Gothamist: Alternate New Yorker Cover Much Better Than Real One

Dean

Thu, 02 Mar 2006 08:32:58 -0500

The Cheney/Bush cover, in my opinion is way better. The mardi gras cover is too simplistic and message too obvious (and I don't care for the art either). While the Cheney/Bush cover is obviously a Brokeback reference, it speaks to the administration's failings which is the real cause of the mess New Orleans finds itself in now. And artist Ulriksen has a great style.

Paul T

Tue, 28 Feb 2006 20:41:16 -0500

The NO MG cover is a take off on a John Gutman photo from the 20's or 30's. Gutman died about 10 years ago in his early 90's.

[]\[]\[]\[]\

Tue, 28 Feb 2006 13:14:44 -0500

The New Yorker is culturally irrelevant anyway. People like to lift it up and hold it to their noses, but do they actually read what's on the paper? My guess is that the New Yorker assumes no, and so they produce their content accordingly. That's why they're the proud home of Malcom Gladwell's 10 Page Pointless Ramble: {Now with Extra Pseudo-Jargon!}

lauren

Tue, 28 Feb 2006 09:07:15 -0500

are you people cracked?! they're both ugly as hell!

me

Tue, 28 Feb 2006 09:02:52 -0500

That is an amazing peice of artwork. So sad not to see it on the magazine cover, but glad to have seen it here. I'm guessing that the artist will be able to makes lots of money selling prints of this if he's got copywrites!

Harry Matthews

Tue, 28 Feb 2006 01:41:41 -0500

I'll sign on with those who prefer the Cheney/Bush cover, which is a very effective "quick read" on the newsstand. The Mardi Gras cover is elegant but understated; the magazine could run it this week (which actually includes Fat Tuesday) if it wanted to. I'm also drowining in a flood of Mardi Gras stories. Thanks, Anderson Cooper, for 20 minutes on abandoned pets in New Orleans. But the witty and pungent commentary of The New Yorker did a lot more for my brain.

george

Mon, 27 Feb 2006 19:28:40 -0500

Bush Cheney is the better cover. Judging from your recent photoshop work, I would say that you failed art.

anon

Mon, 27 Feb 2006 19:27:06 -0500

This is a lame piece by you. Who cares?

art director

Mon, 27 Feb 2006 16:11:26 -0500

As a magazine art director, the Cheney cover is 100 times better. The color is more vibrant, the image more compelling, etc. The New Orleans cover doesn't do anything for me. Last week's report on New Orleans in the New Yorker was wonderful, however.

rev pays

Mon, 27 Feb 2006 15:31:20 -0500

Oh, then it was waaaaaay over my head. That or my ADHD kicked in while passing the movie pages.

Jeff

Mon, 27 Feb 2006 14:51:16 -0500

"Rev pays": the cover is a parody of the "Brokeback Mountain" poster.

Tim N.

Mon, 27 Feb 2006 14:40:19 -0500

I could almost deal with this were it not for the fact that that Bush/Cheney B-back Mtn joke has been making the email rounds for eight weeks now. Proof once again that you won't get very far with originality, son. Fear the artists...

rev pays

Mon, 27 Feb 2006 14:16:12 -0500

How is the current cover a nod to "brokeback Mtn"? Cheney was hunting not herding animals.

rev pays

Mon, 27 Feb 2006 13:30:32 -0500

What does mardi gras has to do with NY'er? Oh I know, big party for rich white folks. Party on Babylon. the whole NO is just one big f up.

your sister's gay boyfriend

Mon, 27 Feb 2006 13:27:33 -0500

And the Bush/Cheney as Jack/Ennis thing isn't that fresh either: http://advertisingwithoutpity.typepad.com/my_weblog/2006/01/two_gay_cowboys.html

sam

Mon, 27 Feb 2006 13:26:52 -0500

The first thing I thought when I got my New Yorker in the mail was "what? they couldn't come up with something better than a rip-off of the 80 gajillion brokeback mountain photojob jokes that have been floating around the internet for months?" I didn't even know that the cover that they shelved was so much better. That just makes it worse.

Jen

Mon, 27 Feb 2006 13:09:44 -0500

Brokeback jokes are soooo 2005!