Details magazine

[Fabienne]

I had to wait a short while at Meineke this morning, and picked up a copy of "Details". I found it pleasant, but didn't have time to read the articles in depth. What is the consensus on this magazine?

 

[DocHolliday]

Not as good as it used to be. Likes to play coy about whether it caters specifically to gay men. Can't seem to decide what it is and whom it serves.

 

[Fabienne]

Originally Posted by DocHolliday

Not as good as it used to be. Likes to play coy about whether it caters specifically to gay men. Can't seem to decide what it is and whom it serves.

I quickly glanced at an article that seemed to pin heteros against gays in the issue they had there. Something about gays being the arbiters of fashion and good taste while heteros were clueless and how one or the other group needed to watch out.

I wonder who brought that magazine into the shop!

 

[Tomasso]

While I've never purchased Details, in the past I would skim through it at the newsstand. I no longer even do that.

 

[lawyerdad]

Silly and pointless fluff.

 

[Jovan]

Originally Posted by DocHolliday

Likes to play coy about whether it caters specifically to gay men. Can't seem to decide what it is and whom it serves.
Why exactly does this matter? Style is style, whether you're gay or straight.

 

[lawyerdad]

But without that clarity how do you know whether to leave it prominently spread open on your table at Starbucks or tucked inside your newspaper?

 

[Jovan]

I've stopped giving a **** what people think my sexuality is, so it doesn't matter to me.

 

[kitonbrioni]

It doesn't appear to have much in the way of style in it though I've not looked at it in a while except on the web site.

 

[lawyerdad]

Originally Posted by Jovan

I've stopped giving a **** what people think my sexuality is, so it doesn't matter to me.
Good for you. Hopefully you weren't thrown by failure to include the sarcasm emoticon.

 

[Jovan]

Well, I actually used to be concerned about that believe it or not.

 

[Get Smart]

I must think it's an entertaining read since I just mailed in a 3 year renewal on my subscription. It's pretty much GQ Part Deux, but I don't read these magazines to help me dress, I just like looking at the pretty pictures....and for that these magazines are a success.

 

[DocHolliday]

Originally Posted by Jovan

Why exactly does this matter? Style is style, whether you're gay or straight.

Because it's not just about clothing. A magazine needs an editorial voice -- a direction for its content. If that is lacking, the magazine tends to be schizophrenic. In Details case, it can't decide if it's a hip urban mag for gay men or a mass-market men's mag like Esquire.

I mention the sexuality issue only because it can't be both. A mag with lots of winks and nods that suggest it's targeting gay men is never going to be a huge seller among mass-market periodicals. Yet Details tries, unsuccessfully, to attract both audiences. It tones down its content as to erase any direct reference to the gay lifestyle, yet then includes enough as to make it a niche publication. Why? What's the point? Pick an audience and go with it. The current approach is doing neither audience any favors.

My point involves sexuality only tangentally. This could be a cooking mag that features plumbing schematics in every issue. People who want plumbing schematics would probably be better off going elsewhere, and most of the other readers will find the schematics useless/offputting.

If Details were solely about clothing, the sexuality issue might be moot. But it's not, because there's a wide variety of other content there. And that content needs direction -- something it's simply not getting. Right now it's essential reading for no one.

 

[Jovan]

Occasionally I'll pick up a copy of either if they have interesting articles. Don't think I'll subscribe anytime soon since I see far better brands, pictures, style, and advice here for the most part.

 

[DocHolliday]

Oh, one more point to clarify: I'm not plucking the argument about Details trying to please two audiences out of thin air. It used to have a much more underground feel to it, and its evolution makes it clear that there was a deliberate decision to try to go mainstream.

It was never really great, but it was better, back before it turned itself into mass-market mush.