Following the press coverage of Monocle in the papers this week, the new magazine appeared in newsagents yesterday. I got a copy in Liverpool Street station, appropriately enough, on my way to the Frontline Club to drop in my membership application form. My first reactions, having read about a quarter of it, is that visually, it's much less impressive than I expected: The photos in the stories, like the one on the Japanese navy, are fairly humdrum - no action or no exotic and striking tableaux to catch the eye. The most eye-catching things are the ads for luxury goods with which the magazine is packed.
None of the news stories I've gone through so far seem very surprising - the cover-story on Japan shouldn't surprise anybody who reads the Economist, the NY Times or WSJ regularly in its account of Japan's quiet resurgance as a military power and the growing naval competition in Asia. It seems to lack both the Steve Irwin factor ("Jesus, how the fuck did he not get killed?") and the writer's point of view that gives a spine to writing on current affairs.
On the other hand, I was at a university reunion later in the evening and many of the ladies at least seem to have heard of the impending launch of the magazine - which surprised me. The marketing buzz seems to have been handled well.
Overall, I think that Charlie Baker's Diplo magazine looks and reads much better, in spite of being put together by students and impecunious freelancers in a hole in the wall off Greys Inn Road. it's monocle for grown-ups.
Comments