the essay as form pdf

The Essay as Form

Cite this chapter.

• Elena Gualtieri  

118 Accesses

The interest in questions of marginality that characterises Woolf’s focus on eccentrics, obscure and Anon also marks her reading of the history of the essay as a genre. Woolf wrote extensively both on the essay and on specific essayists throughout her career, starting in 1905 with the ‘Decay of Essay-writing’ and up to her essay on De Quincey published in the second Common Reader (1932). Her approach to the history and to the nature of the genre was always marked by an attempt to identify within what she saw as a male tradition an alternative line of descent to which she could affiliate herself. This she outlined by stressing the connection between the essay and autobiography, but a type of autobiography which she insisted was essentially non-narrative and presented the self as a conglomeration of moments of perception and reflection. In reading the essay as an autobiographical genre Woolf thus defined a form of writing that could bring together criticism and the private experience of reading in an intimate kind of historiography that allowed her to speak of and through the gaps which narrative sequence had conspired to close off.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Unable to display preview.  Download preview PDF.

For a study of the notion of the moment in Woolf’s work see Jane Goldman, The Feminist Aesthetics of Virginia Woolf (1998), pp. 25–38.

Google Scholar  

Samuel Johnson, The Lives of the English Poets (1779–81), p. 441.

For an in-depth analysis of the intertextual relation between Woolf and Johnson see Beth Carole Rosenberg, Virginia Woolf and Samuel Johnson (1995), which focuses on the dialogic character of the idea of the common reader.

Download references

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 2000 Elena Gualtieri

About this chapter

Gualtieri, E. (2000). The Essay as Form. In: Virginia Woolf’s Essays. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230599147_3

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230599147_3

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, London

Print ISBN : 978-1-349-41164-1

Online ISBN : 978-0-230-59914-7

eBook Packages : Palgrave Literature & Performing Arts Collection Literature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

UC San Diego

The Theory of the Essay: Lukács, Adorno, and Benjamin

• Kauffmann, R. Lane
• Advisor(s): Jameson, Fredric R. ;
• Kirkpatrick, Susan

This study treats three German philosopher-critics – Georg Lukacs, Theodor W. Adorno, and Walter Benjamin – whose theories of the essay, considered together, are the most comprehensive attempt yet made to define the essay as a cognitive and philosophical form. The introduction envisages a descriptive-historical poetics of the essay as a methodological standard by which to evaluate the theories just mentioned. The aim of such a poetics would be to elucidate the ways in which particular cognitive projects are actualized in essays through specific literary-discursive devices.The central chapters offer a close analysis of the ideas of Lukacs, Adorno, and Benjamin on the essay, situating each theory in its historical and intellectual context. (The two main documents here are Lukacs' 1910 essay on the essay in his Soul and Form, and Adorno's 1958 "The Essay as Form," in his Notes on Literature. Benjamin left no explicit theory of the essay; his ideas on philosophical method and form – ideas which strongly influenced Adorno – are culled from his study on the baroque Trauerspiel and from his later essays.) These theories are compared with respect to such themes as the historical development of the essay, its dominant aesthetic and philosophical functions (with particular regard to whether the essay is "systematic" or "fragmentary" in nature), and the role of the subject in the act of cognition which is embodied in the essay form. Each theory reflects its author's particular version of Marxist dialectics, his distinct view of the interrelations between aesthetics, cognition, and social reality. Thus, for example, the young Lukacs sees the modern essay as an alienated, fragmentary form which strives for an ideal "system" (this ideal being exemplified by the unity and "immediacy" of Plato's essay-dialogues). The nostalgic longing of Soul and Form reappears in the totalizing Marxism of Lukacs' History and Class Consciousness (1923). For Adorno, by contrast, the essay registers a utopian protest against such totalizing systems. Adorno considers the essay to be the formal enactment of "negative dialectics" (as he named his philosophy); fragmentation is its basic principle.Whereas Adorno's theory is contrasted to that of Lukacs, his practice of the essay is juxtaposed to Benjamin's experiments with the form. The now famous aesthetic dispute between Adorno and Benjamin of the thirties is re-examined in terms of the rhetorical strategies evidenced in their critical writings. It is argued that Benjamin was more attentive than Adorno to the cognitive responses of readers, and that in some ways his essays came closer to satisfying the normative aims of "negative dialectics" than did the essays of Adorno himself.Each of these theories is a "cognitive utopia," a kind of philosophical wish-fulfillment, in that each theorist projects his own ideal Essay as the solution to the most basic problems of modern culture and society. While none of these theories gives an entirely satisfactory historical account of the essay genre, they still serve as interpretive master keys to the essays of the theorists themselves.Or perhaps as clues for a theory of the modern critical essay. Whatever their differences, these thinkers are alike in seeing the essay as a function of the cognitive experience of a writing subject. Thus they belong to a familiar anthropology of discourse which in recent years has been sharply challenged by "poststructuralist" theories. The poststructuralists-among them Derrida, Foucault, Lyotard, and Barthes – reject the notion of a controlling subject of discourse in favor of the "free play" of the language of the text. The concluding chapter imagines a confrontation between Marxist utopias of cognition and poststructuralist utopias of language – two alternative poetics for the modern critical essay.

