by John Ore

With spring officially here, we’ve reached the two final installments of this series of favorite casserole recipes (with crockery recommendations) from The Awl and The Hairpin. But before you go full fair-weather grill-out, a recipe for jambalaya.

One of my first post-collegiate single-guy attempts at “cooking” — outside of warming a can of Goya black beans in a saucepan — was for a Mardi Gras-themed party in the mid-90s. I’d gone to my first Jazz Fest in 1993 with some friends/co-workers (synonymous in those days for me), and I listened to a lot of Dash Rip Rock and The Radiators. The next year, a creole-themed party emerged as the perfect delivery vehicle for copious amounts of booze in advance of Lent.

Everyone was responsible for bringing a dish, so I chose jambalaya for our potluck gathering, mostly because it seemed exotic while still containing familiar ingredients. It didn’t require making a complex roux like gumbo, yet it still felt a little grown up to bring it to a party. I was probably still wearing a baseball cap, though.

Since the Internet existed only in William Gibson books back then, I got a recipe from a co-worker’s mother from Louisiana. Like, transcribed over the phone onto a 3×5 note card. Authentic! Turns out, it was a hit. Along with the jambalaya and aforementioned gumbo, we managed to come up with fresh mudbugs. As that day progressed into evening, it devolved as would befit a bunch of 20-somethings with too much booze at a Mardi Gras-themed party. We did the most platonic body shots you could ever imagine — ooooh, the crook of the arm! SEXXXY — which was, sadly, what passed for intimacy with a woman at that point in my career. But the recipe endures!

I’ve added a bit of a paella/Spanish touch to the original recipe, mostly because I’m all growns up and pretentious and live in Brooklyn and wanted to use lamb merguez. Feel free to use andouille or shrimp or whatever moves you. Unlike stovetop versions, this jambalaya is baked in the oven, therefore it qualifies as a bona fide casserole.

Spanish Jambalaya Casserole

1 large Spanish onion, chopped
1 large green pepper, chopped
1 celery rib, chopped
4 garlic cloves, minced
1/2 cup butter
~1 pound fully cooked lamb merguez sausage, cut into 1/2-inch slices
~1 ½ fully cooked chicken breasts, coarsely chopped or shredded
3 cups chicken broth
2 cups uncooked Spanish rice
1 cup chopped fresh tomatoes
1/2 cup chopped green onions
1/4 cup minced fresh parsley
1 tablespoon Worcestershire sauce
1 tablespoon Frank’s Red Hot or Sriracha sauce (to taste)
1 tablespoon browning sauce
1 tablespoon salt
1 tablespoon pepper

Directions

In a large skillet, brown the sausage lightly. The merquez that I was using from Brooklyn Cured had a spicy zing to it that lent itself naturally to the jambalaya motif, to the point that you could ease up on the Frank’s or Sriracha. But heat to taste. Remove the sausage to paper towels to drain, reserve about a teaspoon of the drippings, then slice into ½ inch pieces.

Separately, saute some chicken breasts over a little oil in a skillet, browning them lightly as well. Slice/shred these into irregular chunks and set aside.

In yet another large skillet, saute the onions, green peppers, celery and garlic in butter until tender and slightly browned. Place in a shallow baking dish or casserole with the sausage and chicken, then stir in the remaining ingredients, including the merguez drippings, minus the chicken stock. Once mixed, add the chicken stock to saturate the whole thing. As we’ve already learned, the rice will cook during the casseroling-in-the-oven process, which is a really handy and cool way to cook rice dishes.

Cover and bake at 375 for 45–50 minutes or until the rice is tender, stirring a couple of times throughout to ensure the rice is cooked to your liking. Serve in bowls or on paper plates, add hot sauce to taste, sprinkle with some chopped parsley, and crack open a nice Abita SOS.

Body shots optional (but recommended).

John Ore doesn’t want to tell you what he did to get Mardi Gras beads.

Will Summer Be Hot?

Do the record-high temperatures we’ve been enjoying of late foretell an extra-hot summer? Climatologists refuse to commit, but don’t we all know by now that when the question takes the form of “is something only going to get worse” the answer is pretty much always a resounding yes? So, yes.

If you have already worked 40 hours this week, go home, you’re not gonna do anything else productive. I mean, how nice is it out there? Go! If your boss gives you a hard time tell her I said it was okay.

by Jon Blistein and RJ Cubarrubia

“I Just Want My Pants Back” premiered last month on MTV. It’s about four attractive post-grads living in Williamsburg, dropping pop-culture references to the tunes of its hipster-friendly soundtrack. RJ and Jon, our two in-house young-altbro would-be music writers living in Williamsburg, greeted the show with guarded optimism — even some excitement. But as the show has progressed — tonight is episode 10 of the 12-episode first season — they may have become just the latest generation to discover the heart of sadness in the world of MTV.

