Explore Harvard's Nieman network Nieman Fellowships Nieman Lab Nieman Reports Nieman Watchdog Nieman Storyboard

“Why’s this so good?” No. 24: Gay Talese on Joe DiMaggio

“Do you know how George Washington died?” my girlfriend asked one evening last week.

I was busy working on this piece, and in truth, I had no idea. Because after he kicked out the British, helped establish modern democracy, and became the first American Hero – never mind the first president – Washington left the realm of popular history.

Which, oddly enough, recalls “The Silent Season of the Hero,” one of a pair of magazine profiles Gay Talese wrote for Esquire in 1966. First came the perennially lauded story about Frank Sinatra, who happened to have a cold. Second was “Silent Season,” tracing life after the Yankees for Joe DiMaggio.

It’s always mentioned second, too. In most tellings, “Frank Sinatra Has a Cold” is the best magazine profile ever written, while “Silent Season” gets kid brother status as the best sports story. Maybe it’s because I’m a second son, but to me, DiMaggio’s always been the better of the two.

Calling “Silent Season” a sports piece is a little misleading, because it doesn’t lean too heavily on the designation. The main sports action comes in a handful of words about a very specific stretch of games (more on that in a minute) and in its closing lines, when DiMaggio takes a few swings in a batting cage during spring training. Otherwise, it’s a short look into the life of someone who used to be famous.

Talese has said that his goal in covering celebrities is usually to show them after the celebration is done. That’s apparent in both of these profiles, and also in his writing about boxer Floyd Patterson, which just gets better as Patterson’s career gets worse.

Elegy for an enforcer

If you’ve been on the New York Times’ website at all this week, or even the Internet, chances are you’ve seen or heard something about our latest Notable Narrative, “Punched Out: the Life and Death of a Hockey Enforcer.”

The multimedia project tells the story of Derek Boogaard, a 28-year-old player found dead in his apartment by family members in May. Going beyond the well-done print piece and galleries of images, the Times has also produced a series of video interviews and – most notably – a triptych movie on Boogaard’s life.

Each installment runs about 12 minutes. The first chronicles his awkward childhood and his adolescent realization that the only way he would get to play hockey was to learn to use his fists on the ice. The second follows his unlikely entry into professional hockey and rise to popularity in the NHL. And the third traces the toll of his career: injuries and addiction that cascaded into a death spiral.

The storytelling technique is chronological and classic, following the arc of Boogaard’s life in three stand-alone sections. Boogaard isn’t romanticized – the filmmakers present him as someone who became an addict and was willing to hurt other people very badly in exchange for a lot of money. Yet there’s something glorious in watching him score a goal – a feat not commonly accomplished by an enforcer – and seeing the arena explode. This moment shows the life he really wanted, a life that might have let him stay in the league and survive. But that life was not the life he got.

“Why’s this so good?” No. 23: William Langewiesche’s voice of experience

I’ve never met William Langewiesche, and I don’t know many of his secrets, but I know he and I have at least one thing in common: We’re guided by the same terrible fear.

“You have this precious, incredibly privileged thing,” he told the San Francisco Chronicle in 2007, “which is the reader’s attention for a little while. And you can make the slightest misstep and the reader will put you down. People will say that the reader lives in a busy world. But that’s not the reason why. The reason is that the writer blows it, and loses the reader’s trust.”

One of the best ways to lose a nonfiction reader is to write something confusing or opaque. Nobody wants to follow a mysterious stranger into a dark forest. Which is why it’s a good rule to do two things at the beginning of a long piece: Prove yourself as a good traveling companion, and point the way down a well-lighted path.