Enter the password to open this PDF file:

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Godard and the Essay Film: A Form That Thinks

Godard and the Essay Film offers a history and analysis of the essay film, one of the most significant forms of intellectual filmmaking since the end of World War II. War-ner incisively reconsiders the defining traits and legacies of this still-evolving genre through a groundbreaking examination of the vast and formidable oeuvre of Jean-Luc Godard. The essay film has often been understood by scholars as an eccentric development within documentary, but Warner shows how an essayistic process of thinking can materialize just as potently within narrative fiction films, through self-critical investigations into the aesthetic , political, and philosophical resources of the medium. Studying examples by Godard and other directors, such as Orson Welles, Chris Marker, Agnès Varda, and Harun Farocki, Warner elaborates a fresh account of essayistic reflection that turns on the imaginative, constructive role of the viewer. Through fine-grained analyses, this book contributes the most nuanced description yet of the relational interface between viewer and screen in the context of the essay film. Shedding new light on Godard's work, from the 1960s to the 2010s, in film, television, video, and digital stereoscopy, Warner distills an understanding of essayistic cinema as a shared exercise of critical rumination and perceptual discovery. http://www.nupress.northwestern.edu/content/godard-and-essay-film

Related Papers

Quarterly Review of Film and Video

Lourdes Monterrubio Ibáñez

The beginning of Jean-Luc Godard’s essayistic practice is intrinsically linked to the use of the diptych device. Thus, a previous work is the cause of an essay film that aims to reflect on the cinematic practice carried out. This article aims to analyse the use, function, and evolution of this device in the beginning and consolidation of the Godardian essay film. While Camera-eye (1967) offers a prefiguration of this new filmic form in relation to La Chinoise (1967), Letter to Jane (1972) results in its first realisation concerning a previous fiction, Tout va bien (1972), in order to continue the reflection on the intellectuals’ role in revolution. Thanks to the decisive arrival of video technology, essential for the essay film practice, Ici et ailleurs (1976) takes up the material of the never released film Jusqu'à la Victoire to generate self-criticism in militant practice. Finally, with Scénario du film Passion (1982), Godard offers a new subsequent essay film that generates both temporalities, before and after the creation, in order to embody an essential self-portrait of the audiovisual essayist. This series of diptych works reveals a hypertextual audiovisual thinking process that rethinks cinematic practice.

The present article aims to show how the consolidation of the cinematic form of the essay film in Jean-Luc Godard’s work is a consequence of the evolution of his experience in the cinéma militant. This militant cinema emerges from the political and social circumstances that caused May 68 and in the case of the filmmaker is materialized through his participation in the Dziga Vertov Group. The defining elements of the group’s filmic experience –the supremacy of montage, the dialectics between images and sounds and the relevance of the spectator as an active part of a dialogical practice– are the same that bring about the essayistic form when the film is enunciated from the author’s subjectivity. With the analysis of Letter to Jane this paper tries to demonstrate how the irruption of subjectivity in the revolutionary cinematic practice allows the appearance of self-reflexivity and the thinking process that define the cinematic essay. RESUMEN El presente artículo pretende mostrar cómo la consolidación de la forma cinematográfica del film-ensayo en la obra de Jean-Luc Godard es consecuencia de la evolución de su experiencia en el cinéma militant. Un cine militante que surge de las circunstancias político-sociales que dieron lugar a mayo del 68 y que en el caso del cineasta se materializa mediante su participación en el Grupo Dziga Vertov. Los elementos definitorios de la experiencia fílmica del grupo –la primacía del montaje, la dialéctica entre imágenes y sonidos y la relevancia del espectador como parte activa de una práctica dialogística– son los mismos que propician la forma ensayística cuando la obra se enuncia desde la subjetividad del autor. Con el análisis de Letter to Jane pretendemos mostrar cómo la irrupción de la subjetividad en la práctica cinematográfica revolucionaria posibilita la aparición de la auto-reflexión y del proceso de pensamiento definitorios del ensayo cinematográfico.

The Essay Film: Dialogue, Politics, Utopia, ed. Caroline Eades and Elizabeth Papazian, 28-67. London: Wallflower, 2016.

Rick Warner

Adaptation 6, no. 1 (2013): 1-24.

Though it stubbornly resists classification, the essay in cinema still tends to be approached as a genre or quasi-genre constituted through recurring structural traits. This article develops an alternative view by stressing the adaptive principles of the form, specifically as they concern citation, self-portraiture, and an implicit running dialogue with a spectator who potentially shares in the intellectual labor of montage. I offer a pointed discussion of the Essais of Montaigne in order to draw attention to the activity of essaying over time, in and across multiple works. Then, while extending this conception to several of the cinema's most prolific essayists, I focus on how Jean-Luc Godard takes up a Montaignian sense of the practice in his late endeavors of self-portrayal, most notably in his film JLG/JLG: Autoportrait in December and in his video series Histoire(s) du cinéma. Ultimately I argue that what distinguishes the most capable essayists working with sounds and images is a " pedagogical " mission to pass on to the spectator not simply ideas and arguments but a particular way of seeing, a means of investigation to be incisively replayed and re-tested.

The Global Auteur: The Politics of Authorship in 21st Century Cinema, ed. Seung-hoon Jeong and Jeremi Szaniawski, 61-78. New York: Bloomsbury, 2016.

Columbia University Press

Hunter Vaughan

Hunter Vaughan interweaves phenomenology and semiotics to analyze cinema's ability to challenge conventional modes of thought. Merging Maurice Merleau-Ponty's phenomenology of perception with Gilles Deleuze's image-philosophy, Vaughan applies a rich theoretical framework to a comparative analysis of Jean-Luc Godard's films, which critique the audio-visual illusion of empirical observation (objectivity), and the cinema of Alain Resnais, in which the sound-image generates innovative portrayals of individual experience (subjectivity). Both filmmakers radically upend conventional film practices and challenge philosophical traditions to alter our understanding of the self, the world, and the relationship between the two. Films discussed in detail include Godard's Vivre sa vie (1962), Contempt (1963), and 2 or 3 Things I Know About Her (1967); and Resnais's Hiroshima, mon amour (1959), Last Year at Marienbad (1961), and The War Is Over (1966). Situating the formative works of these filmmakers within a broader philosophical context, Vaughan pioneers a phenomenological film semiotics linking two disparate methodologies to the mirrored achievements of two seemingly irreconcilable artists.

