Skip to main content

An Interview with David Remnick, editor-in-chief of The New Yorker

There is perhaps no more apt use of the phrase "needs no introduction" than to describe David Remnick, editor-in-chief of The New Yorker. I won't even attempt to describe his immense talent, instead I will just express my gratitude for the opportunity to interview him. Read on to find out his reading recommendations and how he brought the magazine into the digital age.


What's the best piece of storytelling you've ever encountered?

Impossible, there are so many man! But I can highly recommend, for starters, some rarities like "Great Plains" by Ian Frazier or "Slouching Toward Bethlehem" by Joan Didion.

What's the worst argument you've gotten into with a staff member?

I think I will keep that one a secret.

Which issue of The New Yorker is your favorite?

The one we just put to bed. And then I would say the same the next week. But you have to say that the "Hiroshima" issue, in which John Hersey's 1946 piece was the only piece in the issue, was amazing. As was our 9/11 issue with Art Spiegelman's back cover.


When you first became editor was there anything you were really looking forward to changing about the magazine?

When I first became editor, it was a huge surprise. And while I wanted to do certain things-- more political reporting and deeper international reporting and to publish more writers of color, more women, and certain individuals whom I was eventually lucky enough to hire-- my first thought was not to drown in a sea of inexperience and nerves!

What major changes has The New Yorker gone through over the years you've been editor?

Well, the biggest is that we have made the transition to the digital world. So that in addition to publishing the traditional print magazine, with its usual complement of in-depth pieces and fiction and the rest, we have added an entirely new piece of business,, which, in addition to publishing what's in the print magazine, adds at least fifteen pieces every day on a variety of subjects and by, very often, some very exciting and young new writers, like Doreen St. Felix and Jia Tolentino and Charles Bethea.


Popular posts from this blog

Steps to healing and solastalgia.

It's quite amazing how your inner landscape changes after abuse and trauma.  Things that never used to bother me, or never even entered my awareness are now triggers sending off anxiety responses and distress.  The intensity of these varies and even though I am aware of them and have good protective strategies in place, frequently they go where they want to go as happens in trauma response.  Your hypothalamus hijacks your brain and off goes your heart rate, blood pressure, cognitive function etc.  If ever you find yourself in the company of someone with severe anxiety or experiencing a traumatic trigger please don't expect them to snap out of it or just get over it, the healing process doesn't work like that. They are not being dramatic or silly, nor is it something they have control over.  Be patient, help them to ease their anxiety and fear by using their senses.  Smelling the smells around them, feeling the breeze on their skin. Noticing the texture of their shirt, the …

a heart who's love is innocent

Lately I've been thinking about the difference between being alone and being lonely. I actually don't like the label of introvert, especially the way it's used nowadays online. People that I've encountered online who identify as introverts seem to have swell heads and think that wanting to be alone sometimes counts as a personality. Or they're incredibly misanthropic and think hating people will make them popular online. Obviously this is a generalization, and I'm sure there are some wonderful people in online introvert communities, I just never felt comfortable calling myself part of them, especially lately. I've also been questioning the usefulness of labels-- I think pretty much everyone has introverted and extroverted tendencies.

I am a pretty solitary person, though, and I've always been okay with that, until recently. In high school, I was hardly a party animal, but I had friends that I could go get coffee with and study with and make flower crowns…

lip gloss and cherry pop

Lately I've been thinking a lot about the ways in which my online persona differs from how I act in real life. I think that my demeanor is mostly the same-- I'd like to think that my online friends and my real life friends view me as a kind and intelligent cheese lover. I've met several online acquaintances in real life and they don't seem at all surprised by my mannerisms or anything. But, strangely, I think I'm more open and expressive online. It sounds strange to say "I'm more myself online than I am in real life," because, like most people, my digital life is heavily curated. But I do think that, as someone who suffers from social anxiety, the internet has allowed me to share my thoughts more freely without the intimidation of talking to someone face-to-face.

My (real-life) friend and I are starting a silly podcast-- it's mostly just us talking and we still don't know if we for sure want to make it public or just record conversations for ou…