Culture
Novak Djokovic needs new tennis quests. Can the U.S. Open provide them?
Follow live coverage of the 2024 U.S. Open
NEW YORK — What motivates Novak Djokovic now that he has nothing left to fight for?
The 24-time Grand Slam champion finally won his coveted Olympic gold medal in Paris this month. In so doing, he essentially completed tennis, sweeping up the only coveted title in the sport that had eluded him. Djokovic has other targets, like the 25th Grand Slam title that would take him clear of Australia’s Margaret Court, but the Olympic gold was the true white whale for a player who has accumulated trophies like interest.
Not so much recently. He arrived in New York without his name already engraved on one of the three majors for the first time in 14 years.
The most interesting part is that he has been here before.
In 2016, in Paris, Djokovic finally won the French Open. In so doing, he completed the career Grand Slam, and became the second male player in the Open Era, after Rod Laver, to hold all four Grand Slam titles at the same time.
Novak Djokovic’s 2016 French Open title put him out ahead of his contemporaries. (Philippe Lopez / AFP via Getty Images)
It felt like he would carry on dominating tennis forever. Instead, he bombed out of Wimbledon against Sam Querrey, and then didn’t win a major for another two years in a period that took in elbow surgery and some hugely uncharacteristic upsets, the mother of all comedowns.
“I wasn’t mentally in the right place,” he said later.
In 2024, the early signs are that he is working to avoid a repeat. Djokovic was asked about his motivation ahead of the tournament starting, and he spoke of his rivalries with Carlos Alcaraz and Jannik Sinner, his advocacy work with the Professional Tennis Players Association (PTPA) and his belief in his competitiveness.
There is little to be gleaned from a 6-2, 6-2, 6-4 first-round cruise against the overmatched Radu Albot, but Djokovic — and the rest of the tennis world — might learn more from what awaits him Wednesday. He faces compatriot Laslo Djere, in a repeat of their fourth-round meeting in 2023. Djokovic trailed two sets to love, eventually coming through in five on the way to the title.
GO DEEPER
How Novak Djokovic changed his game to become the GOAT
Djokovic is in a curious position. He is coming off what he calls the “greatest achievement” of his career, but his season as a whole is more trough than peak. Despite beating Alcaraz to win that Olympic gold, Djokovic has lost to the Spaniard in consecutive Wimbledon finals. Sinner overwhelmed him at the Australian Open, an event where he had previously seemed invincible. The rivalries that motivate him are, as of recently, not going to plan.
Novak Djokovic’s struggles date back to the clay-court swing. (Filippo Monteforte / AFP via Getty Images)
This could help Djokovic. He finally has two younger rivals who are at his level, and he will be desperate to reassert himself at the top of the sport, vanquishing them like he has done so many players in the last 10 years. He may be the U.S. Open champion, but here in New York, it’s reigning French Open and Wimbledon champion Alcaraz who has the biggest target on his back. It’s Sinner, not Djokovic, who is world No. 1.
Djokovic likes nothing more than proving a point, and silencing those who have written him off. This is not like June 2016, when it almost looked too easy for Djokovic to dominate tennis, as he turned the “Big Four” to the “Big One.”
Just over eight years ago, there wasn’t even a suggestion that Djokovic’s motivation would wane. In retrospect, it might seem obvious that achieving the tennis Holy Grail could occasion a lull, but at the time it wasn’t on the forecast.
Looking back at his pre-Wimbledon press conferences, Djokovic wasn’t asked about whether he’d struggle for new targets. Only when he suffered that seismic shock of a defeat to American Sam Querrey did the topic emerge.
Novak Djokovic’s defeat to American Sam Querrey at Wimbledon is one of the biggest shocks in recent tournament history. (Adrian Dennis / AFP via Getty Images)
“It’s an amazing feeling to be able to hold four Grand Slams at the same time,” Djokovic said that summer. “Coming into Wimbledon, I knew that mentally it’s not going to be easy to kind of re-motivate myself.”
Djokovic has since spoken of suffering an existential crisis in that period.
“I was going through a period where I was really looking for myself off the court,” he later reflected. During the defeat to Querrey, there were a couple of rain delays, and Djokovic recalls asking his team to leave him alone in a room during one of the interruptions.