JON: So “Pants” was kind of a bummer, right? Five episodes in (approximately, er, three weeks ago) and Jay and Tina’s Brooklyn-based adventures in hip young adulthood weren’t necessarily as compelling as the narrative of the pre-All Star Game match-up between the Lakers and Thunder. The show with 2000-words worth of potential hasn’t offered much other than some fun characters who sometimes say funny things: The James Franco-hosted party that Tina’s then-squeeze, Brett, takes her and Jay to provided good beard jokes, the excellent line, “Franco’s doing a dramatic reading of his Wikipedia page on the roof!” and even led to Jay scoring an interview at Kracken Records (yeesh) — which he promptly blows cause he sees Jane (the girl who took his titular pants) in the hall. It wasn’t a total bust, but the lack of, y’know, substance (see: episode four’s too easy, groan-worthy conflict resolution via a spontaneous “hipster marching band” just minutes after Jay and Tina’s night hits rock bottom) was disappointing. And, let’s be honest, that burden falls on the writers… but the show is on MTV. And typical of lame, corporate, out-of-touch-with-the-youths MTV to go and pick up a show that’s more style than substance. Not like the good ol’ days, right? Or I mean that’s what I’m told — it’s the network that’s disappointing. Not that each generation is.

RJ: Leave it up to us assholes to reach for meaning in a semi-pointless and likely doomed MTV show. Yeah, we get some laughs out of exaggerated portrayals and biting zingers (like an actually hilarious Solange Knowles name drop), but the fact that we won’t bother watching it now exposes the biggest failure of “Pants”: We don’t even care about the characters anymore. And that’s coming from two kids who cared too much from the get-go. Weed even made a return in episode 4 with Jay’s journey to Fat Tim, the Bushwick dealer; but Jay doesn’t even smoke it, lamenting that he somehow can’t get high after missing a Battles show. Because apparently inside Warsaw during a Battles show is the only place you can inhale nuggetry. Dude, you just had a frustrating night of failed best-friend plans and missed a band you were really pumped about after you sort-of hooked up with an engaged girl at her bachelorette party. This seems like the time to smoke.

So are we absolute fools for wanting, expecting, looking for meaning from MTV? Short answer: Yeah. Long answer: Surely we can’t be to blame here. It must be MTV’s fault! It may seem silly that we grasped for deeper meaning in this MTV show, but once upon a time that meaning wasn’t too hard to find in MTV programming. When I talk about The Music Television with those older and wiser than me, I hear a strong attachment to MTV that I’m not sure our generation has (as well as disapproval, dismissal, ridicule, and other generally negative vibes towards its current incarnation that I don’t think I share). But I’m not interested in the usual large “monoculture vs. the Internet age” arguments. What about MTV specifically? Did the programming falter? I’m not sure MTV means that much, if really anything, to people our age.

JON: I gotta admit though, my gut reaction is: Not a chance; I have no expectations of MTV that could even be shattered. This is the network that basically walked me — a weird, sheltered suburbanite who totally got freaked out by The Talk in fifth grade — through puberty. My most vivid memories of MTV all revolve around sex. Video girls on “TRL,” Britney Spears ripping off her suit to reveal that rhinestoned, skin-colored number at the 2000 VMAs, numerous after school viewings of “Next,” “Room Raiders,” “Date My Mom,” “Parental Control,” etc., the glorified orgy that was “Real World: Las Vegas,” Spring(er) Break, and one very confusing night with two episodes of “Undressed.” Now I’m not one to armchair psychoanalyze myself, but the potent cocktail of televised casual sex mixed with healthy doses of “Pinkerton” might explain some of my neurosis… but that’s neither here nor there.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75v5k3dfSvk

