Article Club Mark Isero

Welcome, new subscribers, and welcome back, loyal readers! I’m happy you’re here.
Today’s issue is dedicated to an interview with Daniel Duane, the author of “A Tale of Paradise, Parking Lots, and My Mother's Berkeley Backyard,” September’s article of the month.
Originally published in The New York Times Magazine in May, the piece explores the housing crisis in the Bay Area and the fears that emerge alongside the inevitability of change. If you haven’t read it yet, I urge you to do so — and join our discussion on September 24, if you’re moved.
I got a chance to interview Mr. Duane a few weeks back, and it was an honor. I won’t give everything away, because it’s better to listen, but we discussed a number of topics, including:
* his fond memories of growing up in Berkeley
* his relationship with his mom, who was a radical activist in the 1960s, but who now feels scared about the changes coming to her neighborhood
* how the NIMBY / YIMBY debate could benefit from some compassion and nuance
Most of all, it became abundantly clear in our conversation that Mr. Duane is nostalgic but also does not find nostalgia useful. After all, we need more housing, he argues, even if that means having to make sacrifices for the common good. Sometimes, that sacrifice means realizing our time has come, that the world belongs to the young, that it’s time to let go.
At one point, when I was asking myself, Well, what is this story really about for me? I had sort of a moment of thinking about it as like, It‘s about the fact that the world belongs to the young, and it hurts when you find out that you’re no longer one of them. And that moment comes for everyone.
Thank you for reading this week’s issue. Hope you liked it. 😀
To our 10 new subscribers — including Sonia, Abigail, and Charles — I hope you find the newsletter a solid addition to your email inbox. To our long-time subscribers (Kristen! Kristin! Krystyn!), you’re pretty great, too. Loyal reader Paul, thank you for sharing the newsletter and getting the word out.
If you like Article Club, please help it grow. I really appreciate your support. Here are two ways you can help out:
❤️ Become a paid subscriber, like Opal (thank you). If you’ve subscribed for free for a long time, and you appreciate the articles and author interviews, and if you’ve joined one or more discussions, I encourage you to take the leap. You’ll join an esteemed group of readers who value the mission of Article Club. Plus you’ll receive surprise perks and prizes. It’s $5 a month or $36 a year.
📬 Invite your friends to subscribe. Know someone who’s kind, thoughtful, and loves to read? I’d love it if you encouraged them to subscribe. Word of mouth is by far the best way to strengthen our reading community. Thank you for spreading the word.
On the other hand, if you no longer want to receive this newsletter, please feel free to unsubscribe. See you next Thursday at 9:10 am PT.


This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit articleclub.substack.com/subscribe

Welcome, new subscribers, and welcome back, loyal readers! I’m happy you’re here.
Today’s issue is dedicated to an interview with Matthew Desmond, the author of “Why Poverty Persists in America,” August’s article of the month.
Originally published in The New York Times Magazine in April, the piece is an excerpt from Prof. Desmond’s bestselling book, Poverty, by America. If you haven’t read it yet, I urge you to do so — and join our discussion on August 27, if you’re moved.
Fellow Article Clubber Melinda and I got a chance to interview Prof. Desmond a few weeks back, and it was an honor. I won’t give everything away, because it’s better to listen, but we discussed a number of topics, including:
* how poverty is about having a lack of choice, not just money
* how exploitation is at the center of poverty
* what it means to be a poverty abolitionist
Most of all, it became abundantly clear in our conversation that Prof. Desmond doesn’t find despair useful. Even though poverty is a result of harmful policies, shame won’t solve the problem. Rather, Prof. Desmond wants us to do something about the issue — not just talk about it. There’s too much “informed sophisticated passivity,” he said.
For the past half-century, we’ve approached the poverty question by pointing to poor people themselves — posing questions about their work ethic, say, or their welfare benefits — when we should have been focusing on the fire. The question that should serve as a looping incantation, the one we should ask every time we drive past a tent encampment, those tarped American slums smelling of asphalt and bodies, or every time we see someone asleep on the bus, slumped over in work clothes, is simply: Who benefits? Not: Why don’t you find a better job? Or: Why don’t you move? Or: Why don’t you stop taking out payday loans? But: Who is feeding off this?
As someone who sometimes likes to read and think and discuss, yet remain on the sidelines, I appreciated Prof. Desmond’s call to action. In the interview, he offers five ways we can be poverty abolitionists. Let’s stop debating people and sighing about how bad things are, he says. Let’s stop trying to change other people’s beliefs. Calling himself a “pragmatic writer,” he said, “I want my work to do things.”
Thank you for listening to this week’s episode. Hope you liked it. 😀
To our 16 new subscribers — including Joe, Kent, Emily, Rachael, Dhaka, Jordan, McKenzie, and Robert — I hope you find the newsletter a solid addition to your email inbox. To our long-time subscribers (Rose! Rosie! Rosaline!), you’re pretty great, too. Loyal reader Ivy, thank you for sharing the newsletter and getting the word out.
If you like Article Club, please help it grow. I really appreciate your support. Here are two ways you can help out:
📬 Invite your friends to subscribe. Know someone who’s kind, thoughtful, and loves to read? I’d love it if you encouraged them to subscribe. Word of mouth is by far the best way to strengthen our reading community. Thank you for spreading the word.
❤️ Become a paid subscriber, like Nellie and Tanya (thank you!). You’ll join an esteemed group of readers who value Article Club. Plus you’ll gain access to our monthly discussions, our monthly quiet reading hours, and my personal audio letters from me to you. It’s $5 a month or $36 a year.
On the other hand, if you no longer want to receive this newsletter, please feel free to unsubscribe. See you next Thursday at 9:10 am PT.


