Editor's Note — September 15, 2016, 6:21 pm

Inside the October Issue

Robert Sullivan on the cult of Hamilton, Walter Kirn on the Republican National Convention, Rachel Nolan on El Salvador’s anti-abortion machinery, a story by Joyce Carol Oates, and more

HarpersWeb-2016-10-cover-220By now, raising any objection to Lin-Manuel Miranda’s Hamilton is tantamount to treason—you might as well complain about the national anthem, or spit on the flag. The musical has enthralled not only a legion of theatergoers, but politicians, celebrities, historians, and even Robert Sullivan, the author of this month’s cover story. But as he argues in “The Hamilton Cult,” the marvelously talented Miranda has managed to sin by omission. What is absent from the musical, writes Sullivan, is Hamilton’s obsessive focus on military force and wealth concentration as the building blocks of nationhood. More specifically, there is no spiffy song-and-dance number about Hamilton’s quashing of the Whiskey Rebellion—a populist uprising in the Pennsylvania hinterlands and a distant predecessor, one might argue, of the Occupy movement and the Tea Party alike. Debunking Hamilton is not really the point, of course. Sullivan is interested in history and what we do with it. “The past is complicated,” he notes, “and explaining it is not just a trick, but a gamble.” As his essay makes clear, putting all our chips on the Great Man theory is no longer a winning strategy.

Speaking of Great Men, or at least theoretically Great Men—our own Walter Kirn made the ultimate sacrifice in July and attended the Republican National Convention in Cleveland. These quadrennial pep rallies have become black holes for even the most diligent journalists. They are staged and sanitized to a fare-thee-well, so that nothing really happens. Reporters are there simply to note the ripple effects on social media and the nominee’s double-breasted, contempt-radiating body language. Yet somehow, Kirn brings the whole extravaganza to life. What’s more, he listens to Donald Trump’s acceptance speech with an open mind, and while the content might be appalling, he can’t help but respond to the delivery: “If he’s acting, he doesn’t know it, which isn’t acting—it’s conducting. His pauses are louder than his bursts of speech and create irresistible spaces for massive clamor. It’s working.” Whether it will work clear through to Election Day is a riddle we’ll be solving very soon.

If Trump is elected, he will appoint the next tranche of Supreme Court justices, which raises the inevitable question: what would it be like to live in a nation without Roe v. Wade? As it happens, there is a test case on hand—a nation where not only abortion but miscarriage has been criminalized to a draconian extent. That would be El Salvador, whose fearsome anti-abortion machinery Rachel Nolan explores in “Innocents.” Her report is detailed, compassionate, and infuriating. How can it be that a woman who has miscarried in a rural pasture—already a sufficient tragedy—is then arrested, tried, and threatened with up to fifty years in prison? How will Salvadoran authorities wrestle with the arrival of the Zika virus, with its attendant threat of microcephaly and other birth defects? There are glimmers of hope here, but El Salvador’s Kafkaesque crusade against its pregnant citizens shows no sign of going away.

Elsewhere in the magazine, Alexandria Neason chronicles the slow-motion collapse and unlikely resurrection of the Detroit school system. In “Division Street,” Robert Gumpert delivers an eloquent and empathetic photo study of the homeless in San Francisco—and while his black-and-white images speak for themselves, they are further enhanced by Rebecca Solnit’s brief introduction. In Readings, Nicholson Baker fails to maintain order in the classroom, and a robot emits a metallic cri-de-coeur: “Why can’t I be considered a person?” We also have Lidija Haas on Nell Zink, whose “cheerfully elastic, almost Walserian deadpan” tends to leave readers in a state of smiling unease, and Matthew Bevis on Thomas De Quincey’s very bad habits, which include substance abuse (to put it gently), voyeurism, and what Bevis calls his “self-relishing archness,” which also makes De Quincey terribly appealing to us navel-gazing moderns.

Last but not least, a reminder: our paywall, erected as a sort of Maginot Line against non-subscribers, has been modified. All visitors to our website can now read one article per month at no charge, and we encourage you not only to dip into Harper’s Magazine, but to share your discoveries on social media. (That’s right, you just saw the words Harper’s Magazine and social media in the same sentence. Despite our fondness for photogravure and pneumatic tubes, we are steadily making our way into the current century.)