Well, I should clarify. It wasn’t all sex — there were plenty of drugs on “True Life” and tons of rock and roll and general numbskullery on “Jackass.” And of course a lot of those things conflated on “TRL”: I’ve got vivid memories of coming home from school and watching the clips for “Fat Lip,” “Oops… I Did It Again,” “The Real Slim Shady,” “Fell In Love With A Girl,” and, hell, even Limp Bizkit’s “Rollin’,” all of which were total mindfucks at their respective times. As lame as it sounds — and believe me it sounds super lame — MTV was absolutely a crucial part of how I was exposed to the adult world (plus “The Simpsons” and some Skinemax). The channel wasn’t expressly forbidden in my house, but there was like an unspoken rule about watching; but you can’t expect a hormone-rattled kid with a cable TV in the basement to watch Nickelodeon forever when MTV’s just two channels away. MTV fulfilled a desire, basically: The programming wasn’t top notch (as you can gather from the majority of the aforementioned shows), but once it hooked me with its rock ‘n roll ‘tude and edginess and taboo subjects (read: um, boobs, I guess) I was sold on everything from “Newlyweds: Nick and Jessica” to “Made” to a true classic, “Pimp My Ride.” That’s my MTV and — wait for it — I totally wanted it.

RJ: NICE ONE.

Anyways, I too don’t really expect much from MTV other than absolute entertainment, but I also wonder if mere entertainment does justice to the storied MTV history. My irrational love for “Jersey Shore” aside, I don’t really watch any MTV programming these days, and I think that’s why “Pants” excited me: I felt it could offer something philosophically or culturally engaging, like a step in the direction of the glory days. While I can’t say I horndogged all over MTV in my budding pubic years like you, I did watch many of the same shows at that time too (and became enamored by “Jackass,” which explains a lot). Yet thanks to “chill parents” (or “questionable parenting” — depends on your definition of “good supervision”), I was also lucky enough to watch MTV (and VH1) since my early elementary school career. Back then I fiended music culture coverage and any music video I could watch, from slammin’ euro dance hits to 90s alternative staples and anything in between. MTV helped spark my transformation from mushy blank slate to sentient fan. But in my first year of middle school, I began to grasp for deeper subcultures (thanks, skateboarding!), gradually turning elsewhere for music discovery. MTV still had some significant music moments, and I wouldn’t have reached that point of cultural interest without the channel, but soon enough it was my destination for unusual, barely dangerous, and/or rabble-rousing programming. And it’s pretty much the same today.

This isn’t to say I didn’t enjoy what MTV had become at that age. I loved the shit out of it. In fact, I watched more MTV post-music than in my gateway years. Yet it became a main mental veg-out zone, and less a place for thoughtful or provoking programming. Still, we both loved MTV as it transitioned away from bonafide Music Television, even if that’s supposedly when it “went wrong.”

JON: Well, I dunno if MTV really went wrong. I mean, first of all, let’s not neglect the handful of good, and sometimes even (gasp!) revolutionary shows MTV aired over the past decade. “Jackass” is absolutely brilliant — it’s 90s xxx-treeemee sports (sponsored by Red Bull!) jacked up to their most illogical and absurd. “The Osbournes” changed reality TV just as much as the “Real World,” allowing not just seven complete strangers their fifteen minutes, but extending that option to aging rockstars, high-society brats (young and old), MySpace stars looking for love and sex addicted C-listers. (And don’t just holler “decline in quality,” because plenty of people have found plenty of interesting and intelligent things to say about “The Hills.”) Not to mention that below the radar MTV continued to offer a space for up-and-coming comedians, allotting air time to the weirdest of the weird, from “Wonder Showzen” (on MTV2, admittedly) to “Human Giant” to “The Andy Milonakis Show” to one shining season of “Clone High” (Will Forte voices Abe Lincoln; Bill Lawrence co-created; the soundtrack features American Football, Taking Back Sunday, Saves The Day, and others — need I say more?).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XdCzi236mcU

Of course that was the minority, but the majority was equally compelling. Though maybe not exemplary television, “The Hills,” “Made,” “Cribs,” “Laguna Beach,” “Two-A-Days,” “My Super Sweet Sixteen,” “Jersey Shore” are just endlessly watchable television. I didn’t shout to the world that I watched some of those shows, but I always tuned in, and so did my friends. We’d laugh about “Cribs” or “Jackass” or Diddy’s hilarious “Vote Or Die” campaign, maybe kill time with an episode of “Made” or make fun of “Next.” That was the extent of our engagement and we were absolutely fine with that; no need to pick a bone that doesn’t need to be picked.