Critical Quarterly

Marcia Landy

The Essay Film: Dialogue, Politics, Utopia, co-edited by Elizabeth A Papazian and Caroline Eades. London: Wallflower Press, November 2016 (ISBN: 9780231176958 (pbk), 9780231176941 (hbk), 9780231851039 (e-book).

Elizabeth A Papazian , Caroline Eades

With its increasing presence in a continuously evolving media environment, the essay film as a visual form raises new questions about the construction of the subject, its relationship to the world, and the aesthetic possibilities of cinema. In this volume, authors specializing in various national cinemas (Cuban, French, German, Israeli, Italian, Lebanese, Polish, Russian, American) and critical approaches (historical, aesthetic, postcolonial, feminist, philosophical) explore the essay film and its consequences for the theory of cinema while building on and challenging existing theories. Taking as a guiding principle the essay form's dialogic, fluid nature, the volume examines the potential of the essayistic to question, investigate, and reflect on all forms of cinema—fiction film, popular cinema, and documentary, video installation, and digital essay. Includes contributions by Luka Arsenjuk, Martine Beugnet, Luca Caminati, Timothy Corrigan, Oliver Gaycken, Anne Eakin-Moss, Ernesto Livon-Grosman, Laura U. Marks, Laura Rascaroli, Mauro Resmini, and Eric Zakim.

Journal of Film and Video

This article argues that video technology plays a decisive role in Godard’s double movement toward the “cinematic” and the “post-cinematic” as demonstrated in his videographic essay Histoire(s) du Cinéma. It claims that Godard’s videographic refashioning of cinema in the technical, ontological, and philosophical manners necessarily involves bringing cinema to its limits. As this article will discuss in the ensuing two parts, video’s material and technical elements transform the methods of cinematic montage and the ontological status of the films extracted from disparate sources extensively. As a result, video in Histoire(s) ultimately serves both as a tool for the postcinematic expansion of montage and as a “synthesizer” of discrete images (films, paintings, photographs) and soundtracks whose affiliated media are originally distinct from each other.

RELATED PAPERS

jerson coello

Ferdy Mujahid

Ideas Inspired by the Qur'ān

Mont Redmond

Jennifer Gonzaga

Yonsei Medical Journal

Chang-hee Suh

Sylwia Opozda-Suder

Gayana (Concepción)

Paola Villalobos González

Procedia Economics and Finance

Manoj Hudnurkar

Luciana Martinez

Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance

Raymond Kim

Revista de lenguas para fines específicos

Journal Revista de lenguas para fines específicos

Eating Behaviors

Giovanni M Ruggiero

atp magazin

Alexander Fay

Diversity and Distributions

Allen Allison

Research, Society and Development

Pahlevi Augusto De Souza

Sri Djuniati

UCI毕业证书 加州大学尔湾分校学位证

Womens Studies International Forum

Aitemad Muhanna

David José Gonçalves Ramos

International Journal of Health Sciences and Research

JEMIMAH JOHN DAVID

Anticancer research

Rosario Sanguedolce

Philosophy & Rhetoric

Savannah Downing

Maruxa Álvarez

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Official websites use .gov

A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS

A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

From August 1 Onward: Required Documents for Bringing a Dog into the United States

The documents on this website are specific to the importation of dogs under CDC’s updated dog and cat regulation, effective August 1, 2024. All suspension rules remain in effect through July 31, 2024. If your dog is entering the United States before August 1, 2024, you must follow the rules of the temporary suspension. Please find relevant information (and use the DogBot) at What Your Dog Needs to Enter the United States . On August 1, the new requirements become effective.

The documents required depend upon where your dog has been vaccinated for rabies, and what countries they have been in during the six months before traveling to the United States.

Required documents for dogs with a current rabies vaccination administered in the United States that have been in a high-risk country for dog rabies within the 6 months before entry:

• The CDC Dog Import Form will be accessible beginning July 15, 2024. Check back at that time for travel occurring on or after August 1, 2024.
• The Certification of U.S.-issued Rabies Vaccination form must be completed by a U.S.-accredited veterinarian before the dog leaves the United States. U.S.-accredited veterinarians can access the form and its instructions at Veterinary Export Health Certification System (VEHCS) Help Page
• Instructions for veterinarians are available here: Instructions to complete the Certification of U.S.-issued Rabies Vaccination Form [PDF – 4 pages] .
• This document can be shown instead of the  Certification of U.S.-issued Rabies Vaccination  form.
• The rabies vaccination must be valid (not expired) on the date of return or the form will be invalid.

Required documents for dogs that departed the United States and have been only in dog rabies-free or low-risk countries during the 6 months before entry:

AND one of the following:

• The Certification of U.S.-issued Rabies Vaccination form must be completed by a U.S.-accredited veterinarian before the dog leaves the Unites States. U.S.-accredited veterinarians can access the form and its instructions at Veterinary Export Health Certification System (VEHCS) Help Page
• Lists the destination as the dog rabies-free or low-risk country from which the dog is returning (the form will only be valid for 30 days if it does not contain rabies vaccination information) (the form will only be valid for 30 days if it does not contain rabies vaccination information), or
• Documents a valid (unexpired) rabies vaccination administered in the United States (the form will be valid for the duration of the rabies vaccination (1 or 3 years)).

Required forms for dogs that have been in a country at high-risk for dog rabies within the 6 months before entry (and do not have Certification of U.S.-Issued Rabies Vaccination form)

• Certification of Foreign Rabies Vaccination and Microchip form [PDF – 2 pages] Fillable Adobe PDF forms don’t function properly within web browsers (Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome, etc). You should download fillable PDFs and complete them using Adobe Reader or Adobe Acrobat.
• Instructions to complete the Certification of Foreign Rabies Vaccination and Microchip form [PDF – 2 pages]
• For information on CDC-registered animal facilities, see: CDC-registered animal care facilities .