This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit articleclub.substack.com/subscribe

Dear VIPs,
Thank you for being paid subscribers and for supporting me and Article Club.
This weekend, I have for you an audio letter, where I share some of my thoughts on deeper reading — and whether it’s possible to read deeply with so many online distractions swirling around, competing for our attention.
I’ve been thinking about this topic for a while, but Meta’s launch of Threads really got me wondering if there’s any way for us to escape the endless bombardment, besides of course destroying all our tech and moving to a mountain in Montana.
I do think there’s hope, and in this audio letter, I talk about four things we can do to promote and preserve deeper online reading. They are:
* Limiting our reading sources
* Choosing a dedicated reading device
* Consciously compiling our reading collection
* Scheduling a regular time and place to read
These steps sound commonsensical, but at least for me, they’re easier said than done. I hope you’ll listen to my musings, and I’d love to hear what you think!
Do you do any of these four things? Do you have an online reading system that works for you — or any secret tips to share? You can leave a comment, email me, or record a voice message.
Also, if this deeper reading thing interests you, I warmly invite you to Quiet Reading Hour next Sunday, July 16, 9-10 am PT. Let me know if you’re in!
Have a great weekend, and happy reading,
Mark
PS - Want to listen to these audio letters (and all other AC-related audio) on your phone? Click “listen on” to the right of the player above, then click “email link” to receive the private, subscriber-only RSS feed. Go to your phone, find the email from Substack, and click “add to podcast app.” Voila!




This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit articleclub.substack.com/subscribe