Share
Single Page

More from James Marcus:

Editor's Note February 12, 2018, 11:15 am

Inside the March Issue

Rebecca Solnit, Katie Roiphe, Sallie Tisdale, and more

Editor's Note December 22, 2017, 1:26 pm

Inside the January Issue

Fenton Johnson, Andrew Cockburn, Mansi Choksi, Rebecca Solnit, Yasmine Seale, and more…

Editor's Note October 20, 2017, 11:00 am

Inside the November Issue

Rebecca Solnit, J. C. Hallman, Vivian Gornick, Dale Maharidge, and more

Get access to 167 years of
Harper’s for only $45.99

United States Canada

CATEGORIES

THE CURRENT ISSUE

March 2018

The Infinity of the Small

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Empty Suits

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Great Divide

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Nobody Knows

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Other Whisper Network

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

view Table Content

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

Article
The Other Whisper Network·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

No one would talk to me for this piece. Or rather, more than twenty women talked to me, sometimes for hours at a time, but only after I promised to leave out their names, and give them what I began to call deep anonymity. This was strange, because what they were saying did not always seem that extreme. Yet here in my living room, at coffee shops, in my inbox and on my voicemail, were otherwise outspoken female novelists, editors, writers, real estate agents, professors, and journalists of various ages so afraid of appearing politically insensitive that they wouldn’t put their names to their thoughts, and I couldn’t blame them. 

Of course, the prepublication frenzy of Twitter fantasy and fury about this essay, which exploded in early January, is Exhibit A for why nobody wants to speak openly. Before the piece was even finished, let alone published, people were calling me “pro-rape,” “human scum,” a “harridan,” a “monster out of Stephen King’s ‘IT,’?” a “ghoul,” a “bitch,” and a “garbage person”—all because of a rumor that I was planning to name the creator of the so-called Shitty Media Men list. The Twitter feminist Jessica Valenti called this prospect “profoundly shitty” and “incredibly dangerous” without having read a single word of my piece. Other tweets were more direct: “man if katie roiphe actually publishes that article she can consider her career over.” “Katie Roiphe can suck my dick.” With this level of thought policing, who in their right mind would try to say anything even mildly provocative or original? 

Illustration by Shonagh Rae
Article
Pushing the Limit·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

In the early Eighties, Andy King, the coach of the Seawolves, a swim club in Danville, California, instructed Debra Denithorne, aged twelve, to do doubles — to practice in the morning and the afternoon. King told Denithorne’s parents that he saw in her the potential to receive a college scholarship, and even to compete in the Olympics. Tall swimmers have an advantage in the water, and by the time Denithorne turned thirteen, she was five foot eight. She dropped soccer and a religious group to spend more time at the pool.

Illustration by Shonagh Rae
Post
CamperForce·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

After losing their savings in the stock market crash of 2008, seniors Barb and Chuck find seasonal employment at Amazon fulfillment centers.

Days after the Columbine shootings in 1999 that Eric Holder called for “regulations in how people interact on the Internet‚”:

5

The 63 percent drop in Brazil’s birth rate between 1960 and 2000 was due in part to soap operas.

US president Donald Trump, who once said it “doesn’t matter” what journalists write about him if he has a “piece of ass” that is “young,” blamed the press coverage of the abuse allegations on the White House communications director, whom Trump has reportedly called a “piece of tail” and asked to steam a pair of pants he was wearing.

Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!

HARPER’S FINEST

Report — From the June 2013 issue

How to Make Your Own AR-15

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

By

"Gun owners have long been the hypochondriacs of American politics. Over the past twenty years, the gun-rights movement has won just about every battle it has fought; states have passed at least a hundred laws loosening gun restrictions since President Obama took office. Yet the National Rifle Association has continued to insist that government confiscation of privately owned firearms is nigh. The NRA’s alarmism helped maintain an active membership, but the strategy was risky: sooner or later, gun guys might have realized that they’d been had. Then came the shootings at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, and at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, followed swiftly by the nightmare the NRA had been promising for decades: a dedicated push at every level of government for new gun laws. The gun-rights movement was now that most insufferable of species: a hypochondriac taken suddenly, seriously ill."

Subscribe Today