Optional, in addition to above forms, to avoid 28-day quarantine at a CDC-registered animal care facility:

• For information on CDC-approved laboratories, see: Approved Rabies Serology Laboratories for Testing Dogs .

Required documents for dogs that have been ONLY in countries that are dog rabies-free or low-risk during the 6 months before entry (and do not have Certification of U.S.-Issued Rabies Vaccination form or USDA-endorsed export health certificate)

• Certification of Dog Arriving from DMRVV-free or Low-Risk Country into the United States form
• Certification of Dog Arriving from DMRVV-free or Low-Risk Country into the United States form [PDF – 2 pages] Fillable Adobe PDF forms don’t function properly within web browsers (Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome, etc). You should download fillable PDFs and complete them using Adobe Reader or Adobe Acrobat.
• Instructions to complete the Certification of Dog Arriving from DRMVV-free or Low-Risk Country into the United States form [PDF – 2 pages]
• Veterinary records (including microchip number) for the previous 6 months
• Certification of Foreign Rabies Vaccination and Microchip form
• Valid rabies serology titer OR veterinary records (including microchip number) for the previous 6 months
• Contact your local veterinarian in the country of export for assistance obtaining this form.
• Travelers' Health
• Healthy Pets Healthy People
• Southern Border Health and Migration
• Port Health
• Division of Global Migration Health

To receive email updates about this page, enter your email address:

Exit Notification / Disclaimer Policy

• The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) cannot attest to the accuracy of a non-federal website.
• Linking to a non-federal website does not constitute an endorsement by CDC or any of its employees of the sponsors or the information and products presented on the website.
• You will be subject to the destination website's privacy policy when you follow the link.
• CDC is not responsible for Section 508 compliance (accessibility) on other federal or private website.

• Architecture and Design
• Asian and Pacific Studies
• Business and Economics
• Classical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies
• Computer Sciences
• Cultural Studies
• Engineering
• General Interest
• Geosciences
• Industrial Chemistry
• Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Library and Information Science, Book Studies
• Life Sciences
• Linguistics and Semiotics
• Literary Studies
• Materials Sciences
• Mathematics
• Social Sciences
• Sports and Recreation
• Theology and Religion
• Publish your article
• The role of authors
• Promoting your article
• Abstracting & indexing
• Publishing Ethics
• Why publish with De Gruyter
• How to publish with De Gruyter
• Our book series
• Our subject areas
• Your digital product at De Gruyter
• Contribute to our reference works
• Product information
• Tools & resources
• Product Information
• Promotional Materials
• Orders and Inquiries
• FAQ for Library Suppliers and Book Sellers
• Repository Policy
• Free access policy
• Open Access agreements
• Database portals
• For Authors
• Customer service
• People + Culture
• Journal Management
• How to join us
• Working at De Gruyter
• Mission & Vision
• De Gruyter Foundation
• De Gruyter Ebound
• Our Responsibility
• Partner publishers

Your purchase has been completed. Your documents are now available to view.

1. On The Nature and Form of The Essay

From the book essays on the essay film.

• Georg Lukács
• X / Twitter

Supplementary Materials

Please login or register with De Gruyter to order this product.

Chapters in this book (33)

Search form

New: Ferdium (May 16, 2024), Platform 29.5.1 (May 08, 2024) 1,100+ portable packages , 1.1 billion downloads Please donate today

Foxit Reader Portable 2024.2.1 (PDF reader and creator) Released

Foxit Reader is packaged for portable use with permission from Foxit Corporation.

Update automatically or install from the portable app store in the PortableApps.com Platform .

Learn more about Foxit Reader...

PortableApps.com Installer / PortableApps.com Format

Foxit Reader Portable is packaged in a PortableApps.com Installer so it will automatically detect an existing PortableApps.com installation when your drive is plugged in. And it's in PortableApps.com Format, so it automatically works with the PortableApps.com Platform including the Menu and Backup Utility.

Foxit Reader Portable is available for immediate download from the Foxit Reader Portable homepage . Get it today!

Story Topic:

• Freeware Release
• Log in or register to post comments

Please Help Support Us

• Create new account
• Request new password

Latest Releases & News

• App Releases & News...
• Just New Apps...

Join Our Community

Partner with PortableApps.com

• Hardware providers - Custom platform and apps
• Software publishers - Make your apps portable
• Contact us for details

About PortableApps.com

• In The News
• What Portable Means

• CBSSports.com
• Fanatics Sportsbook

Football Pick'em

College Pick'em

Fantasy baseball, fantasy football, fantasy basketball, fantasy hockey, franchise games, 24/7 sports news network.

• CBS Sports Golazo Network
• PGA Championship
• UEFA Champions League
• UEFA Europa League
• Italian Serie A
• Watch CBS Sports Network
• TV Shows & Listings

The Early Edge

A Daily SportsLine Betting Podcast

With the First Pick

NFL Draft recap

• Podcasts Home
• The First Cut Golf
• Beyond the Arc
• We Need to Talk Now
• Eye On College Basketball
• NFL Pick Six
• Cover 3 College Football
• Fantasy Football Today
• My Teams Organize / See All Teams Help Account Settings Log Out

Preakness Stakes 2024: Cheat Sheet for racing form, past performances, post positions, odds given Muth scratch

Sportsline's 2024 preakness stakes racing form cheat sheet features pps info and analysis for pimlico race course with race favorite muth scratched with a fever.

The 2024 Preakness Stakes post positions were determined earlier this week, and with eight 2024 Preakness Stakes entries and a shorter distance than the Kentucky Derby, post position doesn't have the same impact. However, there are still certain posts that have resulted in more winners than others. Since 1909, post No. 6 has produced the most winners (17). However, there's only been one winner from post No. 6 over the last 10 years. Just Steel is 12-1 in the current 2024 Preakness Stakes odds and will run from No. 6. Muth was the 8-5 favorite to win the Preakness Stakes 2024, but scratched on Wednesday, making Kentucky Derby winner Mystic Dan the new favorite at 8-5.

The 2024 Preakness Stakes takes off from Pimlico Race Course in Baltimore on Saturday at 7:01 p.m. ET. Before making any 2024 Preakness Stakes picks for the 149th Run for the Black-Eyed Susans, you need to see our 2024 Preakness Stakes cheat sheet, 2024 Preakness Stakes racing form, and 2024 Preakness Stakes past performances featuring analysis from renowned horse racing handicapper Jody Demling . 

A fixture in the horse racing world who has been writing about, talking about and betting on races for years, Demling enters the 2024 Kentucky Derby having nailed the winner of the Belmont Stakes four of the last six years, including an exacta in 2022 with Mo Donegal and Nest. He also called Flightline's win at the Breeders' Cup Classic in November of that year. 

Demling is at his best in the biggest horse races in the world like the Kentucky Derby 2024. In fact, he has hit 11 of the last 16 Derby-Oaks doubles at Churchill Downs. That means he held a ticket with the winners of both races all but five times in the last 16 years. He's also called 10 of the last 19 Preakness winners, including nailing his Preakness winner, exacta, trifecta and superfecta picks in 2023, keenly understanding when the Kentucky Derby winner was poised for victory or a massive upset. Anyone who has followed him is up huge.

Now, with the 2024 Preakness Stakes odds already on the board, SportsLine has teamed up with Demling to provide a complete 2024 Preakness Stakes cheat sheet racing form with connections, past performances, speed figures, expert picks and more, all to save you time on your Preakness Stakes bets. It's a must-see 2024 Preakness Stakes primer.  Go here to see it .

2024 Preakness Stakes cheat sheet 

With SportsLine's Preakness Stakes 2024 cheat sheet, you'll get valuable information for every horse in the 2024 Preakness Stakes field. The 2024 Preakness Stakes cheat sheet will give you post position, connections, odds, career record, earnings, past performances and speed figures. You'll also get analysis from Demling on each horse, including his breakdown of Imagination, who runs out of eight-time Preakness winner Bob Baffert's barn.

Imagination makes his Triple Crown debut at the 2024 Preakness Stakes since Bob Baffert is suspended by the Kentucky Racing Commission. The bay-colored colt has been trained to be at his best for the second leg of the Triple Crown. Imagination will run his first race in five weeks, a schedule he's stuck to often throughout his career. Imagination finished second in his last two races in which he had more than a month between a run. Baffert has won eight Preakness Stakes, more than any other trainer in the race's history. He trained National Treasure to a Preakness Stakes victory last season after being unable to run in the Kentucky Derby.

Here's a sample of the 2024 Preakness Stakes cheat sheet with Imagination's PPs:

Imagination

Post position:  9 Trainer:  Bob Baffert (Preakness Stakes winner in '97, '98, '01, '02, '10, '15, '18, '23) Jockey:  Frankie Dettori Odds:  6-1 Career earnings:  $406,800 (sixth in Preakness field) Career record (starts-win-place-show):  6-2-4-0 Notable win:  San Felipe Stakes (G3) Best consensus speed figure:  98 (fifth in Preakness field) Last Race:  2nd by nk Santa Anita Derby (G1) Analysis : The Santa Anita Derby runner-up is another from the Baffert barn. This son of Into Mischief has a bright, bright future.

With the Preakness Stakes 2024 cheat sheets from SportsLine, you can get a breakdown and important details on every horse in the field on Saturday. Click here for everything you need as a horse racing handicapper ahead of the 149th Preakness Stakes .

How to make 2024 Preakness Stakes picks, bets

Demling also has a surprising prediction for Kentucky Derby winner Mystik Dan. See all of Demling's picks and analysis now plus give yourself a head start on your research with our 2024 Preakness Stakes cheat sheet racing form featuring past performances and more. This Preakness Stakes 2024 cheat sheet can save you time and give you a leg up ahead of the second race of the Triple Crown .

Who wins the 2024 Preakness Stakes, and how can our 2024 Preakness Stakes cheat sheets make you a more informed horse racing handicapper? Check out the latest 2024 Preakness Stakes odds below, then visit SportsLine to see Demling's Preakness Stakes picks and see all the intel on the 2024 Preakness Stakes field with our 2024 Preakness Stakes cheat sheet and past performances .

2024 Preakness Stakes odds, futures

Our latest general stories.

2024 Preakness Stakes post positions, odds

Austin nivison • 2 min read.

2024 Preakness Stakes: How to watch, start time, horses

Austin nivison • 1 min read.

2024 Preakness Stakes odds, futures picks, exotics

Cbs sports staff • 2 min read.

2024 Preakness Stakes: Exacta, trifecta and superfecta

Cbs sports staff • 3 min read.

2024 Preakness Stakes expert picks with Muth scratched

2024 preakness stakes picks from exacta champion, share video.

2024 Preakness Stakes cheat sheet, racing form

Edwards climbs another rung on superstar ladder

Schauffele takes control of narrative

Darvish makes history after latest gem

NBA will have sixth champion in 6 years

What's next for Nuggets after stunning exit?

NBA world reacts to Wolves' Game 7 comeback win

Haliburton wears 'choking Reggie' sweatshirt after win

Knicks have everything they need to eventually win

Former All-Pro running back announces his retirement

Find anything you save across the site in your account

The Historic Trump Court Cases That We Cannot See

By Neal Katyal

Over the past month, in two courtrooms some two hundred and fifty miles apart, the government was hearing arguments in two of the most consequential court cases in American history. In New York, at the Manhattan Criminal Courthouse, a judge was presiding over the first criminal trial of a former U.S. President. Meanwhile, in Washington D.C., at the United States Supreme Court, the nine Justices were mulling over a grave question of constitutional law—whether a former President is immune from criminal prosecution.

