The search to fill George Plimpton's shoes at the Paris Review is entering a more intense phase, according to sources, with two names—one inside the magazine and one outside it—emerging as leading candidates. It is a process has turned into a debate as much about the role of the Paris Review after the death of its editor as it has about the person who will run it.
The contest pairs two people comparable in accomplishment but very different in background. John Jeremiah Sullivan, the whippersnapper National Magazine Award—winner, is a Harper's writer, a poet, a music critic and an author (he's currently working on a book for FSG), and in many ways embodies the literary dilettantism Plimpton was known for. Brigid Hughes is the Review's current managing editor; she worked for a number of years under Plimpton and is said to have the support of a number of staff members, including editor-at-large Elizabeth Gaffney, who was herself once a candidate. Officially, the magazine maintained that it is continuing a full search and has "not ruled anyone out."
Sources said that the search has occasioned a discussion among members of the Paris Review Foundation's older board and the magazine's comparatively younger staff. It is a conversation that is said to be covering issues as varied as the magazine's emphasis on nonfiction and the need to expand circulation. "We're talking about both [candidates and vision] simultaneously," said one insider. Sullivan, known for his nonfiction talents, is said to be favored by those who would like to push the magazine in new directions. With her Paris Review experience, Hughes is seen as the person who can shoulder the weighty load of Plimpton's legacy.
Insiders said that despite the stakes, they don't want to see this drag on too long. "We'd like to finish this really soon, possibly even by the end of the year," said one source. But they acknowledged the inherent difficulty. "One of the problems with 'who is the best person for the job?' is figuring out 'What is the job?' What George was doing was often not quantifiable."
