But it doesn’t have to be—if you watch Thirty-Four Fourteen, a sublimely ridiculous five-minute movie by those sly, foxy goofs at the Variety Shac (that’s Chelsea Peretti, Heather Lawless, Andrea Rosen, and Shonali Bhowmik) while at work, that is. Boycotting Starbucks? Hating the faceless machine that is your boss? Under pressure? Wearing blouses? This film is for you.

And if you like this (and if you’ve ever worked somewhere, you will), consider Scott Prendergast’s equally absurd and initially office-gibberish-tweaking short film The Delicious, of which I am very fond. It, too, is online.

Oh, and what does this have to do with The New Yorker? As with so much in life, happily, it’s basically one degree of separation.

From the Observer, thoughts on the wild new lingo that’s taking the indiesphere by storm. Lynsey Hanley writes, “I’ve found myself scratching my head at some of the words and phrases used by bloggers to describe things that once would simply have been described as either ‘good’ or ‘bad’. It’s brilliant fun and completely baffling at the same time.” Just “good” or “bad”? I think, say, Arthur Danto, Greil Marcus, Pauline Kael, John Lahr, et al. might have another point of view. Anyway, continues Hanley:

You could never get away with this level of obtuseness on such an august title as the New Yorker, which prides itself on bringing the same sort of acts championed by Pitchfork – Dizzee Rascal, MIA and Lady Sovereign, among others – to the attention of doughty Manhattan [what means this “other four boroughs”?] intellectuals. In print, the magazine’s pop critic, Sasha Frere-Jones, can explain the cultural significance of East End rap collective Roll Deep in terms that your parents would understand, but uses his website, sashafrerejones.com, as an outlet for a style of writing which, though utterly infectious in its enthusiasm, is also often impossible to follow.

He drops street slang and music-insider references into his musings, calling, for instance, Burt Bacharach’s new album ‘dire bougie make-out piffle’ and, later in the same entry, referring to a promotional video by ‘smooth jazz footsoldier’ Brian Cuthbertson, complains that ‘dude is a turbochoad’ who speaks in ‘marketing pre-cum’. Come again?

‘Nobody’s paid to read my blog; nobody has to sit through it to get to The Sopranos,’ says Frere-Jones of his idiosyncratic blogging style, ‘so if I sometimes write in an unfiltered way, it isn’t likely aimed at other critics, but is simply a reflection of how I think when no one is watching.’

Asked if he hopes one day to transfer some of that unfiltered quality into his print journalism, Frere-Jones quips: ‘I hope to use the jaculation “Christ on a plastic dolphin!” in the New Yorker soon.’ Don’t we all, dude.

I don’t think Frere-Jones’ blog writing is like anything else I read online, or anywhere. I find it occasionally elusive (I skipped half a decade of pop music when I learned to lindy hop), but it’s fun to see people in different writing modes—memo to co-Eyebeam panelists, there are different writing modes—and if you get really lost, there are pictures.

The Yale Daily News reports on a talk by New Yorker visual editor Elizabeth Biondi:

Biondi discussed her passion for aesthetics before an audience of about 45 students and faculty at an Ezra Stiles College Master’s Tea on Wednesday. Biondi, who has worked with the New Yorker for nine years, said that even though she is not a photographer or illustrator herself, she enjoys her position as visual editor because it gives her the power to organize images in a text-heavy publication. During the tea, Biondi presented a series of slides and discussed the slow introduction of photography to the New Yorker magazine, which once only featured illustration.
…
The New Yorker does not publish photos that are digitally enhanced, Biondi said.

“Our photography is based on content,” Biondi said. “We visualize our stories … Pictures are never arbitrary. They are always based on fact.”

Some audience members asked Biondi about how she chooses images to match with essays. Biondi said essays about abstract ideas or concepts are better supplemented with illustrations.

“Not everything lends itself to photography,” she said.
…
Sochie Nnaemeka ’09 said she was moved by Biondi’s presentation [and] was impressed that Biondi has accomplished so much without a formal education in her field.

“It kind of makes you question, what are we doing here?” Nnaemeka said.

Biondi said that while she has worked at a number of different publications ranging from glamour magazines to other literary magazines, she does not intend to leave the New Yorker.

And here’s Biondi on CNN last year, talking about her experience chairing the World Press Photo Awards:

BIONDI: This [by Jean-Marc Bouju of The Associated Press] is the one we pulled out in the end, and that stayed with us. You know, judging is sort of a long process. You look at a lot of things, and then you narrow it down, and eventually you come up, well, hopefully, with a photo that everyone in the jury is excited about and believes in.

And this one really touched us, because, obviously, we looked at a lot pictures from Iraq, and there were a lot of pictures that showed violence, and death and killing. And this one here, it’s a father, it’s a prisoner of war with his son that he had to be put in a detention camp and put on the hood. And you know, when you look at this, you can imagine what he feels like. He’s holding his son, and he’s comforting his son, and the military actually allowed him to be with his child, and in the beginning his hands were bound, and now they’re unbounded, so there was some humanity on all sides.

But we were all touched how this father cares for his child, and you know, war turns life upside down. More.

And here’s a gallery of 50 years of World Press Photo Award winners. Amazing collection.