这可能是《经济学人》最好玩儿的板块
Letters, an often overlooked section, is as readable and refreshing as the newspaper's other sections, if not more so
"Don't judge a book by its cover," admonishes an old saying. Yet it is safe to judge a newspaper by the quality of the mail from its readers. The Economist is a good case in point. The traits--diversity, contentiousness, humor, erudition, and nicety--of published letters say as much about the caliber of readers as this 175-year-old British publication.
Deciding which letters to publish and which not is itself a matter of attitude. The Economist editors review mountains of mail before picking the ones that go to press. As Letters occupies only one page per issue, editorial judgment is the key. Its selection of letters is compatible with its overall editorial philosophy, as The Economist proudly declares on its print copies and website, "to take part in 'a severe contest between intelligence, which presses forward, and an unworthy, timid ignorance obstructing our progress.'" (This is also the spiritual torch that lit and led The Economist Open Future Initiative earlier in the past months in commemoration of its 175th anniversary.)
To say the least, Letters serves a dual purpose: to engage and to influence readers. Often the letters contradict or complement the views expressed in previous issues, sharing novel perspectives and unique experiences (often only available to a few), shedding light on neglected facts and details (either important or amusing), and pointing out glaring mistakes (albeit occasionally; pictured). While engaging readers, this section works on them as well, exposing them to a more complicated world, challenging them to be critical thinkers, and making them loyal readers who are more likely to renew their subscription or refer to friends.
a careless mistake
caught by a careful eye
The most rigorously contended almost always concerns politics. As The Economist covers much local politics and economics news and is relentlessly critical, it attracts objection, not unwanted though, in particular from spokespeople for foreign ministries and embassies. Such responses (pictured) suggest that foreign governments are close readers of The Economist and are always ready to stand their ground.
🇯🇵
🇪🇬
🇨🇳
🇸🇬
This is welcoming for at least three reasons. First, The Economist takes these ripostes as an opportunity to foster its values: respecting opposing views, displaying intellectual probity, and embracing diversity. In so doing, its position as a leading global newspaper will undoubtedly be strengthened. Second, tolerance of competing opinions implies trust in readers: they are free to think on their own and make informed and sound judgments. Third, diversity of the readers is a boost to its already distinctive and strong branding. Done right, the division can be a boon.
a quote "gone wrong"
Although The Economist is widely celebrated for its clarity of writing and sharpness of analysis, some readers find they can do a better job making elusive topics more accessible. A physics professor (pictured), for example, believed his knowledge and diction could help readers get the effects of methane with more ease and fun, so he took the trouble (and apparently the joy too) to pen a couple of didactic and soothing paragraphs. The Economist gracefully acknowledged his offering--and in a way, admitting its own imperfections--by putting Mr. Pierrehumbert's words to print.
not all science is dry
Yet you don't have to be an Oxford don to make your voice heard. The section is teeming with inspiring, well-written, witty, warm-hearted words from ordinary men and women across the world. One letter stood out. After the atrocious Paris terrorist attack in November of 2015, a Parisian turned in a thoughtful note (pictured). As a victim, he empathized and sympathized with people in perpetually unstable and dangerous foreign lands. Further, he was able to think cool-headedly about the consequences of being self-centered and uncaring. He made his point so simply yet convincingly that the message "Paris is only part of the perpetual pain" still rings in my ears to this day. The editor must have felt the same way as I did when he or she read the letter, hence its publication.
no pain no gain
Another memorable reading is a rare tale told by a Londoner. He wrote to share the amazing story of a friend and lifelong reader of The Economist. The relationship between The Economist and this reader must come as a reassurance to the entire The Economist team that their cause is worth the effort in the face of rising populism and protectionism across the West. Liberalism shall prevail. And decades-long subscribers must be able to relate to the story.
once upon a time...
What The Economist is particularly pleased with seems to be snappy and witty remarks (pictured), which mark the ending of Letters. They can be original or borrowed. They grace Letters because they convey the message in a delightfully effective way and can help raise a laugh as readers finish Letters and move onto other sections.
terrified, mortified, petrified,
stupefied, and Trumpified
The name Letters may be commonplace and unassuming, but when it comes to defending the bastion of liberalism and advocating universal values that touch and win the hearts and minds hungrily in pursuit of freedom, liberty, and egalitarianism, it is a section meriting attention. Read it and enjoy!
------------------------------------
P.S. Over the past three weeks, over 400 English learners have joined Phenomenal English. It is arguably the most driven group of English learners in the country. Here is what they say about the experience. Click and explore it for yourself.
孟庆伟 Justin
现象级英语联合创始人
《经济学人》11 年研究者
雅思写作 8 分，口语 8 分
Banner: The Economist.
Originally written in February of 2017, this article has recently been rewritten and expanded.
More posts about The Economist: