I’ve followed monocle through its first 5 issues or so and I really want to say that I love it. I do love the presentation. The page layout. The Believer-esque unglossed finish. The heft of the thing - 200-some pages an issue. The unassuming photos. The whole feel of the magazine is both kinda’ retro and progressive at the same time - and is definitely a breath of fresh air. But this style, and you really have to check one out at the bookstore to see what I mean, completely overwhelms the substance of the thing. Upon opening, Tyler Brûlé tried to bill his brainchild as ‘the trendy economist’ and the about section on their site claims it delivers “the most original coverage in global affairs…” Wow, yeah, not at all. More of like an inconsequential economist. You read these obscure articles on something like bike-friendly cities or narcotecture in Afghanistan and you are like, huh, that’s mildly interesting, now why did I drop $10 on this?… oh yea, because of how it looked and felt in my hands at the store - the presentation.
Also, while it is chock full of beautiful people and exotic European locales, for a mag that wants to have at least something to do with word affairs, any mention of poverty is conspicuously absent. I guess it’s ok to leave out the developing world from your reportage but you pay the price of having the whole thing feel contrived and unnatural. You begin to feel like the world is made up of white, good-looking Europeans making over two hundred thousand dollars a year. (Easy way around this Monocle, don’t even feign a connection to the economist, or any other world affairs mag. How about global culture magazine? That works.)
Eye magazine recently critiqued Monocle on the eco-unfriendliness of the globetrotting lifestyle that they advocate. It was a truly bizarre attack on the magazine, but fair at the same time. I guess I would have expected it from Mother Jones and not Eye.
1 Response to “Monocle Magazine…”