The Euphrates is a peaceful river. It meanders silently through the desert province of Anbar like a ribbon of life, flanked by the greenery that grows along its banks, sustaining palm groves and farms, and a string of well-watered cities and towns. Fallujah, Ramadi, Hit, Haditha. These are among the places made famous by battle—conservative, once quiet communities where American power has been checked, and where despite all the narrow measures of military success the Sunni insurgency continues to grow. On that short list, Haditha is the smallest and farthest upstream. It extends along the Euphrates’ western bank with a population of about 50,000, in a disarray of dusty streets and individual houses, many with walled gardens in which private jungles grow. It has a market, mosques, schools, and a hospital with a morgue. Snipers permitting, you can walk it top to bottom in less than an hour, allowing time enough to stone the dogs. Before the American invasion, it was known as an idyllic spot, where families came from as far away as Baghdad to while away their summers splashing in the river and sipping tea in the shade of trees. No longer, of course. Now, all through Anbar, and indeed the Middle East, Haditha is known as a city of death, or more simply as a name, a war cry against the United States.

That’s the first paragraph of “Rules of Engagement,” from Vanity Fair, a piece Langewiesche wrote in 2006.

It was a massive challenge. He wanted to explain an incident that at first glance seemed inexplicable – the U.S. Marines’ massacre of 24 Iraqis in Haditha the previous year. Any explanation would have been impossible, of course, without the deep knowledge he’d earned in his numerous travels through Iraq. But the reporting goes without saying. You can’t be a great nonfiction writer without being a great reporter. What led me through nearly 15,000 words of desert quagmire and military bureaucracy was Langewiesche’s voice.

Most newspaper veterans have heard an editor say, “That story practically tells itself,” or “Just get out of the way.” Well, I understand the sentiment. Some writers do wonderful work with a more straightforward delivery. But here’s why I never put down the story on the Haditha massacre: I felt as if Langewiesche wouldn’t let me. He wasn’t just saying, “This is what happened.” He was saying, “This is why it happened, and here is exactly how we’re losing a war being fought in our name.” He understood that in a story this twisted and complex, supplying the bare facts wouldn’t be enough. And he certainly couldn’t gloss over the rough details.

To begin with, the Marines didn’t do what they did for no reason. Their convoy was bombed in the road, causing two injuries and one death:

It is a requirement of understanding the events in Haditha—and the circumstances of this war—not to shy away from the physical realities here, or to soften the scene in the interest of politics or taste. Terrazas was torn in half. His bottom half remained under the steering wheel. His top half was blown into the road, where he landed spilling his entrails and organs. He probably did not suffer, at least.

Gay Talese has a Coke*: reflections of a narrative legend, in conversation with Esquire’s Chris Jones

Continuing a Nieman Foundation narrative writing speaker series set up by Paige Williams, journalism legend Gay Talese appeared on campus two weeks ago in conversation with Esquire’s Chris Jones. The Harvard Writers at Work lecture series co-sponsored the standing-room-only event, where Talese and Jones were introduced by current Nieman fellow Adam Tanner of Reuters. What follows is a transcript of the talk, edited for clarity and length:

Adam Tanner: Gay Talese is an especially good choice for those seeking to study great writing. His 1966 story “Frank Sinatra Has a Cold,” and other stories, are credited in helping create New Journalism: deeply researched literature of fact enlivened with vivid storytelling. He has published 11 books including the 1969 book “The Kingdom and the Power,” about the history of the New York Times, where he was a reporter from 1956 to 1965. Over his career Talese has written for the Times, Esquire, The New Yorker, Harper’s Magazine, and others, and remains an active writer. He has influenced countless writers and journalists, including quite a number in the hall today.

We’ve paired him with a fine younger narrative writer who has a cult following of his own, Chris Jones, writer at large at Esquire and the new back-page columnist for ESPN The Magazine. He has won two National Magazine Awards for his long-form features and he has traveled from Toronto today to join us.

All of this has come together today in partnership with the Harvard Writers at Work lecture series. The lecture series is co-sponsored by the Harvard College Writing Program, the Harvard Review, Harvard Extension School and the Program in General Education, which brings together distinguished writers throughout the year.

Jones: Thank you very much to the Nieman Foundation for Journalism for having us today. How many of you are either writers or aspiring writers? Wow, there we go. Nonfiction? Fiction? Look at those people. They are not to be trusted.