Dear Loyal Readers,
Thank you for being here! I have three things for you this week, so let’s get right to it.
1️⃣ Article Club
This month we’ve been focusing on “How Much Would You Pay to Save Your Cat’s Life?” by Sarah Zhang. Originally published in The Atlantic last December, it’s a piece I highly urge that you read. Here’s why:
* It explores the rising trend of cat kidney transplants (expensive! controversial!)
* Ms. Zhang asks a provocative question and examines it from all sides
* Even though the article is about pets, it’s really about human relationships
Where’s the line between being a caring pet owner and doing too much? If you consider your pet a part of the family — or if you judge people who consider their pet part of the family — you’ll love this article.
I hope you’ll sign up to discuss the piece on Sunday, June 25, 2:00 - 3:30 pm PT on Zoom. Article Clubbers are kind and thoughtful and welcoming. Our conversations are always in small, intimate, facilitated groups. Reach out if you have questions or if you want to participate in the conversation but are secretly shy or nervous.
2️⃣ My interview with Sarah Zhang
One of the best parts of Article Club (in addition to our monthly discussions) is the generosity of journalists and how they share their insights on the outstanding articles they write. Ms. Zhang (who has two cats herself!) was kind and thoughtful, and it was a delight to chat with her. We talked about a number of topics, including:
* why this topic — how much we are willing to spend on our pets — is fraught with judgment (what’s too much? too little?)
* how cat kidney transplants raise major ethical questions (namely: the kidney comes from another cat, who can’t consent)
* how pets serve an “in-between” role in our lives — how they’re not exactly our children, but they’re not exactly our property (and how that’s confusing)
I hope you take a listen! (You can click the player at the top or subscribe to The Highlighter Article Club on your favorite podcast player.)
3️⃣ Issue #400 is coming! What do you think about all this?
We’re coming up on eight years and 400 issues of this newsletter, which is a mild marvel, and to celebrate the occasion, I’d love to hear from you. What has been your experience of reading The Highlighter Article Club or participating in the discussions? Do you have any kind words, or words or wisdom, or requests for the next eight years? Feel free to leave a comment or reply privately. Thank you!
Thank you for reading this week’s issue. Hope you liked it. 😀
To our new subscriber Susan – I hope you find the newsletter a solid addition to your email inbox. To our long-time subscribers (July! Julio! Julia!), you’re pretty great, too. Loyal reader Brett, thank you for sharing the newsletter and getting the word out.
If you like The Highlighter Article Club, please help it grow. I really appreciate your support. Here are two ways you can help out:
📬 Invite your friends to subscribe. Know someone who’s kind, thoughtful, and loves to read? I’d love it if you encouraged them to subscribe. Word of mouth is by far the best way to strengthen our reading community. Thank you for spreading the word.
❤️ Become a paid subscriber, like Susan, Courtney, and Sara (thank you!). You’ll join an esteemed group of readers who value the mission of The Highlighter Article Club. Plus you’ll receive surprise perks and prizes. It’s $5 a month or $36 a year.
On the other hand, if you no longer want to receive this newsletter, please feel free to unsubscribe. See you next Thursday at 9:10 am PT.


This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit articleclub.substack.com/subscribe

Dear Loyal Readers,
Thank you for being here! I have four things for you this week, so let’s get right to it.
1️⃣ Article Club
This month we’ve been focusing on “Why is Affirmative Action in Peril?” by Emily Bazelon. It’s a piece I highly recommend that you read. Here’s why:
* The Supreme Court will likely strike down affirmative action next month
* This article expertly explains why
* Ms. Bazelon — staff writer for The New York Times Magazine, senior research fellow at Yale Law School, and co-host of Slate’s Political Gabfest — knows how to write and knows what she’s talking about
Instead of focusing on the current politics of the Court, Ms. Bazelon takes us back in time, helping us understand the history of affirmative action through a close study of the Bakke decision and the legal strategy of attorney Archibald Cox — which won the case but ultimately left affirmative action vulnerable.
I hope you’ll sign up to discuss the article on Sunday, May 21, 2:00 - 3:30 pm PT on Zoom. Article Clubbers are kind and thoughtful and welcoming. Our conversations are always in small, intimate, facilitated groups. Reach out if you have questions or if you want to participate in the conversation but are secretly shy or nervous.
2️⃣ My interview with Ms. Bazelon
I can’t stop thinking about how much fun it was to chat with Ms. Bazelon. She was a total pro: generous, thoughtful, and deeply knowledgeable. (My friends have told me to stop gushing.) We talked about a number of topics, including:
* how Mr. Cox cobbled together a victory by wooing a segregationist justice
* how the justices have wildly different interpretations of the 14th Amendment
* how white people have a very short amount of patience for thinking about the harms of race discrimination
There is a fundamental American tension between prizing individual achievement and promoting the collective spirit of the nation’s egalitarian promise, between the call to be colorblind and the call not to be blind to racism.
I hope you take a listen! (You can click the player at the top or subscribe to The Highlighter Article Club on your favorite podcast player.)
3️⃣ Article Club author Eli Saslow wins another Pulitzer Prize
When I spoke with Eli Saslow last November about “An American Education,” I asked him how it felt to win a Pulitzer Prize. He shared his complex feelings: both that he was “hugely gratified” for the acknowledgment but also “a little conflicted” given that he writes about people’s worst moments and our country’s deepest problems.
I appreciated the thoughtfulness of that answer, and I have continued recommending Mr. Saslow’s work to my colleagues. For those reasons and more, I was delighted to hear that he won yet another Pulitzer Prize this week. Here’s a clip:
Congratulations, Mr. Saslow! You are further evidence proving my bold claim — that writers who participate in Article Club go on to win Pulitzers. My other evidence? Mitchell S. Jackson. (Sadly, I can’t take credit for Kathryn Schulz or Stephanie McCrummen; they won their Pulitzers beforehand.)
4️⃣ Meet other thoughtful readers at HHH on June 1
Highlighter Happy Hour has been one of the most joyful ways for us to gather, connect, and celebrate our reading community. We’re heading into the 20th HHH! Can you believe it?
We’ll be meeting up at Room 389 in Oakland on June 1 beginning at 5:30.
If you live or work not too far from Oakland, it’d be great to see you there. If you get a free ticket, you’ll get a prize at the door. And just in case you’re nervous: Yes, we do chat about the articles — but only sometimes, and usually just tangentially.
Thank you for reading this week’s issue and for listening to the interview. Hope you liked it. 😀
If you like The Highlighter Article Club, please help it grow. I really appreciate your support. Here are two ways you can help out:
📬 Invite your friends to subscribe. Know someone who’s k