RJ: So maybe MTV never “went wrong”? “Human Giant” and “Wonder Showzen” gave us absurd comedy like “The State” offered viewers in the 90s, and “Jackass” meant as much to us as “Beavis and Butthead” meant to Gen X. Except the reality-dating braindrains, which pretty much define “junk food” programming, even shows like “Laguna Beach” offered some (slightly scripted) insight into a certain lifestyle, locale and youth culture that dominated the imaginative fancy of our culture at the time (damn, it’s been that long since “The O.C.”?). “Cribs” was a sometimes demystifying, humanizing look into artist and celebrities’ lives in the pre-Twitter era (or dehumanizing, depending on the gaudiness of the star’s digs) and produced possibly the greatest segment in MTV history. For better or worse, MTV created this reality TV juggernaut, and regardless of criticisms, it’s been compelling enough to grow into an unstoppable force. Unfortunately, I can’t speak that much to older MTV programming because while it helped me blossom into early stages of cultural awareness, I was far from the fullblown geek I am today. Or I was just unborn.

But let’s look at the now. My first impulse is to reach for music in The Channel Formerly Known As Music Television, and on today’s MTV there are a few things happening, albeit more indirectly. MTV often highlights songs that play during shows at the bottom of the screen; I think I first saw this around the “Laguna Beach” days so MTV could tell me Yellowcard was soundtracking this phenomena of “high school love forever/fuck you, LC, Stephen IS MINE.” Now, the tracklist system is used to showcase silliness on “Jersey Shore,” but also shoots some good looks to good bands. “Pants” did a solid job on this, using tunes from quality (Brooklyn-based, no less) acts like X-Ray Eyeballs and Frankie Rose. And the recent short-lived cartoon series “Good Vibes” featured our favorite band, Nashville punks Diarrhea Planet. But MTV’s push into post-broadband indie relevance isn’t all that new. “The VICE Guide To Everything” has a title that speaks for itself; and a couple years ago, “My Life As Liz” featured Band of Horses in a season climax and tied itself to SPIN by having a main character as an intern. It was pretty cheesily done, but Liz was a sort of precursor to many current and recent scripted MTV shows. But ok, does MTV suck right now or what?

JON: I think the answer is no. “Pants” may not have been what we’d hoped, and sure the network is home to tons of mediocre and straight-up awful programming (like most networks); but as far as I can tell, MTV continues to be what it’s always been: an outlet that caters to and somewhat represents the good ol’ youths. It’s just that instead of young adults, it seems like over the past decade or so their target audience has become tweens and teenagers (everyone’s favorite watchdog group, the Parents Television Council, pointed out that “Pants” was being targeted to kids as young as 12). So it makes total sense that MTV is now airing a show like “Awkward” (which I have not watched yet, but I hear is quite excellent), and is prepping a US version of the very well received British teen-angst sitcom, “The Inbetweeners” — they’ve obviously still got a vested interest in airing programs that the kids can connect with (which is probably why the uber-outlandish “Skins” remake bombed so hard). Plus, as you pointed out, it’s not like they’ve abandoned music, they’ve just adapted to the immediacy of the iTunes era where a sync on a show can absolutely break a band, just like a music video did back in the 90s. Plus, for the “but MTV used to do like hard hitting reporting” claim; it’s called MTV.com, they’ve got tons of coverage, interviews, music videos, and more — but you don’t read it because you think the brand is lame.

But let’s not forget the initial question: Did MTV disappoint another generation? Again, I’d say no. I’ve never had any sort of deep personal connection to the network that could be betrayed via “Teen Mom” or whatever — as far as I’m concerned MTV’s always had some great shows and just as many crappy ones. MTV may not be the voice of a generation, but these days I don’t think any one thing can. Maybe Facebook or Twitter, but those just let you become the voice of your own privately-selected generational movement. And I mean, isn’t that kind of what MTV always promised? These days you can want and have your MTV — it’s just that MTV is whatever you want it to be.

RJ: There’s definitely a gradient shift in viewer age, and it’s easy to see why that makes the programming appear shallow or horridly immature compared to the channel’s high times. If a slightly older and more politically and culturally aware demographic represents your channel’s target audience, more substance is implied and expected. If you’re now catering to 15-year-olds who need “Teen Mom” to really let them know what’s up, that substance seems… lacking. Or at least much harder to achieve. I don’t think the idea behind “Teen Mom” is necessarily trashy or exploitative, but when it devolves into a faux celebrity culture for the “stars” with dedicated TMZ coverage and viral news stories of assaults, any potential grace or insight just dissipates. Maybe those 15-year-olds aren’t watching “Teen Mom” for sociological reasons, and instead are just craving that television junk food and easy drama. But if so, that’s a wasted opportunity. I’d like to think the older MTV would’ve been able to approach a subject like this better. So maybe there is a slight disappointment in MTV here.

