why blueprint blows
i really wanted to like blueprint magazine when it came out. we need a new shelter rag. but, truth be told it's lame. it's really lame. it's a bad version of domino. it's martha trying to be hip. sort of like, watching martha trying to break dance. what she thinks is hip isn't and yet she insists on trying to do it anyway. the first issue: something felt funny about it. there was all of this crazy font stuff going on. was i supposed to read that page? wait, was that the contents page? wha??..... do i have to turn the page sideways to read that? oh my god. numbers? what does 42 mean? is that the page number? what is that saying over there. is that supposed to be with the photo? god i feel car sick. then there's this weird 'perimeter' thing. these lines on the side of the page. what is that? i know it's the perimeter of the page.... but you know what else it is? bad, conspicuous design. sometimes, clean is good. less is more. that first issue did have some nice diy ideas: blow up things (on paper-not pyro like) things such as ephemera, a playing card. a fun idea.
the photos were pretty cool too.
i mean, nothing new, a little domino copycat, but still, a nice clean modern feel. the models had a sophisticated, cerebral, urban look to themselves. but the following month i waited. nothing. i sort of hoped that they were fixing some of these silly glitches. waited. nothing. and in the next year. only 2 more showed up. i had a year's monthly subscription. and i received 3 copies? shady. i'm thinking that martha has her faithful 'stewies' in naperville, who still buy that fading flower of a magazine, 'living'. but i'm also thinking that martha is obesessed with the popularity of domino. i think privately, she paces, pounding at the sides of her head, beads of sweat on her upper lip, eyes rabid, scanning the newest issues of domino. trying to figure out how she can capture back this young audience of hip, urbanites. so let me recap for you why i believe that blueprint magazine needs to quietly bow it's lowly head and walk away now: 1. that which bugs the most--really bad graphic design. what's with the scrollie serif business? the font sizes? seriously. i'm no graphic designer, and i know not to do this. it's a fucking mess. nobody can read what you're writing let alone know where to look next. did you eat a big plate of crazies before sitting down to art direct? 2. content. it's no bueno. i know it's hard to come up with novel ideas. trust. i know. but, please don't try to make us think we need an icky pink and gold christmas this year.
leave that to urban outfitters and their dorm room dwelling shoppers. we expect this from them. 3.that index thing at the back. what the hell? again, i GET that the art of typography has, until recently been lost. and you want to show off all you got. but you have to be judicial. make good choices. sort of like wearing a low cut mini dress....don't show us all your tricks at once. i can't even read it.
it's way too much work. i don't even know what it is.
4. hey, schizo-pants magazine. are you 'domino'? are you 'real simple'? are you 'living' re-invented? find your own voice. i think we all want to hear it.
5. those fashions. um. could it be possible that maybe you need a new fashion editor? this isn't my speciality. but it seems that things in this arena, might be sliding a bit south too. i think that's about all i have to say. any of you, surviving 'stewies' from the glory days, don't take this personally. just consider my points. this is not one of her better efforts. and it's getting worse.
i feel that it represents her 'trying to hard' thing that bothers me most about this magazine.
and while i've tried to see the fun in all of the white and pink and blue christmas trees, they just remind me of poodles dyed pink.
but, hey! my word is just my opinion.
This mag makes me feel like I need to sign my name in bubble letters and dot the "i" with a smiley face.........while I'm snappin a gob of pink gum.
i'm glad others feel the same way about this super lame magazine.
you know what it is. all magazine's ultimate goal is to make a profit. BUT hopefully there is someone who is in it because they have a passion for whatever that magazine revolves around.
blueprint just feels as though they're walking through the motions to dip into the domino demographics while swinging on the stewart star.
i think this, is what ultimately got the bee in my bonnet. that they believed we would be so easy to pick up and follow their lead.
That's the problem with Blueprint: It's just so Mormon.
btw Martha has a great new blog that I've been reading If ou what to know what's going on in her life, its pretty good.
Do you think we'll ever see a non-Caucasian on the cover?
you nailed it! uptight posing as loose, hip and open minded.
and ya, joni, i'd stick a pink tree in a kid's room. or my own if i were still in my 20s living in my apartment in sf, and my whole place was a fun little lab for design risks.
but i still hate it with gold. blech. it's so....zsa zsa to me.
Like getting a knife in the eye.