The Top 5 Longreads of the Week: Mark Rothko, Martha Stewart, and the History of the High Five

Mother Jones guest blogger Mark Armstrong is the founder of Longreads, a site devoted to uncovering the best long-form nonfiction articles available online. And what better time to curl up

with a great read than over the weekend? Below, a hand-picked bouquet of five interesting stories, including word count and approximate reading time. (Readers can also subscribe to The Top 5

Longreads of the Week by clicking here.)

1. A Holocaust Survivor Raised a Fist to Death | Kurt Streeter | Los Angeles Times | Aug. 5, 2011 | 6 minutes (1,634 words)

Leon Weinstein, now 101, feared for his life in the Warsaw Ghetto. Then he and his wife gave up their 18-month-old daughter in the hopes she would survive:

“She could not be Natalie Leya Weinstein, not in wartime Warsaw. Her father wrote her new name on a piece of paper.

“‘The little one must make it,’ Leon Weinstein told his wife. ‘We got no chance. But the little one, she is special. She must survive.’

“He fixed a metal crucifix to a necklace and hung it on their daughter. On the paper, he scrawled another fiction: ‘I am a war widow, and I have no way of taking care of her. I beg of you

good people, please take care of her. In the name of Jesus Christ, he will take care of you for this.’

“A cold wind cut at the skin that December morning, so Leon Weinstein bundled Natalie, 18 months old, in heavy pants and a thick wool sweater. He headed for a nearby apartment, the home of a

lawyer and his wife. The couple did not have a child. Weinstein hoped they wanted one.”

More Streeter: “Dorsey High’s Football Program Is About More than Athletics” (Dec. 2009) |

How Mark Rothko’s death created a mess for Levine’s family. Levine examines the life of his father—who was named an executor of the artist’s multimillion-dollar estate—and Rothko, who left

nothing for his children:

“Why are we all fighting so fiercely on behalf of bad fathers? Rothko was, by all accounts, a terrible parent, who alienated his teenage daughter to such an extent that she told him she

hated his paintings. So he responded as any narcissistic, alcoholic, monomaniacal abstract expressionist would, and he left the paintings in the hands of his friends. Once he’s dead, she’s

sorry, and wants to take it all back. But by now the paintings are with others, who have their own interests and their own understanding of his priorities. And they are villainized. And they

lose. And my father dies. And I barely notice, because as far as I know, he’s a loser, and a jerk, and then thirty years later someone brings me a failure’s blessings from beyond the grave,

and suddenly I feel as though my father’s memory is being betrayed. And suddenly I find myself a loyalist, because apparently it’s more important to like your father’s memory than to like

your father.”

More Triple Canopy: “Mao, King Kong and the Future of the Book” (Aug. 2010)

Many have been credited with creating the revolutionary hand-slap, but Mooallem settles the complicated matter once and for all. He starts with a call to former college basketball player

Lamont Sleets:

“I was calling Sleets because I wanted to talk to the man who invented the high five. I’d first read about him in 2007 in a press release from National High Five Day, a group that was trying

to establish a holiday for convivial palm-slapping on the third Thursday in April. Apparently, Sleets had been reluctantly put in touch with the holiday’s founders, and he explained that

his father, Lamont Sleets Sr., served in Vietnam in the 1st Battalion, 5th Infantry—a unit nicknamed The Five. The men of The Five often gathered at the Sleets home when Lamont Jr. was a

toddler. They’d blow through the front door doing their signature greeting: arm straight up, five fingers spread, grunting “Five.” Lamont Jr. loved to jump up and slap his tiny palms against

their larger ones. “Hi, Five!” he’d yell, unable to keep all their names straight. Years later, Sleets started high-fiving his Murray State teammates, and when the Racers played away games,

other teams followed. In short, Lamont Sleets was both the inventor of the high five and its Johnny Appleseed.

“The low five had been a fixture of African-American culture since at least World War II. It might seem impossible to pinpoint when the low five ratcheted itself upright and evolved into the

high five, but there are countless creation myths in circulation. Magic Johnson once suggested that he invented the high five at Michigan State. Others trace it to the women’s volleyball

circuit in the 1960s. But the Sleets story quickly shot around the Internet and into local newspapers, displacing, or at least undermining, all other claims. Sleets was budging his way atop

the high-five hierarchy.”

More Mooallem: “Do-It-Yourself Genetic Engineering” (New York Times, Feb. 2010)

Revisiting Sylvia Plath’s only novel, written a year before her suicide in 1963 and published in 1970:

“It’s always interesting when a very strange book is also an enduringly popular book. The Bell Jar has sold more than three million copies and is a mainstay of American high school English

classes; it was made into a movie in 1979, and another version, starring Julia Stiles, is currently in production. Like The Catcher in the Rye, it is a touchstone for a certain kind of

introspective, moody teenager—the kind of teenager who used to listen to the Cure and, later on, Tori Amos, and who these days listens to—actually I have no idea, but she definitely has a

blog. (There are an amazing variety of embarrassing shrines to The Bell Jar online.) Unlike Catcher, it also has other sources of partisan support: feminists of the 1970s claimed Plath as a

martyred patron saint of repressive domesticity, and mental illness advocates have found in her work easily identifiable symptoms and syndromes that were misdiagnosed and barbarically

treated.