The Internet has definitely given us the ability to be our own generational movement, but I still think MTV has to shoulder some responsibility in the relative decline of its brand, content, and cultural role. I’m not really disappointed in MTV either because I never expected that much; but compared to Music Television, I can sometimes sense I’m missing something. Something important, something meaningful. And I’m not sure I’ll ever really get it. Sometimes I feel it’s a shame, but not always. It’s kind of like I’ve been “Punk’d,” but only if I cared a little bit more.

Jon Blistein and RJ Cubarrubia spend their afternoons at Billboard and have also written at places like RollingStone.com, The L Magazine, Impose and Nerve.com.

Search is just about retrieving information. Actually answering subjective questions requires a deep knowledge of the person doing the asking: Where you are, who your are friends, what your interests are, what you like and don’t like…. Google has forgotten why we loved it. It has degraded its premier product in service of promoting others. It has done devious things to ferret out information from its users that they do not willingly provide. It is too much focused on the future, and conversely too scared of current competition.

— This is a fantastic and understandable explanation and argument about what Google is, what it wants to be and what it shouldn’t be — but probably is.

by Lauren Kirchner

A little more than two years ago, Denmark’s absurdly well-funded public-television network DR spun off some of its children’s programming and launched a separate station just for kids. The new station was named “Ramasjang,” which means something like “hullabaloo” in Danish, and it’s amazing. I can’t get enough.

Ramasjang has everything you’d want in a children’s television network. It’s got a fake news program called “Gepetto News,” starring a talking purse named Babe and a whole cast of puppets that look like drug-addled Jim Henson bizarros. It’s got earnest dance lessons meant for preteens that somehow don’t make you cringe while you’re watching them. It’s got a show called “Nørd” (nerd), about the science of sports like tennis, archery and cycling. These alone would keep me hooked to the online archives — and I don’t even speak Danish. But I haven’t even gotten to the strangely hypnotic video loops of the sleeping, farting puppets, or the political dust-up over the network’s elderly transvestite character.

Ramasjang’s programming is educational, but not exclusively. It’s often just really, really weird. Fans of “Sesame Street” and its yep-yep-nope-nope Martians will appreciate the absurdity of this next clip. What seems at first to be a Flaming Lips video from the early nineties turns out to be Ramasjang’s hit music video “Mr.Calzone,” starring a hideous, singing pizza.

It’s also wholesome as heck. One of my favorite programs is “Min Funky Familie,” a School of Rock-type conceit where kids and their families get rock n’ roll makeovers and perform a song at the end. The kids are the lead singers, and the parents and older siblings back them up on drums, bass and guitar. And the songs are often in English — from ABBA’s “Mamma Mia” to AC/DC’s “It’s a Long Way to the Top” — so it’s extra entertaining. “My Funky Family” pulls on a precise combination of my heartstrings by mashing up kid-comeback, glamorous-makeover and the earnest faces of the parents who are doing this thing to support their kids even though they look pretty silly in the process. (Go to the DR website here for an archive of show clips.)

What the cast of Ramasjang lacks in ethnic diversity (about 90 percent of people living in Denmark today are of Danish descent), it makes up for in spunk and cheeriness. Here’s a TV spot for a show called “Victorious.” I don’t know what this one is about, but I do love a tiny blond hip-hopping child — always have, always will!

The DR website describes Ramasjang as “the channel that parents can safely dare send their children alone in the room to see — without having to be nervous if they see something that’s too creepy.” That (bizarre thing) being said, Ramasjang isn’t overly prudish or protective, either. The producers of the network aren’t afraid to stand up against criticism from conservative politicians; our own PBS should take note.

Last month, the Christian Democrat party in Denmark — which, true, is so far to the right that it has no representatives in Parliament at the moment — filed a complaint with DR about a segment of “Gepetto News” that its members found especially offensive. The show featured an old man (puppet) wearing women’s underwear. He comes home from work, takes off his clothes, and dances in front of a mirror while singing a song whose chorus roughly translates to “I feel most free when I wear French lingerie.” The group, which was outraged that a children’s program was being used for what was termed “propaganda,” argued that it was exposing children to confusing issues before they would be prepared to process them correctly.

DR rejected the criticism with a shrug. Channel editor Kirstine Vinderskov responded by saying that it was Ramasjang’s job to “celebrate the values of diversity and tolerance.” (The Transvestite Association of Denmark (TID) also weighed in; the group’s president Pernille Feline explained that the segment in question isn’t about sex, it’s about gender roles, which is a perfectly appropriate thing for children to explore. She dismissed the debate by saying “It is a fart in a horn lantern.” (Goofy translations courtesy of Google Chrome.)

