Is this the new IJ

>>8523578
Nah, its not being recieved well by establishment pseuds

HAS ANYONE ACTUALLY STARTED READING IT

>>8523578
It wasn't written to impress a broad and (failing that) a bunch of female undergrads, so no.

>>8523581
It is, though. Establishment pseuds must make a show of liking outsider bits when they're getting too relevant.

>>8523596
>It is, though.

Nah the New Yorker just viewed it as quaint and novel

http://www.newyorker.com/culture/persons-of-interest/a-party-in-a-lunatic-asylum

>>8523611
Have you read the review? It's pretty complimentary of bot Moore and the work, and never uses the words "quaint" or "novel" at all

>>8523643
You have to look at the subtext. He doesn't take it as a serious work even if its enjoyable

>>8523668
>>8523611
You must have decided ahead what you wanted to read in it, and then focused on that line that calls Northampton "Provincial".

Actually read the article you moron.

>>8523743
I could accuse you of having the same pre-emptive lens.
Have you got any actual argument the writer thinks its anything close to canonical like they praised IJ?

File: puked2.jpg (319KB, 660x432px) Image search: [Google]

319KB, 660x432px

>>8523755
>pre-emptive lens

>>8523611
seems more like a piece on Moore and his eccentricities than a review of Jerusalem. who the hell doesn't want to throw a party at an empty lunatic asylum? invite friends and family, loonies all.

>>8523578
Not until we start making memes

>>8523578
>RIP Alan Moore, 2028