[laughter]

Jones: We were just having coffee in the cafeteria, and Gay [was telling me he] is working on a piece for the New Yorker on Joe Girardi, the [Yankees’] manager. And I thought this might be an interesting way to talk about the process of writing and how you find stories. You spend so much time on a story. How do you know when an idea is good enough – is it good enough for a short piece, is it good enough for a long piece, is it good enough for a book?

Chris Jones on reporting for detail, the case against outlining and the power of donuts

Esquire writer at large Chris Jones came to the Nieman Foundation two weeks ago as part of the Narrative Writing speakers series I started at the foundation last year, and spent a couple of hours talking about craft. Jones began his career as a sportswriter for the National Post in Toronto, where he covered boxing, which became the subject of his first book, “Falling Hard: A Rookie’s Year in Boxing.” Without a single magazine byline, and with a whole lot of hubris and a box of donuts, he famously talked his way into Esquire, a legendary home for narrative journalism.

Williams & Jones (photo: Jonathan Seitz)

Now Esquire’s writer at large (as well as ESPN The Magazine’s new back-page columnist), Jones has written about presidential candidates, astronauts, soldiers, movie stars and game shows, and has won two National Magazine Awards, the highest honor in magazine writing. One ASME award was for “The Things That Carried Him,” about the return of a soldier’s body from Iraq, and the other was for “Home,” which became the basis for his nonfiction book “Out of Orbit: The Incredible True Story of Three Astronauts Who Were Hundreds of Miles Above Earth When They Lost Their Ride Home.”

“When you read one of his stories, you’re putting on the Chris Jones suit of clothes and walking through this world, and you’re seeing and feeling things the way he does,” his Esquire editor, Peter Griffin, told me the other day. [Read our 2009 interview with Griffin here, for Jones’ “The End of Mystery.”] “But it’s frictionless. Part of the reason is, he’s obsessive. He works a story until he gets it right.”

On his second day visiting Harvard, Jones appeared with Gay Talese. But his first day on campus he sat down with this year’s Nieman fellows to share details about his career and thoughts on writing. What follows are some excerpts from my conversation with him and the discussion with fellows that followed.

You’ve worked in both newspapers and magazines. What adjustments did you have to make in order to move from newspapers to magazines, from the daily news beat?

When I started at the paper I was a beat guy, so I did the 600-word sports stories, mostly about baseball and boxing. Then I started working in features. The paper I worked at was a paper called the National Post, which at the time Conrad Black had sunk a bajillion dollars into, and [it] had exactly no ads, so you could write a 3,000-word feature, and you could pitch anything. I remember we sent one reporter to Mongolia to watch a meteor shower, and it was cloudy so she got no story. And that was my impression of newspapers; that was my first job ever, so I was like, This is how it is. I just didn’t know any better. So I was a feature writer. But then when I started at Esquire my very first sit-down with my new editor was – and this is no insult to anyone who works in newspapers – he said, I don’t want to read a single sentence in your stories that I could have read in a newspaper.

“Why’s this so good?” No. 22: Hank Stuever on
9-ish

There are two stories from the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001, that to me remain better than all the others. R.W. Apple wrote a news analysis that ran on the front of the New York Times on Sept. 12. Hank Stuever wrote an essay that ran on the front of the Style section of the Washington Post on Sept. 13. Apple? He unleashed on deadline a voice-of-God assessment of the far-reaching geopolitical implications, pretty much predicting the future. And Hank?

“I turned in a vibe,” he says now.

America opens at 9, which is to say 9-ish, which has become our saddest hour.

9:02, for example. Or 8:45, or 9:04.

Or 9:11, six minutes after the second jet hit the second tower, and the mind started connecting dots in a panic. At some point we may have stopped to consider the date, 9/11, which reads as 9-1-1, which is keypad-speak for: Oh God no, help, please. Perhaps the day could simply be called Nine One One.

Why’s this so good?

Start on Sept. 11. Hank, a two-time finalist for the Pulitzer Prize, had been at the Post for about two years, and his editor was Henry Allen, who in 2000 had won a Pulitzer for criticism.