The two courtrooms could hardly be more different, with the polished white marble of the U.S. Supreme Court contrasting with the more ramshackle wooden court furnishings in Manhattan. And yet both rooms are similarly opaque, with most Americans unable to see what’s happening inside of either one. Cameras are prohibited, and so the only way to observe the proceedings is to wait in line outside, in hopes of snagging one of the few seats reserved for members of the public. (The Supreme Court saves room for fifty public spectators; the Manhattan Criminal Courthouse has been able to accommodate around ten.) This is despite the fact that the American people pay for these courtrooms with their tax dollars, and the fact that prosecutions are brought in their name. The New York case is called the People v. Donald J. Trump.

Like grownups who abstain from tequila because of a bad experience with it in high school, the bans on cameras are the lingering effects of some early issues with courtroom photography. In 1935, Bruno Hauptmann was put on trial in New Jersey for kidnapping and murdering the nearly two-year-old son of the aviator Charles Lindbergh. At that trial, cameras were allowed under certain conditions: they could film during trial recesses but not while witnesses were testifying. And yet camera footage of the trial testimony leaked, and Hauptmann’s trial became a media circus. This defiance of court restrictions, paired with the bright flashes in the courtroom and the general mayhem caused by the cameramen, ultimately led the trial judge to ban photography for the rest of the proceedings. Many states followed suit.

Once television became ubiquitous, in the nineteen-fifties, the prohibitions on cameras began to seem antiquated. Some states rolled back their anti-camera legislation, and, today, most permit some form of audiovisual coverage in court, whether it be still photography during testimony, audio recordings, or live broadcasts on television. Federal appellate courts, too, permit live broadcasts, as does the International Criminal Court. But not so New York. In 1952, the state adopted a statute still in place today, banning all cameras in the courtroom—a law so broad that one court-reform organization, the Fund for Modern Courts, has called it “an extreme outlier among the states.” The U.S. Supreme Court, for its part, prohibits cameras but makes live audio of oral arguments available. That puts the Court in better audiovisual stead than New York, and yet there’s a lot that happens in court that cannot be captured by either audio or transcript.

As a member of the Supreme Court bar, I was able to sit at the front of the courtroom for the arguments in Trump v. United States, the Presidential-immunity case. I could see Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s face twist into an expression of utter incredulity as Trump’s lawyer D. John Sauer claimed that a President sending a Navy SEAL team to assassinate a political rival was not an indictable crime. I was able to watch Michael Dreeben, the lawyer for the special counsel Jack Smith, painstakingly describe the counts in one of the federal indictments against Trump, relating to his abuse of the Justice Department. Dreeben outlined how Trump tried to pressure top Justice Department officials into sending letters to state legislatures expressing doubt about the election counts, and how Trump threatened to fire those officials if they didn’t comply. After Dreeben relayed this information, almost two hours into the proceedings, I could see the Court dynamics shift. The Justices began to listen far more closely to him, sitting up in their chairs.

I’ve personally seen more than four hundred oral arguments at the Supreme Court. Why bother trudging all the way to One First Street when I could just listen to audio recordings or read a transcript? Because neither is any sort of substitute for watching the way in which these arguments are delivered, and for observing the dynamics on display in the courtroom. The Court itself isn’t satisfied with just reading a bunch of written words in briefs; it insists on seeing advocates deliver their arguments in person. More than fifty Americans should get that same basic opportunity.

The judiciary is the least democratic of the three branches of the government. Supreme Court Justices, who have lifetime tenure, are appointed, not elected. And so they are required to justify their decisions in ways that elected officials are not. President Joe Biden can sign an executive order without explaining his reasoning behind it. (It might cause a P.R. crisis, but it’s certainly within his power to do this.) By contrast, when the Justices overturn a longtime legal precedent, or when they create a new one, whether major or minor, they must issue written opinions explaining their decision-making process. This process might be as significant as the opinion itself. Oral arguments are, undoubtedly, a major part of that process, and yet most Americans are barely even aware that oral arguments are happening—let alone what arguments are being made—creating a situation in which the public receives a pile of controversial opinions, every June, with little context. One can imagine that if oral arguments were televised, Americans might spend the year doing what the Justices do: thinking through a bunch of complicated, nuanced questions before ultimately reaching their own conclusions.

The Court today is relying far too much on the idea that Americans are going to seek out audio feeds of oral arguments. This is unrealistic in an age of TV and Instagram. It’s not 1936, and Americans aren’t huddled around a radio in the family room. Without the visual component, it is unlikely that they are going to pay attention to the arguments in a Supreme Court case, even if the decision that’s eventually rendered may directly affect their lives. It would serve the Court well for Americans to be confronted with the same questions that are raised during oral arguments. It would also serve Americans well to see how the Court, which is increasingly seen as a politically motivated entity, is genuinely grappling with questions about governance, such as how to draw the line between an official Presidential act (like appointing a Cabinet member), and a private one (like taking a bribe from said Cabinet member).

