Cook's Illustrated letter from the editor: Henry?
I like the magazine a lot but have to wonder what gets into Mr. Kimball with his personal essays. Enough already with the oldtimey stuff! I am old enough to have read the comic strip Henry (subject of this issue's reminiscence) as a child and remember it being unbelievably, mindbendingly, unremittingly dull. Even duller than Little Lulu. Even then it seemed a relic of the far distant past. I know the magazine is his to do with as he wishes but why not put more food content and less maundering on about his idealized past in it?
Henry -- was that the bald-headed kid?
There were some pretty lame classic strips. The artwork was better then -- simpler and clearer.
There was a great profile of Chris Kimball in the Boston Globe Sunday magazine a while back that touched on the fact that everyone hates his essays. His quote was something along the lines of "It's my f---ing magazine and I'll do whatever I want with it." Which...fair enough!
I actually really like the essays, in large part BECAUSE they're such an odd, quirky thing to put in the magazine, plus he's not a bad writer.
He's an odd duck. Don't see him around the Village as much these days and yes he wears a bow tie. My take is that he's modeling himself on such characters as Henry Beetle Hough, who wrote a folksy (better) column for a few generations for the (Martha's) Vineyard Gazette.
One of the reasons I cancelled my subscription. Dull blather about himself, his precious offspring, and religion.
And I love a man (NOT HIM) in a bow tie.