They by then had started to develop an almost telepathically good working relationship. One day a few months before Sept. 11, Henry came back from lunch, walked over to Hank’s desk and said, “Plastic patio chairs,” and Hank looked up and said, “Absolutely.” A week and a half later, he had written 1,915 words about the world’s most ubiquitous piece of quasi-furniture, their place assured in the pantheon of the all-time most Stuever-esque Stuever stories.

So on that blue-sky Tuesday, in a buzzing, mobilizing Post newsroom, Hank said to Henry something about how they always know when to get us, don’t they? Right around when we’re getting to work. Right around 9. Hank, they decided, would get up early the next morning to report.

It’s worth pausing here for a second to consider what we mean when we use that word. Reporting is not walking around with a tape recorder or a notebook and a ballpoint pen. It is not transcribing. It is not talking to as many people as possible. It is not collecting quotes. Reporting is all that, or can be, but it’s also observing and thinking and recognizing themes and ultimately earning the ability to say what there is to say. Reporting is work. Hank, an outsider by nature, is a keen observer and possesses the kind of original mind that sees meaningful differences between the convenience store chains Wawa and Sheetz and turns those perceptions into nearly 2,500 words of culturally relevant synthesis.

“Why’s this so good?” No. 21: Neal Stephenson’s plot-free adventure story

For one thing, it’s 42,535 words long. This lets you know that you’re into Serious Business right there, before you even get started. Then comes the opening, torn straight from a 19th-century adventure novel and refracted through a cyberpunk prism: “In which the hacker tourist ventures forth across the wide and wondrous meatspace of three continents…”

This is no accident. In “Mother Earth Mother Board,” Neal Stephenson aims to reveal the very physical underpinnings of the virtual world. He’s going to tell you the tale of how the postmodern world was wired together. This requires reaching back to Victorian England, and forward, just a little bit, into the future. Accordingly, the form mirrors the content. A bit of travelogue, a bit of pulp adventure novel, a bit of technothriller, a bit of postcyberpunk sci-fi.

Wired published “Mother Earth Mother Board” in December 1996. Yahoo! was 2 years old. Google did not yet exist. We were coming to the end of year two of the five-year dot-com boom. The Internet was called “cyberspace” and “the information superhighway.” eCommerce ruled the future to the point that we developed a derisive term of art for regular old (actually profitable) retail operations; they were “brick and mortar” stores (first use, 1992). The implication being that these were dangerously dated operations, tied as they were to the mundane world of atoms. The future lay in the exuberant exchange of weightless virtual wealth.

The dot-com world’s dangerously myopic narcissism was visible to those with the right kind of eyes, and “Mother Earth Mother Board” is 42,535 words of emergency optical surgery. Stephenson wants to show you that everything’s been done before, only crazier.

Jeanne Marie Laskas on hidden lives, the search for the perfect protagonist, and the joys of long-form

Our November Editors’ Roundtable looked at “Hecho en América,” a story by GQ correspondent Jeanne Marie Laskas about migrant blueberry pickers in Maine. Laskas’ work has been featured previously on this site, and has won her a slot in the “Best American Sportswriting” anthologies four times. She has also written five books and been a contributing editor at Esquire, as well as a columnist for The Washington Post Magazine and Reader’s Digest.

Laskas talked with us by phone this week about her migrant worker story, and in these excerpts from our conversation, she discusses finding interpreters, keeping readers in the moment, and prospecting for narrative gold.

What was the genesis of this article? Did you come up with it, or did your editor?

I’m working on this book that’s called “Hidden America,” its about people who do the work that we’re dependent on. And it’s as much about the work as it is about the people. This story idea was in that mindset and in that series. The idea of this one was really quite simply “Who are the people who pick this food?”

The narrative thread of the story rises from the experiences of Urbano and his twin sons. How did you find them, and when did you know they would be at the center of your story?

Oh, God. It took forever.

Not everyone knows that’s fairly normal. Can you talk about how you found them?

First of all, it took, literally, months to get anyone to allow me to come into a camp of migrant workers. You have a choice – you can go in and sneak around, but that’s so limiting. So I wanted to go in legit.