“I just looked at the wall and I was dull. Literally, no drive inside of me,” he said.
In a 2018 interview, he added that the injuries he suffered in the middle of the previous year happened when he was “experiencing some emotional imbalance.” He parted ways with Boris Becker at the end of 2016, and had broken up his team during the 2017 clay-court season in a bid to recover his drive to win matches. Djokovic even considered retirement, as his motivation completely disappeared.
He has since been able to reframe this difficult period as a valuable learning experience. He even said he was “super glad” to have been through it. If ever there was a time when that experience would come in useful, it would be now.
At 37, and still only a couple of months on from knee surgery, physical rather than mental challenges may present the firmest obstacles to Djokovic’s quest for renewed dominance. “I don’t have any limitations in my mind,” he said at Wimbledon. “I still want to keep going and play as long as I feel like I can play on this high level.”
At the homecoming celebration in Belgrade that followed the Olympics, Djokovic hinted that he had nothing left to win. “I feel fulfilled, complete, let’s celebrate!” he said. In the next breath, he was opening up the possibility of playing into his 40s, and defending his title at the 2028 Olympic Games in Los Angeles.
There are some factors in his favor. His kids are now at an age where they can watch their father in action, which seems to act as an additional inspiration, Djokovic weeping in their arms in Paris and developing a new and knowing violin celebration for his daughter.
The Olympic gold was an occasion to celebrate for the entire family. (Amin Mohammad Jamali / Getty Images)
Most of all, he has the sport. One of the great things about being a tennis player is that even when you’ve won it all, there are always new challenges to overcome. New shots to develop, new tactics to try.
Against Albot on Monday, Djokovic certainly looked motivated as he performed some of his party tricks in Arthur Ashe Stadium. Breaking serve having been 40-0 down. Hitting the forehand harder than seemingly any point in his career. Sealing the second set with a second-serve ace. Why not? A second-round match against Djere on Wednesday may not be quite the Olympic gold-medal match, but give Djokovic a court, an opponent and a crowd and he’ll still find a point to prove.
(Top photo: Erick W. Rasco / Sports Illustrated via Getty Images)
Culture
What America’s Main Characters Tell Us
Literature
Oedipa Maas from ‘The Crying of Lot 49’ (1966) by Thomas Pynchon
“The unforgettable, cartoonish protagonist of this unusually short novel is a California housewife accidentally turned private investigator and literary interpreter, and the mystery she’s attempting to solve — or, more specifically, the conspiracy she stumbles upon — is nothing less than capitalism itself,” says Ngai, 54. “As Oedipa traces connections between various crackpots, the novel highlights the peculiarly asocial sociality of postwar U.S. society, which gets figured as a network of alienations.”
Sula Peace from ‘Sula’ (1973) by Toni Morrison
“Sula arguably begins to disappear as soon as she’s introduced — despite the fact that the novel bears her name. Other characters die quickly, or are noticeably flat. This raises the politically charged question of who gets to ‘develop’ or be a protagonist in American novels and who doesn’t. The novel’s unusual character system is part of its meditation on anti-Black racism and historical violence.”
The speaker of ‘Lunch Poems’ (1964) by Frank O’Hara
“Lyric poems are fundamentally different from narrative fiction in part because they have speakers as opposed to narrators. Perhaps it’s a stretch to nominate the speaker of ‘Lunch Poems’ as a main character, but this book changed things by highlighting the centrality of queer counterpublics to U.S. culture as a whole, and by exploring the joys and risks of everyday intimacy with strangers therein.”
This interview has been edited and condensed.
More in Literature
See the rest of the issue
Culture
Poetry Challenge: Memorize “The More Loving One” by W.H. Auden
Let’s memorize a poem! Not because it’s good for us or because we think we should, but because it’s fun, a mental challenge with a solid aesthetic reward. You can amuse yourself, impress your friends and maybe discover that your way of thinking about the world — or even, as you’ll see, the universe — has shifted a bit.
Over the next five days, we’ll look closely at a great poem by one of our favorite poets, and we’ll have games, readings and lots of encouragement to help you learn it by heart. Some of you know how this works: Last year more Times readers than we could count memorized a jaunty 18-line recap of an all-night ferry ride. (If you missed that adventure, it’s not too late to embark. The ticket is still valid.)
