A monthly reading and conversation with the New Yorker fiction editor Deborah Treisman.
David Gilbert Reads Samantha Hunt
David Gilbert joins Deborah Treisman to read and discuss “Three Days,” by Samantha Hunt, which appeared in a 2006 issue of the magazine. Gilbert is the author of two novels, “& Sons” and “The Normals.”
Tommy Orange Reads Louise Erdrich
Tommy Orange joins Deborah Treisman to read and discuss “The Years of My Birth,” by Louise Erdrich, which appeared in a 2011 issue of the magazine. Orange’s first novel, “There There,” was published in 2018 and was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize.
Allegra Goodman Reads Eudora Welty
Allegra Goodman joins Deborah Treisman to read and discuss “No Place for You My Love,” by Eudora Welty, which appeared in a 1952 issue of the magazine. Goodman’s books include “The Family Markowitz” and “The Chalk Artist.”
Bryan Washington Reads Haruki Murakami
Bryan Washington joins Deborah Treisman to read and discuss “U.F.O. in Kushiro,” by Haruki Murakami, which first appeared in a 2001 issue of the magazine and was then republished in 2011, after an earthquake and tsunami devastated northern Japan. Washington’s début story collection, “Lot,” was published last year, and his first novel, “Memorial,” will come out in October.
Kristen Roupenian Reads Shirley Jackson
Kristen Roupenian joins Deborah Treisman to read and discuss “Afternoon in Linen,” by Shirley Jackson, which appeared in a 1943 issue of the magazine. Roupenian’s début story collection, “You Know You Want This,” was published last year, and was just released in paperback under the title “Cat Person and Other Stories.”
Deborah Treisman Reads David Foster Wallace
Deborah Treisman reads and discusses “Good People,” by David Foster Wallace, which appeared in a 2007 issue of the magazine. David Foster Wallace, who died in 2008, was the author of three short-story collections and three novels, including “Infinite Jest,” and “The Pale King,” which was published posthumously, in 2011, and was nominated for the Pulitzer Prize.
Customer ReviewsSee All
Sleepy read of the Great Murakami
This podcast is often a pleasure in the reads and author interpretations. There needs to be a vetting for the reading authors unless they are hard to come by. Please weed out the vocal fries and mono-tonal readings. Washington’s reading of Murakami is painful in the slow monotone struggle of trailing sentences. It fails to capture the cadence of the story leaving one to feel tired. Was this the first time Brian was making an attempt to read this story. Boring.
Entertaining and thought stimulating
It is a pleasure to have these stories read, a pleasure made more interesting by having another author do so.
The introduction to the story, and then more detailed explanation, do inform, though it’s just their opinion.
This concept of short chiseled prose with the added contrast of another author, and the discussions, is a podcast present.
Offsets ‘n such
I had no intention of writing a review, but after reading the recent ones, it seemed necessary. The complaints and the overall rating of this podcast don’t do it justice. The kind of analysis and the brilliant choices of stories are immensely entertaining and the material has a certain freedom to it, since it’s decided by writers that have a passion for a specific author/piece. That grants us free entrance to their excitement!!
For people complaining that these authors are not professional podcasters, it seems silly and like the point is being missed. They aren’t meant to be perfect. This podcast is more similar to sitting next to a passionate writer on a settee, while they share a story they care about (immensely).
Deborah does a magnificent job of leading constructive analysis. It doesn’t fit an agenda, and it also isn’t meant to hold the listener’s hand. The New Yorker attracts a certain type of crowd, and I would wager that the majority of us aren’t bigots or individuals that would glorify sexual violence (responding directly to those complaints about failing to address sexual violence or the racial context of these stories). We see the analysis of the other topics against the backdrop of those more difficult themes, and I’m actually quite satisfied that the discussion doesn’t have to descend into a lecture. I appreciate that we’re expected to understand those issues. And when they’re less obvious, the discussion usually highlights them.
Give this podcast a chance. It will broaden your horizons, expand your tastes, and teach you to think even more critically than before!