What does /lit/ think of the Paris Review?
Are there any widely available, print based literature magazines/journals that you prefer?
>>9282046
Is this what Liberal Arts students read in America?
The interviews can be absolutely fantastic, I'm not sure about the rest of the content
>>9282205
Probably not. I've never come across it in the context of academic institutions (be it available in the library with other journals, tucked under the arm of a student, I've never seen or heard anyone talking about it).
Which is the best:
Paris Review
London Review
Boston Review
New York Review
New York Times Book Review
Harvard Review
>>9282239
Yale Review
New England Review
Massachusetts Review
Times Literary Supplement
>>9282046
I used to read the Paris Review. I stopped because they're, for lack of a better term, too mainstream. I mean, I'd find out about a current writer or contemporary poet or author, read some of their works and commentaries, and then the next two issues would be dedicated to showcasing said writers or poets. I guess if you're not used to following the current trends and emerging/established mainstream writers then it's a good tool, but aside from that it's redundant. Also, and I know this is a minor complaint, but I hate the fashion ads.
I prefer the New Criterion. It's critical and academic, without being stuffy or a wholly academic journal, while also being up-to-date and contemporary, without being mired in social media trends. They just ran a series of articles criticizing the negative effects of SJW/PC politics on university policies, and their article subjects usually focus on ancient and classical events/subjects while tending to tie them to contemporary topics.
I find lit mags almost always shit. 99% of their content pisses me off to the point of wanting to tear up the freebies then and there in the barnes and noble
Bamp
when i was in high school i thought i was going to become a big intellectual so i went to barnes and noble, went to the magazine section, and picked up all the literary magazines that had the word 'review' in the name, accidentally getting national review too. i took them all home and started to read them, and they were all trash. i thought they would be full of book reviews, but they werent, so i took them back and got a bunch of gaming magazines instead.
>>9283313
2deep4u
>>9282046
I prefer stuff like what you'd find in conjunctions or sleeping fish, but neither of those are 'widely available'.
As far as stuff I can randomly stumble upon in bookstores is concerned, I like Raw Vision, but that's more general art than lit.
>>9283313
And the only magazine you actually liked was the National Review, right?
New Ohio Review 4 life, punk nigger
>>9282284
This anon has it.
I love when I get one of their issues in the mail. The New Criterion is quite possibly the only patrician English language periodical. I would love to find a UK or French equivalent to the NC.
The Paris Review has the best lit interviews of any periodical ever, but the New Criterion probably has the best content. Not sure what to read however for fiction because NC is mostly criticism with just a couple poems thrown in. Personally I'm not a great fan of the poetry in NC.
Ideally it would be nice if we had more quality magazines like there were in the 50's and 60's. Maybe they exist and I'm just not hip enough? On the other hand, I was reading Houellebecq years before he became a meme on here... and it's not as if he's even that great. Sometimes it really seems as if we live in some sort of antonymic Golden Age.
>>9283699
I third this. NC is so good, though I wish they did less politically conservative stuff and more aesthetically conservative stuff. I agree with some of their politics, but it's by far my least favorite part of the journal.
>>9282184
My penis scoffs at this embarrassingly obvious shoop