wilfrid Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Fact check fail: The Slits were not a trio. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sneakeater Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 I saw that, but was ashamed to note it. It's nice to know there are others . . . . Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sneakeater Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 DRUNK GIRL AT BAR: What's on your tee shirt? ME: The Coathangers. They're a band. DRUNK GIRL AT BAR: What do they sound like? ME: Kinda like the Slits. DRUNK GIRL AT BAR: The WHAT?????????? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rail Paul Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 DRUNK GIRL AT BAR: What's on your tee shirt? ME: The Coathangers. They're a band. DRUNK GIRL AT BAR: What do they sound like? ME: Kinda like the Slits. DRUNK GIRL AT BAR: The WHAT?????????? How old was this drunk girl at bar? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sneakeater Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Maybe 23. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sneakeater Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Thinking back, maybe not quite. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Wilfrid Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I saw that, but was ashamed to note it. It's nice to know there are others . . . . Other compulsive-obsessives? The error probably derived from there being three women on the iconic album cover. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.