A Colonial era easy chair. (image via chestofbooks.com)

Did anyone else notice the little Leftist fracas that broke out in The New York Times Book Review this weekend?

Bloomberg View columnist Michael Kinsley's review of Baffler editor and Harper's columnist Thomas Frank's conservative-debunking tract, Pity the Billionaire, elicited two spirited letters from Mr. Frank's corner.

Chris Lehmann, a fellow Baffler-er, wrote in to defend the book's focus on Ayn Rand. Mr. Kinsley had written that Mr. Frank's notion that Atlas Shrugged played a role in right wing ideology was "far-fetched."

"No, actually — what seems far-fetched is that any liberal commentator would airily dismiss the reactionary ideology of government-baiting as irrelevant to the business of government," Mr. Lehmann wrote.

Harper's publisher John R. MacArthur chimed in to wag a finger at the Times for allowing Mr. Kinsey to sneak a dig at Lewis Lapham into his review of Mr. Frank.

Mr. Kinsley had written:

Frank sometimes writes in an arch voice that seemed familiar when I first encountered it but that I couldn’t place. Then I read in his book-jacket bio that he writes for Harper’s Magazine, and I thought, “Zounds, Watson, the man may have Lapham’s Disease.” The symptoms of this malady, named after the longtime editor of Harper’s, Lewis H. Lapham (now of Lapham’s Quarterly), include an elevated, orotund, deeply ironic prose style that, in severe cases, reveals almost nothing about what the topic is or what the author wishes to say about it except for a general sense of superiority to everyone and everything around.

But, as Mr. MacArthur pointed out, Mr. Kinsley's account of discovering Mr. Frank's resume was itself pretty ironic. Mr. Kinsley briefly replaced Mr. Lapham as editor of Harper's, only to be dismissed and replaced by Mr. Lapham again. Mr. Frank later took over the "easy chair" column from Mr. Lapham.

"I’m not sure what standards of self-disclosure should apply to book reviewers, as opposed to ordinary journalists and column writers, but certainly editors of book reviews should be aware of potential conflicts of interest or grudges that might lead to irrelevant ax-grinding," Mr. MacArthur wrote.

Maybe Mr. Kinsley was mimicking a writer afflicted with Lapham's Disease? If so, he didn't mention it in his response to Mr. MacArthur's letter.

In 1981, I replaced Lewis Lapham as editor of Harper’s. In 1983, Lapham replaced me. I did not mention Round 2 of this ancient history in my review, and Mac­Arthur did not mention Round 1 in his letter. Maybe we both were wrong. At any rate, we’re even.

I am happy with the reputation of Harper’s during my brief tenure as editor, and am not embarrassed to have been canned.

Mr. MacArthur, a journalist and heir to his father's business empire, almost single-handedly saved the venerable lefty rag. Clearly there are still some extra millions to go around, as he just purchased this three-bedroom apartment in The Kenilworth at 151 Central Park West with his wife, book designer Renee Khatami.

The apartment, listed by Margaret Velard of Brown Harris Stevens, was originally put on the market for $5.495 million, but was sold for the reduced price of $4.95 million. After long days spent exposing corruption and rescuing old media, Mr. MacArthur will enjoy some 40-foot vistas of Central Park and lovely wrought-iron detailing, reminiscent of an era when people still read magazines.

Much like Harper's, the apartment boasts a prestigious past in desperate need of renovations. The listing suggests you bring along an architect, code for more than just a fresh coat of paint. There are only three apartments to a floor in the building, where units have been listed for as much as $21 million recently.

Mr. MacArthur is related to but has no involvement in the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, which awards the well-known "genius grants."

The apartment has belonged to the same shareholder for almost half a century -- charming dilettante Sidney J. Edison, who died almost a year ago today. Edison dabbled in the city's dance and art scenes, but was also heir to the Edison Brothers department store fortune. 

Both Mr. MacArthur and Ms. Velard declined to comment.

lkusisto@observer.com 

Mr. MacArthur was telling his staff that if they had a big writer, or a big manuscript they wanted to get in the magazine, they should swing by his office, have a chat and—maybe—he’d write the check.

There would have to be, he said, “fundamental changes” in order for the magazine to be successful. He said the magazine lacked “extensive collaboration between business and editorial.”

One week later, it’s fair to say that Harper’s staffers are feeling, well, a bit queasy about Mr. MacArthur’s increased visibility in their lives.

“Roger [Hodge] was very good at being the focus of editorial power and being the sole person who had a relationship with the business side,” said one staffer. “He was good about keeping Rick [MacArthur] out of our hair.”

Perhaps as an indication that the trepidation of the editorial staff is shared with the business side, last week, while Rick MacArthur was being interviewed by New York Times reporter Stephanie Clifford, staffers noticed a senior member of the business staff leaning against Mr. MacArthur’s office, with his ear pressed up against the closed door. Staffers said he was there for nearly a half-hour, and that he was quite evidently eavesdropping. A photo (above) was given to The Observer by a friend of a Harper’s staff member, and Harper’s sources confirmed that this was a photo taken of the business staffer during the Times interview. 

A spokeswoman said that Mr. MacArthur was unaware of anyone listening in on his conversation. 

It’s all made for a nerve-racking week. When Mr. Hodge was fired, Ellen Rosenbush, the managing editor at the magazine, was named the acting editor. But at this point, staffers have no confidence that Ms. Rosenbush, or anyone else, for that matter, can stand between them and Mr. MacArthur any longer. Staffers said that Mr. MacArthur has given no indication that there is a search for a new editor. A spokeswoman for the magazine said that Mr. MacArthur is “open to possibilities” of a new editor, but there was no time frame for hiring a replacement, nor is a formal search under way.

While Mr. MacArthur celebrated his love for journalistic integrity—he told them at the meeting last week that he celebrates the moments when he pisses off a politician, or when an advertiser is angry with him—staffers are concerned that Mr. MacArthur may now be in a position to exert more editorial power than ever before.

“What’s really happening here, and the thing that freaks me out the most, is we are going to be creating this magazine for an audience of one now,” said a staffer. “He’s going to be writing checks to see the magazine he wants to see.”

“That he wants spending on big-ticket items at his discretion means he makes the call on what is worthwhile literature and journalism,” said another staffer. “That is a new and significant editorial role for him to have.”

jkoblin@observer.com