This time, we’re training our telescopes on W.H. Auden’s “The More Loving One” — a clever, compact meditation on love, disappointment and the night sky.
Here’s the first of its four stanzas, read for us by Matthew McConaughey:
The More Loving One
Looking up at the stars, I know quite well
That, for all they care, I can go to hell,
But on earth indifference is the least
We have to dread from man or beast.
Matthew McConaughey, actor and poet
In four short lines we get a brisk, cynical tour of the universe: hell and the heavens, people and animals, coldness and cruelty. Commonplace observations — that the stars are distant; that life can be dangerous — are wound into a charming, provocative insight. The tone is conversational, mixing decorum and mild profanity in a manner that makes it a pleasure to keep reading.
Here’s Tracy K. Smith, a former U.S. poet laureate, with the second stanza:
How should we like it were stars to burn
With a passion for us we could not return?
If equal affection cannot be,
Let the more loving one be me.
Tracy K. Smith, poet
These lines abruptly shift the focus from astronomy to love, from the universal to the personal. Imagine how it would feel if the stars had massive, unrequited crushes on us! The speaker, couching his skepticism in a coy, hypothetical question, seems certain that we wouldn’t like this at all.
This certainty leads him to a remarkable confession, a moment of startling vulnerability. The poem’s title, “The More Loving One,” is restated with sweet, disarming frankness. Our friend is wearing his heart on his well-tailored sleeve.
The poem could end right there: two stanzas, point and counterpoint, about how we appreciate the stars in spite of their indifference because we would rather love than be loved.
But the third stanza takes it all back. Here’s Alison Bechdel reading it:
Admirer as I think I am
Of stars that do not give a damn,
I cannot, now I see them, say
I missed one terribly all day.
Alison Bechdel, graphic novelist
The speaker downgrades his foolish devotion to qualified admiration. No sooner has he established himself as “the more loving one” than he gives us — and perhaps himself — reason to doubt his ardor. He likes the stars fine, he guesses, but not so much as to think about them when they aren’t around.
The fourth and final stanza, read by Yiyun Li, takes this disenchantment even further:
Were all stars to disappear or die,
I should learn to look at an empty sky
And feel its total dark sublime,
Though this might take me a little time.
Yiyun Li, author
Wounded defiance gives way to a more rueful, resigned state of mind. If the universe were to snuff out its lights entirely, the speaker reckons he would find beauty in the void. A starless sky would make him just as happy.
Though perhaps, like so many spurned lovers before and after, he protests a little too much. Every fan of popular music knows that a song about how you don’t care that your baby left you is usually saying the opposite.
The last line puts a brave face on heartbreak.
So there you have it. In just 16 lines, this poem manages to be somber and funny, transparent and elusive. But there’s more to it than that. There is, for one thing, a voice — a thinking, feeling person behind those lines.
When he wrote “The More Loving One,” in the 1950s, Wystan Hugh Auden was among the most beloved writers in the English-speaking world. Before this week is over there will be more to say about Auden, but like most poets he would have preferred that we give our primary attention to the poem.
Its structure is straightforward and ingenious. Each of the four stanzas is virtually a poem unto itself — a complete thought expressed in one or two sentences tied up in a neat pair of couplets. Every quatrain is a concise, witty observation: what literary scholars call an epigram.
This makes the work of memorization seem less daunting. We can take “The More Loving One” one epigram at a time, marvelling at how the four add up to something stranger, deeper and more complex than might first appear.
So let’s go back to the beginning and try to memorize that insouciant, knowing first stanza. Below you’ll find a game we made to get you started. Give it a shot, and come back tomorrow for more!
Play a game to learn it by heart. Need more practice? Listen to Ada Limón, Matthew McConaughey, W.H. Auden and others recite our poem.
Question 1/6
Looking up at the stars, I know quite well That, for all they care, I can go to hell,
Tap a word above to fill in the highlighted blank.
Your first task: Learn the first four lines!
Let’s start with the first couplet. Fill in the rhyming words.
Monday
Love, the cosmos and everything in between, all in 16 lines.
Tuesday (Available tomorrow)
What’s love got to do with it?
Wednesday (Available April 22)
How to write about love? Be a little heartsick (and the best poet of your time).
