Monday, November 06, 2006

The magazine hierarchy

I'm sure I've referenced this before, but I can't seem to find the post.

I'm very anal-retentive when it comes to the specific order in which I purchase and/or consume magazines over the span of the month. I've got my top-tier magazines, that I buy every month, the only thing that would ever stop me from purchasing these tomes is if my leg was trapped in a bear trap, but that's highly unlikely because that would actually require me to be outdoorsy (shudder). Magazines that fit into this category would be: Vice and Jane, essentially magazines that I wouldn't be ashamed to have fall out of my bag, and that I've been reading since before I graduated from high school.

Lame aside: I actually frst discovered Jane, when it was featured on The View, a show, I'm ashamed to admit, I used to watch with some frequency - but only for the 'Hot Topics' segment!

Then come the mid-range ones, that I might be tempted to pick up based solely on who's on the cover, and how bored I am. These range from the borderline informed (Vanity Fair), to the downright geeky (Mac Addict/Mac World), to the on the way to self-helpy (Self), and all the way down to the "I'm not getting laid so why bother even fronting" (Martha Stewart Living and Blueprint - a new one from Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia).

and then, there comes rock bottom aka. magazines that get folded over when you're carrying them so as to only expose the back advertisement, and not your overall lameness. Magazines that fall into this category: Seventeen (yeah, I used to have a subscription, but that was in grade 6), Cosmo (because when I 'matured' I needed my magazines to grow with me, Canadian Living (think Martha Stewart, with less cachet and for working women who don't have time to make wreaths for every holiday/season) because I'm secretly in love with all their recipes, and as of late, O (Oprah's magazine, "I'm Oprah, and I'm fucking fabulous!")

It's only November 6th and I'm already at Bluprint, help!

5 comments:

marie lyn bernard said...

OMG, I posted about this very topic in September! And you don'tneed to be ashamed of watching The view, it's the best show on television.

I totally fold over Seventeen too.

Also Jane is a fabulous magazine. It used to be Sassy. I mean, the woman who owns it did Sassy. Did you read Sassy? I subscribe to Jane. You know what's a really good magazine (like, seriously, really well done)? Women's Health. It's pretty new. check it out.

Sushi the Mermaid said...

I proudly carry my Cosmo...there are categories of women.
Women who don't get creative in the bedroom.
Women who experiment in the bedroom.
Women who do everything in the bedroom.
Women who read Cosmo.
BOOYAH!

Maritza said...

You must explain what you find appealing about "Jane" magazine! I love trash but "Jane" is downright retarded in its attempt to be "kooky" and "with-it". It is so caucasian-centric, middle of the road, bland, etc. (I read "Vanity Fair" which is the middle agers equivalent to "Jane" so who am I to judge)

Am I missing something?

team gingerbread said...

mlb - I'm so stoked on Jane it's not even funny. I used to love Sassy and devoured every issue the second it came out.

sushi - I'm not anti-cosmo by any means, it's definitely a guilty pleasure, but it's no longer on my must read magazines list. I've essentially been reading Cosmo since about grade 8, so I'm just ready for something new

Maritza - I'll admit Jane has been a little on the ditzy side ever since Brandon took over the editorial helms but it's still a solid magazine.

I also agree with you assessment that VF is totally a grown up version of Jane. They even do the whole lure you in with a pretty celeb on the cover but all of a sudden your trapped reading an article on female genital mutilation or some other non-puff piece

Maritza said...

I'm just old and shit. I should be reading stuff like "The Nation". I found a copy of the latest Cosmo and I must admit, the clothes in this issue (November) are the best they've been in a long time.