Although I’ve since become a connoisseur of Ramasjang, my first introduction to it was accidental. I was flipping channels one night in a Copenhagen hotel room last fall, Carlsberg and stroopwafels in hand — and hoping for a rerun of “M*A*S*H,” as I’d enjoyed in many other Scandinavian spots along my trip. I landed on a program that baffled me. It wasn’t a show, because nothing happened, and it wasn’t a commercial, because it wouldn’t end. It was a series of shots of people and puppets sleeping, in a dimly lit room, with a grandfather clock tick-tocking soothingly in the background. All of the sleepers made comically loud sleep sounds — rolling around in bed, talking through their dreams, and, well, farting. Here’s a clip:

A few days later I happened to be interviewing two DR news reporters for another story, and so I asked them what in the world was up with the sleeping, farting puppets and humans. Sabine Matz and Michael Bech explained that the sleeping figures were all hosts of the shows that played on the network throughout the day. Instead of the network going black at night, it plays this sleep-themed loop, and there’s a countdown on the top of the screen, saying, for instance, “DR Ramasjang vi vågner om 10 timer og 5 minutter” (“DR Ramasjang will wake in 10 hours and 5 minutes”). The loop plays from 8:30 at night until 6 in the morning, when regular programming resumes.

“So the children know these guys, the puppets and the people,” said Michael. “The one thing is, it’s saving money for the channel, and it’s also so that the parents can tell their children, ‘See, you have to go to bed now; all the others are sleeping.’” Sabine told me that her five-year-old loved the network, and that it had won many awards in Denmark.

I told them that in the U.S., no channels tend to go black at night — not anymore, at least — and that when they run out of original programming in the odd hours, they just play reruns or infomercials. Then Michael said the most obvious thing in the world. “Children shouldn’t be watching television in the middle of the night,” he said. “We are supposed to say, don’t switch it on — when it’s bedtime, it is not TV time.”

That’s what I love most about Ramasjang, and why I think it so perfectly captures a particularly Scandinavian ethos — socially liberal, but simultaneously strict on matters of public health and well-being. It’s public television that isn’t afraid to be really weird, and it doesn’t buckle to hysterics from hyper-conservatives. Yet at the end of the day, it takes the somewhat radical step of telling its audience to turn it off.

Lauren Kirchner is a freelance journalist based in Brooklyn who has lately learned to love pickled herring.

The amazing Brazilian musician Jorge Ben Jor turns 70 today. Put some headphones on and enjoy.

by Mark Bibbins, Editor

A Landscape

I am away thinking
A false situation:

Making “work” out of mountains
When I am not working.

The Oracles are dumm.
Why are they so dumb?

Rainy day, ugly little room.
I will make the mountains hurt.

How will you do that? How ill you
Do so? The oracles talk a lot

Of shit, like any
Body, make your own

Sense,
Mount harness.

Never Mind

The terms given you were: Breathe. That starts it.
Then, do as you’re told, to please them
and don’t, to discover your mind.
Then you are imperfect
child, a wanton.
Whence came this agon? Snot and tears,
hot face, and wretched powerless,
except to cause annoy. So cause annoy.

Catherine Wagner’s latest book is My New Job (Fence 2009). City Lights will publish her fourth book, Nervous Device, in 2012. She lives in Oxford, Ohio, and teaches at Miami University. Her PennSound page is here.

You are not going to BELIEVE how many more poems we have for you right here in The Poetry Section’s archive. It is, like, all the poems.

You may contact the editor at poems@theawl.com.

There is a new issue of The Baffler which you should totally get! Hell, subscribe even.

Mr. Romney loves guessing the ages and ethnicities of voters — often incorrectly. Whenever Mr. Romney bends down to chat with a little kid, the whole press corps giddily inches forward, waiting for the inevitable moment when he asks a boy who is clearly 4 or 5, “How old are you? 9? 10?” (His favorite guess for nationality is French-Canadian, which was a reasonably safe bet in New Hampshire, but became more precarious in more recent primary states, like Florida and Ohio.)

— It’s almost worth subscribing to the New York Times just for their “story behind the story” emails for subscribers. The one that went out this morning, by Ashley Parker, from inside the Mitt Romney bubble, was pretty great. (“For the record, Mr. Romney’s laugh often sounds like someone stating the sounds of laughter, a staccato ‘Ha. Ha. Ha.’”) Of course then these are the kinds of things you just also want to read in the paper.