This piece is basically set up to fail. It's historical, based on math, and doesn't venture towards any drama or stakes. I can easily imagine it being a farticle on a third-rate SEO webzine.
So why does it work okay as a New Yorker piece? How is their writing consistently good?
I think their secret sauce is the (implied) perspective. The impression that the author has a unique, complete, accurate take on the subject, and is letting you in on it piece by piece, in a meandering way.
So why does it work okay as a New Yorker piece? How is their writing consistently good?
I think their secret sauce is the (implied) perspective. The impression that the author has a unique, complete, accurate take on the subject, and is letting you in on it piece by piece, in a meandering way.