Happy Thursday and happy almost-May, loyal readers. I’m very happy to announce that this upcoming month, we’ll be reading and discussing “Why Is Affirmative Action In Peril?” by Emily Bazelon.
You may know that the Supreme Court will be ruling on two affirmative action cases in June. It’s a big deal, given the current composition of the Court. Unless one of the conservative justices changes their mind, affirmative action might be dead.
I deeply appreciated Ms. Bazelon’s article because she offers context for the upcoming decisions. Instead of discussing the current cases in detail, Ms. Bazelon explains the history of affirmative action and tells the story of Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, the 1978 landmark decision that still serves as legal precedent.
Today’s issue is a three-parter. You get:
* an introduction to this month’s article
* a podcast episode with me and fellow Article Clubber Melinda, where we share why we liked the article so much
* an invitation to join this month’s discussion on May 21
Before that, though — a little bit about the author: Ms. Bazelon is a staff writer at The New York Times Magazine and is the Truman Capote Fellow for Creative Writing and Law at Yale Law School. She is also the author of Charged: The New Movement to Transform American Prosecution and End Mass Incarceration, which won the Los Angeles Times Book Prize in the current-interest category, and of the national best-seller Sticks and Stones: Defeating the Culture of Bullying and Rediscovering the Power of Character and Empathy. She is a co-host of Slate’s Political Gabfest, a weekly podcast. Ms. Bazelon has generously agreed to record a podcast interview.
I hope you’ll read the article and join our discussion on Sunday, May 21, at 2 pm PT. You can find out more information about the article and discussion below.
Why Is Affirmative Action In Peril?
The Supreme Court most likely will strike down affirmative action in June. This article explains why. According to journalist and law lecturer Emily Bazelon, it all comes down to understanding Regents v. Bakke, the 1978 decision that banned racial quotas but preserved affirmative action. In order to lure enough justices, lawyer Archibald Cox devised a strategy that centered the benefits of diversity, rather than the responsibility of reparations, as the reason affirmative action should continue. In other words: Let’s forget that the 14th Amendment’s purpose was to give equal rights to Black Americans. In the short term, the tactic worked. The Court sided with Mr. Cox 5-4, and affirmative action has endured despite many challenges, including in Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) and Fisher v. Texas (2016). But now with a much more conservative court, Ms. Bazelon suggests that affirmative action’s “diversity” rationale may be similar to abortion’s “privacy” rationale — way too flimsy to survive. (35 min)
This month, I warmly invite you to read, annotate, and discuss “Why Is Affirmative Action in Peril?” as part of Article Club.
If you’re interested, this how things will go:
* This week, we’ll read the article
* Next week, we’ll annotate the article as a group
* The following week, we’ll hear from Ms. Bazelon in a podcast interview
* On Sunday, May 21, 2:00 - 3:30 pm PT, we’ll discuss the article on Zoom.
If this will be your first time participating in Article Club, I’m 100% sure you’ll find that you’ll feel welcome. We’re a kind, thoughtful reading community. Feel free to reach out with all of your questions.
Thank you for reading this week’s issue. Hope you liked it. 😀
To our 6 new subscribers – including Montessa, Eric, Cory, Lisa, and Josette — I hope you find the newsletter a solid addition to your email inbox. To our long-time subscribers (Fern! Fred! Faith!), you’re pretty great, too. Loyal reader Kathy, thank you for sharing the newsletter and getting the word out.
If you like The Highlighter A