Thursday (Available April 23)
Are we alone in the universe? Does it matter?
Friday (Available April 24)
You did it! You’re a star.
Ready for another round? Try your hand at the 2025 Poetry Challenge.
Edited by Gregory Cowles, Alicia DeSantis and Nick Donofrio. Additional editing by Emily Eakin,
Joumana Khatib, Emma Lumeij and Miguel Salazar. Design and development by Umi Syam. Additional
game design by Eden Weingart. Video editing by Meg Felling. Photo editing by Erica Ackerberg.
Illustration art direction by Tala Safie.
Illustrations by Daniel Barreto.
Text and audio recording of “The More Loving One,” by W.H. Auden, copyright © by the Estate of
W.H. Auden. Reprinted by permission of Curtis Brown, Ltd. Photograph accompanying Auden recording
from Imagno/Getty Images.
Culture
Famous Authors’ Less Famous Books
Literature
‘Romola’ (1863) by George Eliot
Who knew that there’s a major George Eliot novel that neither I nor any of my friends had ever heard of?
“Romola” was Eliot’s fourth novel, published between “The Mill on the Floss” (1860) and “Middlemarch” (1870-71). If my friends and I didn’t get this particular memo, and “Romola” is familiar to every Eliot fan but us, please skip the following.
“Romola” isn’t some fluky misfire better left unmentioned in light of Eliot’s greater work. It’s her only historical novel, set in Florence during the Italian Renaissance. It embraces big subjects like power, religion, art and social upheaval, but it’s not dry or overly intellectual. Its central character is a gifted, freethinking young woman named Romola, who enters a marriage so disastrous as to make Anna Karenina’s look relatively good.
It probably matters that many of Eliot’s other books have been adapted into movies or TV series, with actors like Hugh Dancy, Ben Kingsley, Emily Watson and Rufus Sewell. The BBC may be doing even more than we thought to keep classic literature alive. (In 1924, “Romola” was made into a silent movie starring Lillian Gish. It doesn’t seem to have made much difference.)
Anthony Trollope, among others, loved “Romola.” He did, however, warn Eliot against aiming over her readers’ heads, which may help explain its obscurity.
All I can say, really, is that it’s a mystery why some great books stay with us and others don’t.
‘Quiet Dell’ (2013) by Jayne Anne Phillips
This was an Oprah Book of the Week, which probably disqualifies it from B-side status, but it’s not nearly as well known as Phillips’s debut story collection, “Black Tickets” (1979), or her most recent novel, “Night Watch” (2023), which won her a long-overdue Pulitzer Prize.
Phillips has no parallel in her use of potent, stylized language to shine a light into the darkest of corners. In “Quiet Dell,” her only true-crime novel, she’s at the height of her powers, which are particularly apparent when she aims her language laser at horrific events that actually occurred. Her gift for transforming skeevy little lives into what I can only call “Blade Runner” mythology is consistently stunning.
Consider this passage from the opening chapter of “Quiet Dell”:
“Up high the bells are ringing for everyone alive. There are silver and gold and glass bells you can see through, and sleigh bells a hundred years old. My grandmother said there was a whisper for each one dead that year, and a feather drifting for each one waiting to be born.”
The book is full of language like that — and of complex, often chillingly perverse characters. It’s a dark, underrecognized beauty.
‘Solaris’ (1961) by Stanislaw Lem
You could argue that, in America, at least, the Polish writer Stanislaw Lem didn’t produce any A-side novels. You could just as easily argue that that makes all his novels both A-side and B-side.
It’s science fiction. All right?
I love science and speculative fiction, but I know a lot of literary types who take pride in their utter lack of interest in it. I always urge those people to read “Solaris,” which might change their opinions about a vast number of popular books they dismiss as trivial. As far as I know, no one has yet taken me up on that.
“Solaris” involves the crew of a space station continuing the study of an aquatic planet that has long defied analysis by the astrophysicists of Earth. Part of what sets the book apart from a lot of other science-fiction novels is Lem’s respect for enigma. He doesn’t offer contrived explanations in an attempt to seduce readers into suspending disbelief. The crew members start to experience … manifestations? … drawn from their lives and memories. If the planet has any intentions, however, they remain mysterious. All anyone can tell is that their desires and their fears, some of which are summoned from their subconsciousness, are being received and reflected back to them so vividly that it becomes difficult to tell the real from the projected. “Solaris” has the peculiar distinction of having been made into not one but two bad movies. Read the book instead.
