What was new journalism

Wiktionary 0. Freebase 4. How to pronounce new journalism? Alex US English. David US English. Mark US English. Daniel British. Libby British.

Mia British. Karen Australian. Hayley Australian. Natasha Australian. Veena Indian. Priya Indian. Neerja Indian. Zira US English. Oliver British. Wendy British. There is no getting around the point, I think, that a number of writers in the last dozen years have been exerting a steady and often a self-dramatizing push at the already-pushed boundaries of conventional journalism. Dan Wakefield in The Atlantic. And on the other hand, that anyone who feels a need to assert that the work, especially the whole work, of these men composes a new art form, and a total blessing, is by and large talking through his hat.

By Nicholas Von Hoffman. Consider the mythic hotel fire we were talking about. Instead, there are attempts to catch the heat of the flames, the feel of the fire. A stranger passes by, says something to another stranger, both disappear. Rapid motion. For those who do want to, the standard newspaper will give you the traditional facts: the number of people in the hotel, the number of people killed, who owns the hotel, etc.

The standard newspaper considers these facts important, because apparently the standard newspaper for the last seventy-five years or more has considered these facts important. Aurelio, and has been discussed privately with leaders of blacks and Jews and with high-ranking officials. The plan would call for a scaling-down of the Forest Hills project by about a third and the revival of the project for the Lindenwood section of Queens that was recently killed by the Board of Estimate.

The voice speaks too thin a language. If then the merit of New Journalism is that it affords us the possibility of a wider view of the world, a glimpse of the variousness and disorder of life, its demerits, I think, are that these possibilities are so seldom realized, or at such cost to the reality-mechanism of the reader. For instance, in the matter of our hotel fire; there is no need, it seems to me, for a journalist today to relate all the traditional facts especially since most of them, in this sort of story, are basically concerned with Property ; but if he is to tell it as a real story, an account of an event that actually happened, I think there is a very deep requirement on the part of the reader usually not expressed, or not expressed at the time that the objects in the account be real objects.

If the fire took place at the Hotel Edgewater, probably one ought to know that much, and certainly not be told that it was the Hotel Bridgewater. The Government. None of these contribute much anymore to informing us of the actual objects in the actual room we move about in.

By no means all New Journalism is careless. Talese, for example, seems to be remarkably meticulous to detail. There are other examples, although not, I suspect, all that many. A careful writer. There are probably few careful writers around anymore. And few careful editors. Few careful generals. Few careful stockbrokers.

Few careful readers. Relationships seem to break apart … carelessly. Wars are waged … carelessly. Harmful drugs are put on the market … carelessly. Sex clubs. The Pill. The sexuality of Kennedy politics. The new dark Grove Press best sellers. The sexual emancipation of women. Kaffeeklatsches about the clitoral orgasm. Touch therapy.

Everybody it seemed committed to being sexy, or at any rate aware of it, or at any rate trying to deal with it. Since then, some of the stridency has quieted down a bit. Sex in writing, for instance, seems to be less insistent and obligatory. Fashion magazines have started muttering about a Return to Elegance, whatever that may mean. Critics of the style argue that immersion in the subject matter made it impossible for the writer to report objectively on events.

Unlike traditional journalism, which aims for objectivity and reporting the facts without subjective interpretations, New Journalism was characterized by its subjectivity.

According to proponents of the movement, however, it was just this combination of a strong point of view with scrupulously researched facts that gave this form of journalism its power. Meg Kramer.