“As much as it was initially underappreciated by the British press, The Bell Jar was overpraised on its American publication. As such, it has frustrated generations of critics and

biographers by refusing to be quite the great novel you’d want a great poet’s only novel to be.”

More Gould: “Why I Write for Free” (June 2009)

Stewart came out of prison reinvigorated, but her company has suffered from executive shuffling and the loss of a lucrative licensing partnership with Kmart. Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia

has had just one profitable year in the last eight:

“The new, softer Martha Stewart who emerged from prison allowed microwave ovens to be referred to in her magazines for the first time. She named one of her French bulldogs Francesca, after a

fellow convict. She announced plans to do a TV show about rehabilitating ­errant women while they rehabilitated a house; a fixer-upper was bought in Norwalk.

“That show never happened (among other reasons, Stewart’s probation forbade her to ­associate with felons), but otherwise, Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia became a deal-making machine.

Besides the Burnett TV deal, there were a series of how-to DVDs to be distributed by ­Warner Home Video; an all-Martha-all-the-time satellite-radio channel on Sirius XM; a business book

called The Martha Rules; and a licensing agreement under which KB Home would develop whole communities of Martha-designed and –branded houses. MSLO made plans for a magazine targeted at

younger readers called ­Blueprint, which would launch in 2006.

“This burst of activity was a strategic plan to save MSLO from extinction, but it soon seemed to some observers within the company as if Stewart’s attitude had less to do with business

prudence than with an urgent desire to make up for the years she had lost.”

More Wallace: “Monetizing the Celebrity Meltdown” (Nov. 2010)

Andrew is a founding editor of The Morning News and proprietor of The Staff Recommends.

“Hey, what did you and your faith in government and your 401(k) do this week? Let’s all at least agree on this: It’s been a rough five days. It’s time to take a break, maybe with some

reading. Maybe even try and restore some level of belief in our leadership?

“How auspicious, then, that this week The New Yorker published Nicholas Schmidle’s play-by-play account of the mission to kill Osama bin Laden. This was an event that happened some news

cycles back, we should recall, and Schmidle tells it here in gripping detail: from the first weeks of Obama’s presidency to the behind-the-scenes intelligence and military strategizing to a

night where everything went wrong—then right.”

Getting Bin Laden | Nicholas Schmidle | The New Yorker | Aug. 8, 2011 | 33 minutes (8,422 words)

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

“Lying.” “Disgusting.” “Scum.” “Slime.” “Corrupt.” “Enemy of the people.” Donald Trump has always made clear what he thinks of journalists. And it’s plain now that his administration intends

to do everything it can to stop journalists from reporting things they don’t like—which is most things that are true.

No one gets to tell Mother Jones what to publish or not publish, because no one owns our fiercely independent newsroom. But that also means we need to directly raise the resources it takes

to keep our journalism alive. There’s only one way for that to happen, and it’s readers like you stepping up. Please help with a donation today if you can—even a few bucks will make a real

difference. A monthly gift would be incredible.

“Lying.” “Disgusting.” “Scum.” “Slime.” “Corrupt.” “Enemy of the people.” Donald Trump has always made clear what he thinks of journalists. And it’s plain now that his administration intends

to do everything it can to stop journalists from reporting things they don’t like—which is most things that are true.

No one gets to tell Mother Jones what to publish or not publish, because no one owns our fiercely independent newsroom. But that also means we need to directly raise the resources it takes

to keep our journalism alive. There’s only one way for that to happen, and it’s readers like you stepping up. Please help with a donation today if you can—even a few bucks will make a real

difference. A monthly gift would be incredible.

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Inexpensive, too! Subscribe today and get a full year of Mother Jones for just $19.95.

Award-winning photojournalism. Stunning video. Fearless conversations.

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

We’re a nonprofit newsroom, because the truth-telling investigations we’re known for don’t happen under corporate ownership. We shine a bright light into the dark corners of power and report

the facts other media are afraid to touch.

The essential ingredient that makes this possible? Readers like you. Please stand with Mother Jones and make a donation today. These are dangerous times, and we’ve got a lot of hard,

consequential work to do. But we can’t do it without reader support.

We’re a nonprofit newsroom, because the truth-telling investigations we’re known for don’t happen under corporate ownership. We shine a bright light into the dark corners of power and report

the facts other media are afraid to touch.

The essential ingredient that makes this possible? Readers like you. Please stand with Mother Jones and make a donation today. These are dangerous times, and we’ve got a lot of hard,

consequential work to do. But we can’t do it without reader support.