Has Dwell Magazine become irrelevant?

<span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">As someone who has built a life around being a proponent of Modern Design, I find myself supporting and gravitating towards companies that have similar philosophies.  In October of 2000 I remember walking by a news stand in NYC and seeing the Premiere Issue of a new magazine called Dwell.  The cover was bold.  A big steel box of a house with a woman and her dog sitting in front of it.  The heading under the title said 'AT HOME IN THE MODERN WORLD' in all caps with a lovely sans serif font.  The features listed on the cover had tag lines like 'Design for Real People' and 'The Most Beautiful Vacuum Cleaners on Earth'.  I was drawn from the start and picked up a copy.  </span><div><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">When I got it home I read the first issue from cover to cover and salivated at both the publisher's mission and the editor's opening remarks.  They were brilliant.  Lara Hedberg (publisher) led with the tag line : From the Robie House to Our House and talked eloquently about we should aspire to create homes that fulfill our deep longing for meaning and beauty.  Editor Karrie Jacobs went a step further.  She wanted to stage a minor revolution.  Her beautifully written introduction talked about how the design community has a desire to try and show architecture as this perfect and unattainable being.  Dwell was aiming to give it back to regular ordinary people and this inspired me.  From then on, I waited on every issue and saw the magazine grow and develop to reach thousands of new readers every month.</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEienmQE_6mod7RFdfwEMIYXUTbNVAlbrQSH2fJpWqHeUAd0rvARxyVLD0uuTVw5a5J2Ud6x1rLWwPQaxCZCSPy-JNEO7V2Ba43x7v5Ap2q8W7KHzLuSHsHwTM7US_mezfGPkT05eEjI46U/s1600/dwell+003.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEienmQE_6mod7RFdfwEMIYXUTbNVAlbrQSH2fJpWqHeUAd0rvARxyVLD0uuTVw5a5J2Ud6x1rLWwPQaxCZCSPy-JNEO7V2Ba43x7v5Ap2q8W7KHzLuSHsHwTM7US_mezfGPkT05eEjI46U/s320/dwell+003.jpg" width="240" /></a></div><div><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">By 2006 each issue was the size of a local phone book filled with page after page of enviable goods and projects.  Despite the change in editors (I believe they are currently on their fourth in 12 years) there seemed to be a continuity of thought that made me believe I could be part of this revolution.  Year after year went on and slowly the mission changed. It seemed that the book was getting thinner and thinner as advertising revenue across the industry tanked.  The magazine started to lend their name to conferences and consumer partnerships (such as a tile line with Heath ceramics) and the revolution started to fizzle.  It seemed that all of the energy of the original mission was now going into generating revenue to keep the ship afloat.  Today the magazine arrives about as thick as the original issue, which is pretty thin.  I used to devote a solid two hours to reading each volume and now it takes me all of eight minutes.  All of the original tenacity and gumption have been replaced with project after project of designs that seem as impractical and unattainable as the designs they once condemned.   </span></div><div><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">Now I suppose you could argue that shelter magazines as a whole are tanking.  Domino closed and even Martha Stewart couldn't sustain the popular Blueprint brand.  But I would disagree when you see books like Elle Decor, House and Home, Elle Decor UK, Living ETC, and Inside Out growing by the month. Even Atomic Ranch and Modernism haven't lost their luster through the recession and I even found myself picking up recent issues of Architectural Digest, which is amazing in and of itself.  These books have survived by focusing on their core audience and not concerning themselves with trying to grow beyond their brand.  I think this is a lesson Dwell could definitely learn from.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">Of course there will always be people discovering Dwell for the first time and falling head over heels. But for my part I will not be renewing my subscription and I am very sad to say that.  I wish the magazine went back to it's original desire to show the average person about meaning and beauty in the home as opposed to finding the craziest places around the world which most people will never even come close to living in.  </span></div><div><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: Verdana, sans-serif;">Karrie Jacobs once wrote that Dwell wanted to demonstrate that a modern house could be a comfortable one.  If only it were so.</span></div>

Has Dwell Magazine become irrelevant?

As someone who has built a life around being a proponent of Modern Design, I find myself supporting and gravitating towards companies that h...

Read more »

Who Killed Modern Architecture?