The public is missing even more when it comes to Trump’s criminal trial in Manhattan, which, ironically, is all about whether Trump committed crimes in his efforts to keep information from the American people, in the run-up to the 2016 Presidential election. Last week, the adult-film actor Stormy Daniels went on the stand and told the full story of her relationship with Trump, from their initial sexual encounter, in 2006, to the hush-money agreement that she negotiated with Trump and his former lawyer Michael Cohen some ten years later. We were unable to watch her tell it, or to watch how she handled being cross-examined, in the same way that we were unable to watch Hope Hicks, a witness called by the government, tearfully testify about her old boss, or the former tabloid C.E.O. David Pecker speak to the dozens of stories that the National Enquirer has killed about Trump and other politicians over the years. We can read quotes published online, but it is much harder, from behind our computer screens, to read between the lines. Did Hope Hicks start crying because she felt bad about turning on Trump, or because she was overwhelmed by the trial, or because of something else? Different reporters have had different takes, but we’ve been denied the opportunity to watch her testimony and decide for ourselves. And, of course, we’ve been unable to observe the behavior of the defendant, Donald Trump: how he comports himself in the room, how he reacts to the testimony of witnesses, how he carries himself, and so much more. (Just imagine how different the O. J. Simpson “gloves don’t fit” testimony would have been, had it been reduced to a transcript—or even a highly descriptive newspaper article.) Journalists have done their best to describe what’s happening in the room, and yet even the most faithful retellings can be subjective, skewed by something as simple as where the writer was sitting in the courtroom, and what kind of view they may have had. Some reports, for example, say that Trump keeps falling asleep during the trial; others disagree.

On Monday, Cohen is on the stand—more important testimony that we will not see. There’s also a chance, albeit a small one, that Trump himself will eventually testify in the New York trial. If he does, the American people will not be able to witness some of the most significant trial testimony given in our lifetimes. And if he does not testify, cameras would be the only way for us to see Trump’s true reaction to the case being presented against him. Instead, the lack of cameras has catalyzed a lopsided spin cycle outside the courtroom. Trump leaves the courtroom each day, where the reporters waiting outside for him do have cameras, and he characterizes the proceedings in a gravely slanted way, which then gets broadcast on cable news. The lawyers for the prosecution cannot publicly grandstand like this; rules of prosecutorial ethics require them to make their arguments inside the courtroom, not outside of it. The result is a structural asymmetry, which isn’t just confined to the two sides of the court case. The characters appearing on the witness stand, from Daniels to Cohen, are all subject to innuendo and character attacks, with the public unable to fact-check how these individuals are portrayed by the media. The same goes for the Supreme Court. Don’t believe what I said about Justice Barrett’s facial expression during oral arguments? Tough luck, you can’t go back and check the video, because there isn’t one.

Even if one accepts these rules for a normal trial, you’d think that there’d be an exception for ones that are so clearly in the public interest. Trump is not just a former President but a candidate for President, and twenty-four per cent of Republicans say they would not vote for him if he were convicted of a felony by a jury. The immunity case, too, is of grave concern to the public, as the Justices are essentially deciding whether Trump’s other trials should move forward. The risk is of a double darkness—that a Supreme Court the American public cannot see will render a decision preventing Americans from even hearing the rest of evidence against Trump, by stopping his trials from taking place altogether.

What possible rationale can there be for having a courtroom placed out of view of the people who paid for it? To be sure, confidentiality is sometimes required, from the Constitutional Convention of 1787 to the modern-day jury room. But courtroom proceedings are, by their nature, meant to be transparent, centered on a fact-gathering and argumentation process. Expecting cameras in the courtroom is not unlike expecting body cameras to be worn by police officers, who, like judges, are sworn to uphold the rule of law.

Some fear that courtroom cameras will prompt witnesses to be intimidated and scared. I understand this concern; indeed, I once shared it. From 2020 to 2023, I was privileged to serve as special prosecutor in one of the most high-profile trials in modern history, the trial of Derek Chauvin for the murder of George Floyd . Up until this case, Minnesota had never televised a criminal trial. As prosecutors in the case, and in accordance with Minnesota law and practice, we requested that cameras be forbidden. We feared, in particular, for the safety and comfort of a seventeen-year-old witness, who had taken the video of Floyd’s murder.

The judge, fortunately, overruled us. Americans were able to see, with their own eyes, what happened in that courtroom. They could see the evidence that both sides were able to muster, examine Chauvin’s demeanor in court, and assess the credibility of the on-the-scene witnesses and medical experts. The result was public confidence in the outcome of the trial. When Chauvin was ultimately convicted, there were no mass riots or protests, despite speculation beforehand that either outcome would result in unrest. The trial underscored the importance of courtroom cameras, just as the initial video of Floyd’s murder, recorded by that young witness, was critical in drawing public attention to the incident in the first place.

There have been concerns, too, that televised legal proceedings create perverse incentives for lawyers and judges, who may be tempted to play for the public, and distort the truth-seeking function of the court. That is a possibility, although the democratic benefits strongly outweigh that risk, just as they do for Congress (televised) and the President (extensively televised). And the reverse is more likely, as courtroom participants are incentivized to act with greater care when their actions will be viewable by millions. In 2017, I argued against President Trump’s Muslim ban in the federal appeals court in Seattle, and the oral argument was covered on live television. If anything, the cameras induced us attorneys to be even more conscious of keeping the proceedings solemn. Ultimately, cameras would allow Americans to see what I get to see when I am in court: a bunch of judges who are trying their hardest to resolve difficult cases in a straightforward and honest way. Judge Juan Merchan, who is presiding over Trump’s criminal trial in Manhattan, is a perfect example. Those in the courtroom describe an even-keeled and balanced judge, but Trump goes out every day blasting him as a biased accomplice of President Biden. Televised proceedings would empower Americans to make these judgments for themselves.

The mechanism to fix all of this is not difficult to implement. Changing the rules in New York would likely require the state legislature to lift its ban on cameras, although it is conceivable that a court may try to do so on its own, as Minnesota did in the Chauvin case. Televising Supreme Court arguments would not even require legislation; it could be done by mere Court rule. And, should the Court not act, legislation has been introduced by Senators Chuck Grassley and Dick Durbin to force them to do so. The bill, known as the Cameras in the Courtroom Act, would require the Supreme Court to permit television coverage of oral arguments and other open sessions. It’s accompanied by another bill, the Sunshine in the Courtroom Act, which extends to all open federal court proceedings. Both bills are pieces of bipartisan legislation; Grassley and Durbin don’t agree on much, but they agree on this. Even the Justices themselves have, in other contexts, recognized the importance of governmental transparency in a democracy. The person who famously said that sunlight is the best disinfectant was none other than Justice Louis Brandeis. ♦

New Yorker Favorites

The day the dinosaurs died .

