February 15, 2007
Monocle
First impressions: there’s a lot of it, 244pp plus Manga insert; from the black cover and on it looks, and is, very serious; it must be the only mainstream magazine out there without a single celebrity in it; it is full, and I mean FULL of words; it is single-pace throughout, with almost no change of visual tone; the cover is, I assume, deliberately crap; lovely uncoated but hi-white paper stock; the content is truly international; it is absolutely not Wallpaper* mk2, appearing to be a victory of content over style rather than that magazines’ opposite position; two unassuming fonts, Miler and Helvetica; arguably it’s a book, not a magazine (the standfirsts are titled ‘preface’); it is the antithesis of the quick-fix read-it-on-a-tube-journey magazine – it’s something for your upcoming long haul trip; the little M monogram is too like Habitat’s ‘home is where the heart is’ logo; it is far less pretentious than many will have expected; and finally, how are they going to achieve this volume of content ten times a year?
Assuming the content lives up to it’s claims, Monocle is that rare thing, a launch that delivers on it promise. Take a look:
8 Comments
Comment on February 16, 2007 by EG says:
looks like an annual report. reads like one too. i guess i was expecting something a little less oppressive. the mag does have a nice homogenous feel in its design, but maybe that’s one of its faults too, there are few surprises in tone, editorially or visually. a bit of a sense of humour may have made it easier to delve into. the manga is probably the only concession to fun. mind you i’m hardly the target audience.
Comment on February 16, 2007 by richard says:
i think the target audience comment is a pertinent one.. who is the target audience? James Brown said that when he was doing Loaded they were only concerned with impressing other memeber of the editorial team (or words to that effect), this feels a bit like that, except the only person who is being targeted is Tyler Brule himself. his presence seeps from every detail, from every standfist, caption, idea, cold, stark picture choice. that bit of the back where he lists what goods a Monocle clothes store would stock is essentially just a list of items in his wardrobe.
im just not sure how many other people are as interested in what hes interested in. you can take his FT column because its a VERY brief insight into such a lifestyle but really how many people jet set around like europe living this sort of life as he does? and of those who do, would this slightly camp editorial manifesto suit their tastes? how many really care how a Zurich stores chose to display there wears? how interested are we in dutch (or wherever’s) local newspapers? i dont know…
Comment on February 19, 2007 by Michael says:
The font could be Plantin arther than Miller. I think Wallpaper* have used Plantin before…
http://www.flickr.com/groups/typeid/discuss/72157594542169642/
My original impression was that Monocle seemed to ask and assume a lot about the reader. It looks like hard work. The lack of bold headlines and weighty standfirsts gives the impression of a series of rather dry essays. It seemed rather reader ‘un-friendly’.
—
At the same time though I found it quite comfortable to dip in and out of. There is a lot of copy there but, as with any magazine, you can cherry pick what you want to read. Friends I have passed it onto have mentioned that they like it because you can open up any page and find something interesting to read.
—
Maybe this is where the appeal will lie within Monocle. By making the pages look so ‘samey’, it hands a lot of the control over how you navigate the magazine to the reader, imbuing us with the particular brand of intelligence Monocle hope to exploit.
Comment on February 21, 2007 by Grease Weekly says:
The words pretentious tosser spring to mind.
Comment on February 28, 2007 by Andrew says:
The text was mixed – Japanese navy piece pretty good, not a stunning launch opener, but a good story nonetheless; business class flights comparison was great; interview with Lego guy very flat, and Chile’s finance minister neither explained nor interesting – but I felt a real disconnect between the editorial style/stance on the design/ culture pages and the front politics/history bit. That needs to be sorted out quickly. I read most of it, and it took me about an hour and a half – was surprised how little time I actually spent with the mag compared to, say, The Economist. Some of the editorial ideas are great, such as the brands that make the bits of the Coop shop. Other bits very disposable. An interesting start though, and I’ll probably follow it this year at least, to see how it goes. Not many new mags I’ve been doing that with lately.
Comment on February 28, 2007 by jeremy says:
I’ve read most of it too, on a plane flight natch (though unfortunately not in business class). I found it very disappointing. The tone throughout is very flat and characterless, despite some good editorial ideas, as you say Andrew. I think your comparison to The Economist is a useful one; a lot of that magazine is quite specialist and dry but is balanced by occasional, lighter pieces. There’s no such relief in Monocle.
Another relevant comparison is with The New Yorker, and it’s emphasis on content. Monocle just doesn’t compare.
Comment on September 13, 2009 by David Report blog » Tyler Brule launches Monocle says:
[...] 1: Here’s a peek inside the first issue of [...]
Comment on May 5, 2010 by Sergio Munoz says:
Ive read two issues of Monocle and have been impressed both times by the subject matter. Meaning, they choose great subject matters but fail to deliver in the writing on those subject matters. they seem to favor a lot of short information and not a lot of detail. i am super curious where they get the money to open stores and the rest when the magazine does not seem to be a very popular title anywhere in the world. where is the money coming from? FT?