Again, we weren’t trying to write an immigration story. I wanted the people who pick the food. That was a hard message to get through, especially to the larger agribusiness-type places. They just don’t want journalists messing around, mostly because everything is so awful. Especially in Florida and California – that’s where we started. But none of those companies would allow me to come. Another thing is that I wanted to bring a photographer, which is asking a lot of access. So there was a lot of talking and talking.

Finally we found Juan Perez-Febles. He’s the state monitor, an advocate with the state of Maine. I don’t remember how we got to him, but once we did, everything opened up. Because here was Maine, which was a state that once had terrible conditions for its migrant workers but had worked to better them and was interested in showing how you could do the right thing for these folks instead of chaining them to U-hauls, which is some of what was happening in Florida.

November Editors’ Roundtable: GQ’s close-up on the people who bring you breakfast (and lunch, and dinner)

Our November Roundtable looks at “Hecho en América,” by Jeanne Marie Laskas. Laskas immerses herself in the world of migrant workers picking blueberries in Washington County, Maine, and illuminates the distance between the worlds of those who pick the berries and those who eat them. The story ran in the September issue of GQ magazine.

Laurie Hertzel
Senior editor for books and special projects, Star Tribune

On weaving together facts and narrative:

One of the hardest things to do gracefully in narrative writing is to fold in hard facts, numbers, experts, all the tough background and context, without interrupting the flow of the story. Jeanne Marie Laskas does it smoothly and beautifully in “Hecho en América.” She understands that those hard facts and concrete information are not extras to support the story – they are part of the story. And so that is how she handles them.

She folds facts and numbers into lively sentences and paragraphs. There are six numbers in these two paragraphs, but because they are spread out, and each number is married to a concrete noun (a box, a check, a peach, an orange grove, etc.), they are easy to swallow and easy to remember. She begins and ends the graf with lively writing – comparing blueberries to pinball games, and then one quick sentence reminding us how hard the work is.

Blueberries have always fetched the highest pay of any crop on the East Coast. They’re like the bonus round at the end of a pinball game—all of a sudden the points really started adding up. A good raker with a strong rhythm averages one hundred boxes a day. At $2.25 a box, it’s not uncommon to see a weekly check for $1,350. Compare that with just $375 a week picking Georgia peaches, or $400 down in the orange groves of Florida.

Washington County, occupying the far eastern tip of the state, is where the majority of the blueberry barrens are located, and it has 12.2 percent unemployment, the highest in the state. And yet the money does not draw the locally unemployed into the fields—an inexplicable dimension to the new American dream repeated nationwide. Raking is hard, backbreaking work, and the sun is hot.

“Why’s this so good?” No. 20: Mr. Weschler’s magic cabinet

Magic and writing tricks differ in at least one happy way: A writing trick’s delights only increase once you see through the sleight of hand.

In “Inhaling the Spore,” writing about a visit to a very peculiar museum, Lawrence Weschler hides his prestidigitation in plain sight, like every good magician. His 1994 Harper’s showpiece makes the reader disappear inside the narration with a bold manipulation of point of view, helped along by a few typographical flourishes.

An explanatory narrative, “Inhaling the Spore” begins with the story of a Cameroonian “floor-dwelling ant” that gets infected with a fungus, whereupon “for the first time in its life, it leaves the forest floor” to ascend to the tip of a vine. There the fungus consumes the hapless creature, leaving behind a horn sprouting from the stink ant’s noggin, which proceeds to rain more spores down on its kin.

For the first two pages, the perspective is a comfortable, third-person, God’s-eye view, a La-Z-Boy vantage point that moves from the spore-ridden ant to similarly driven people. Among the historical marginalia we encounter are the “great mid-century American neurophysiologist Geoffrey Sonnabend,” the similarly “great Romanian-American vocalist Madelena Delani,” and “Donald R. Griffith, Rockefeller University’s eminent chiroptologist,” who captured elusive bats by inducing them to crash-entomb themselves into standing sheets of lead arrayed throughout a Caribbean jungle.

This is all magician’s patter, designed to lull our expectations. We settle in for a natural history tour of some charming oddballs, who, we learn, are among the attractions of the enigmatic Museum of Jurassic Technology.