What if you started itching— and couldn’t stop ?

How a notorious gangster was exposed by his own sister .

Woodstock was overrated .

Diana Nyad’s hundred-and-eleven-mile swim .

Photo Booth: Deana Lawson’s hyper-staged portraits of Black love .

Fiction by Roald Dahl: “The Landlady”

Sign up for our daily newsletter to receive the best stories from The New Yorker .

By signing up, you agree to our User Agreement and Privacy Policy & Cookie Statement . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

By David Owen

By Rachel Aviv

By Burkhard Bilger

By Katy Waldman

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

F.D.A. Approves Drug for Persistently Deadly Form of Lung Cancer

The treatment is for patients with small cell lung cancer, which afflicts about 35,000 people in the U.S. a year.

By Gina Kolata

The Food and Drug Administration on Thursday approved an innovative new treatment for patients with a form of lung cancer. It is to be used only by patients who have exhausted all other options to treat small cell lung cancer, and have a life expectancy of four to five months.

The drug tarlatamab, or Imdelltra, made by the company Amgen, tripled patients’ life expectancy, giving them a median survival of 14 months after they took the drug. Forty percent of those who got the drug responded.

After decades with no real advances in treatments for small cell lung cancer, tarlatamab offers the first real hope, said Dr. Anish Thomas, a lung cancer specialist at the federal National Cancer Institute who was not involved in the trial.

“I feel it’s a light after a long time,” he added.

Dr. Timothy Burns, a lung cancer specialist at the University of Pittsburgh, said that the drug “will be practice-changing.”

(Dr. Burns was not an investigator in the study but has served on an Amgen advisory committee for a different drug.)

The drug, though, has a side effect that can be serious — cytokine release syndrome. It’s an overreaction of the immune system that can result in symptoms like a rash, a rapid heartbeat and low blood pressure.

Each year, about 35,000 Americans are diagnosed with small cell lung cancer and face a grim prognosis. The cancer usually has spread beyond the lung by the time it is detected.

The standard treatment is old-fashioned chemotherapy — unchanged for decades — combined with immunotherapies that add about two months to patients’ life span. But, almost inevitably, the cancer resists the treatment.

“Ninety-five percent of the time it will come back, often in a matter of months,” Dr. Burns said. And when it comes back, he added, patients find it harder to tolerate the chemotherapy, and the chemotherapy is even less effective.

Most patients live just eight to 13 months after their diagnosis, despite having chemotherapy and immunotherapy. The group of patients in the clinical trial had already had two or even three rounds of chemotherapy, which is why their life expectancy without the drug was so short.

The dismal prognosis for small cell lung cancer is in sharp contrast to the situation with the other, more common non-small cell lung cancer, which has been a triumph of the revolution in cancer treatments. New targeted therapies seek out molecules those cancers need to grow, containing their spread.

As a result, Dr. Thomas said, many patients with that form of lung cancer live so long that their illness becomes “almost like a chronic disease.”

There were several reasons that patients with small cell lung cancer had been left behind.

One is the type of gene mutation the cancer relies on to grow.

Dr. Jay Bradner, Amgen’s chief scientific officer, explained that other cancers are caused by aberrant genes that are turned on. Treatment involves drugs to turn those genes off.

But small cell lung cancer is propelled by genes that are turned off, which makes them difficult to target, Dr. Bradner explained. Another reason is the cancer’s ability to block immune system cells that try to destroy it.

Tarlatamab is an antibody built to overcome those obstacles. It has two arms, the first of which latches onto the growth-promoting molecule that sticks up like a flag from the surface of the cancer cells. It serves as an identification tag for the drug, allowing tarlatamab to find the cancer cells. The other arm grabs a T cell floating by in the bloodstream. The T cell, a white blood cell, can kill cancers if it can get close to them.

The drug brings the T cell and the cancer cell together, poking holes in the cancer or activating genes that make it self-destruct.

Patients in the clinical trial say they have gotten their lives back.

Martha Warren, 65, of Westerly, R.I., found out last year that she had small cell lung cancer. She joined Facebook groups and immediately saw the bad news — most patients do not live long. Her best hope, she decided, was a clinical trial. After chemotherapy and immunotherapy, with her cancer growing rapidly, she was accepted into the Amgen study and began going to Yale for infusions of the drug.

Almost immediately her cancer began shrinking — dramatically.

“I feel as normal as I did before I had cancer,” Ms. Warren said. “There’s a lot of hope with this drug,” she added.

The Amgen study, and the approval, though, involved patients like Ms. Warren who had already gone through a couple of rounds of treatment. Could tarlatamab help earlier?

Amgen is starting such a study now, testing the drug right after initial chemotherapy.

Gina Kolata reports on diseases and treatments, how treatments are discovered and tested, and how they affect people. More about Gina Kolata

The Fight Against Cancer

We asked experts what to know about melanoma symptoms, treatment and prevention. Here’s how to avoid one of the deadliest forms  of skin cancer.

Colon and rectal cancers are increasing among people younger than 50. Experts have a few ideas about why .

Should alcoholic beverages have cancer warning labels? Ireland will require them starting in 2026, and there are nascent efforts elsewhere .

Risk calculators can offer a more personalized picture of an individual patient’s breast cancer risk. But experts warn that the results need to be interpreted with the help of a doctor .

The human papillomavirus vaccine provides powerful protection against the leading cause of cervical cancer and against a strong risk factor for anal cancer. Here’s what to know about the shot .

A recent study adds to growing evidence that exercise is an important part of preventing prostate cancer , the second most common and second most fatal cancer in the United States for men.