‘Fox 8’ (2013) by George Saunders
If one of the most significant living American writers had become hypervisible with his 2017 novel, “Lincoln in the Bardo,” we’d go back and read his earlier work, wouldn’t we? Yes, and we may very well have already done so with the story collections “Tenth of December” (2013) and “Pastoralia” (2000). But what if we hadn’t yet read Saunders’s 2013 novella, “Fox 8,” about an unusually intelligent fox who, by listening to a family from outside their windows at night, has learned to understand, and write, in fox-English?: “One day, walking neer one of your Yuman houses, smelling all the interest with snout, I herd, from inside, the most amazing sound. Turns out, what that sound is, was: the Yuman voice, making werds. They sounded grate! They sounded like prety music! I listened to those music werds until the sun went down.”
Once Saunders became more visible to more of us, we’d want to read a book that ventures into the consciousness of a different species (novels tend to be about human beings), that maps the differences and the overlaps in human and animal consciousness, explores the effects of language on consciousness and is great fun.
We’d all have read it by now — right?
‘Between the Acts’ (1941) by Virginia Woolf
You could argue that Woolf didn’t have any B-sides, and yet it’s hard to deny that more people have read “Mrs. Dalloway” (1925) and “To the Lighthouse” (1927) than have read “The Voyage Out” (1915) or “Monday or Tuesday” (1921). Those, along with “Orlando” (1928) and “The Waves” (1931), are Woolf’s most prominent novels.
Four momentous novels is a considerable number for any writer, even a great one. That said, “Between the Acts,” her last novel, really should be considered the fifth of her significant books. The phrase “embarrassment of riches” comes to mind.
Five great novels by the same author is a lot for any reader to take on. Our reading time is finite. We won’t live long enough to read all the important books, no matter how old we get to be. I don’t expect many readers to be as devoted to Woolf as are the cohort of us who consider her to have been some sort of dark saint of literature and will snatch up any relic we can find. Fanatics like me will have read “Between the Acts” as well as “The Voyage Out,” “Monday or Tuesday” and “Flush” (1933), the story of Elizabeth Barrett Browning’s cocker spaniel. Speaking for myself, I don’t blame anyone who hasn’t gotten to those.
I merely want to add “Between the Acts” to the A-side, lest anyone who’s either new to Woolf or a tourist in Woolf-landia fail to rank it along with the other four contenders.
As briefly as possible: It focuses on an annual village pageant that attempts to convey all of English history in a single evening. The pageant itself interweaves subtly, brilliantly, with the lives of the villagers playing the parts.
It’s one of Woolf’s most lusciously lyrical novels. And it’s a crash course, of sorts, in her genius for conjuring worlds in which the molehill matters as much as the mountain, never mind their differences in size.
It’s also the most accessible of her greatest books. It could work for some as an entry point, in more or less the way William Faulkner’s “As I Lay Dying” (1930) can be the starter book before you go on to “The Sound and the Fury” (1929) or “Absalom, Absalom!” (1936).
As noted, there’s too much for us to read. We do the best we can.
More in Literature
See the rest of the issue
-
Indianapolis, IN3 minutes agoLouisville native set to make debut in Indianapolis 500
-
Pittsburg, PA9 minutes agoPittsburgh’s new 2026 budget is approved, with nearly $30 million in realigned expenses
-
Augusta, GA15 minutes agoGolden Harvest hosting 15th Annual Georgia Legal Food Frenzy
-
Washington, D.C21 minutes ago
Duffy touts air traffic controller applications amid push to recruit gamers
-
Cleveland, OH27 minutes agoRabbi Leibel Alevsky, 86, AH | Anash.org
-
Austin, TX33 minutes agoAthena the owl: 2nd owlet discovered to be alive
-
Alabama39 minutes agoAlabama juvenile is charged with murder of missing 10-year-old girl found dead at a home
-
Alaska45 minutes agoU.S. Coast Guard announces homeporting of the first two Arctic Security Cutters in Alaska