<span style="font-family:verdana;">While I would like to believe that there are Modernists a plenty out there, all the evidence unfortunately speaks to the contrary. The latest evidence of this is how many Modern shelter <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">magazines</span> are either folding or getting noticeably thinner, while Architectural Digest seems to hold steady amid the rough economic seas. My latest issue of Residential Architect (which focuses mostly on progressive Residential buildings) tops out at a whopping 59 pages. While I don't fully understand most people's bias towards "traditional" styles, I have to wonder what it is about Modern Design and Architecture that turns people off? People don't seem to mind trading in their old car for the latest model or going down to Best Buy for the most technologically advanced Audio Visual experience. So why is it that in the year 2009, people still want to build houses in styles that were fashionable 200 years ago? After all, we weren't building Medieval Castles in the 1800's? So the question remains, Who Killed Modern Architecture?</span><br /><span style="font-family:Verdana;"></span><br /><span style="font-family:Verdana;">When you look at the history of what we call Modern Architecture, it is hard to divorce its origins from the rise of the Industrial Revolution. Machines gave us the technology and the ability to grow buildings faster and stronger. Most people will cite structures such as Joseph Paxton's Crystal Palace, the Eiffel Tower, and the Brooklyn Bridge as being some of the first truly Modern accomplishments. Those gave way to breakthroughs such as modern glazing, the elevator, and prefabrication technologies (the Crystal Palace was a <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1">pre</span>-fab building in 1851). From there, the founding fathers of Modernism enter through the likes of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">LeCorbusier</span>, Louis Sullivan, Frank <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3">Lloyd</span> Wright, Walter Gropius, and finally <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4">Mies</span> Van <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5">der</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6">Rohe</span>. In the early 20<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7">th</span> Century, Modernism was in full swing, also commonly referred to as "The International Style". The Museum of Modern Art (under the lead of Phillip Johnson) organized a pivotal exhibition that changed the face of Architecture forever. By the late 1940's Modernism had arrived and permeated every publication and merchant builder throughout the country. Have you ever seen an issue of Better Homes and Gardens from the 1950's? How about Fortune Magazine? Google them sometime and you will be shocked. They're all progressive and modern. The prevailing style of that day is now known as Mid-Century Modern and objects from that era are highly sought after due to their originality and quality. What happens after the 50's is a product of two different phenomenon that was like a 1-2 punch to all things Modern.</span><br /><span style="font-family:Verdana;">First, you have the Depression era <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8">children</span> growing up and reaching the age where they want to buy a home. Growing up during a depression leaves you with some pretty lasting memories. (I have a friend who still ties together broken rubber bands instead of throwing them away, but we'll save that for another day.) Since homes were (and still are) the largest single investment that the average person is likely to make in their lifetime, this group had no interest in risking their hard earned savings on the latest and greatest trendy home. They wanted security and comfort and chose older homes with time tested styling. The second part of the double whammy has to do with all of the wars which were being fought in the 40's and 50's. The world was not as small as it is today and resources were rare. Modern Architecture often relies on the latest materials to execute the greatest gestures with the least effort. Steel, Glass, and Wood were considered too valuable to be cladding houses with, so the era of vinyl began. And then all of these soldiers came home and needed somewhere to live. The Government was giving them cheap loans to go buy a house and everyone wanted to settle down and make babies. Builders saw the opportunity and started cranking out tract homes. Cities like <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9">Levittown</span> in Long Island grew up overnight. And as you can guess, there were not many tract home developments where each home was designed by an Architect. Builders made <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10">alot</span> of money building the fastest and cheapest house they could and they couldn't keep up with demand. And the rest, as they say, is history. The era of the tract home began and the media now had to change focus on how to decorate and style your brand new tract home. 50 years later, the major publications such as Better Homes and Gardens are still doing the same thing, except now they are decorating <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_11">McMansions</span> and <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_12">faux</span> bungalows.</span><br /><span style="font-family:Verdana;">Of course, there are still those who want Modern housing thanks in part to magazines like Dwell (my latest issue was REALLY skinny). But now that the latest recession has all but wiped out traditional funding for new and innovative companies, will the Moderns just give up or regroup? If only Ayn Rand were here...</span><br /><span style="font-family:Verdana;"></span>

Who Killed Modern Architecture?

While I would like to believe that there are Modernists a plenty out there, all the evidence unfortunately speaks to the contrary. The lates...

Read more »