
When Not to Translate - wellokthen
http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2016/11/07/decameron-when-not-to-translate/
======
cefstat
Apparently, the link should have been to
[http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2016/11/07/decameron-when-
not-t...](http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2016/11/07/decameron-when-not-to-
translate/)

~~~
dang
Whoops, that must have been a mistake on my part earlier, changing the url and
pasting the wrong one (which I was checking earlier because someone posted it
here). Sorry, and thanks.

Since this thread is already so off-topic, perhaps we'll ask the submitter to
resubmit.

------
Kiro
I don't understand the title given here. How is it related to the article?

------
Normal_gaussian
I am not American.

The New Yorker has popped up on my radar a few times, yet I have largely
ignored it. I had assumed it was just another paper, but it appears that it is
at least partly satirical. Clicking around I found a mix of opinionated satire
and highly opinionated fluff pieces. It feels like a really low effort version
of Private Eye.

I am curious. Is that the nature of The New Yorker? Or is it just the
obsession over the election that is making it look that way?

~~~
robterrell
It's not a satirical magazine, no. But Borowitz is one of the frequent
satirical contributors to the magazine. Aside from this and the NYC-centric
listings of events, it's a worthwhile read. Their long-form journalism is
generally excellent.

------
techer
Don't bother reading this

~~~
techer
URL change means it's readable now --> vaguely interesting but short.

