In light of the recent announcement that Geoff Manaugh of BLDGBLOG will be taking a position as Senior Editor at Dwell this coming September, it seems timely to continue the ongoing conversation about the magazine's past, present and future.
In early 2005 Archinect member Suture started a thread that offered his take on Dwell's slow commercialised descent. Here is a quote taken from Suture's original entry:
I have recently received the latest March issue of Dwell to much disappointment. Slowly but surely, over the past few months, that magazine has slowly changed. What started as a great magazine whose goal was "a minor revolution" that could democratise a modern design vocabulary "within a budget" "with the occasional aesthetic lapse" and also be about "real life" has quickly descended into an opportunistically self-serving commercialised "design" rag.
Land + Living picked up this discussion and carried it a bit further.
So here we are, halfway through 2007...
What is your take on Dwell today?
Has it become a modernish version of Architectural Digest?
In its current state, does it provide you anything of real worth?
Should it even try to appeal to the architecture and design community, or should it be directing content primarily to the masses?
Either way, whether the magazine is for you to read or for you to gift to your family, what direction would you like to see it go?
Granted, they aren't asking us what we think, but that hasn't stopped us before...
I think that if they decide the goal is to bring modern design "to the masses", they more attention should be paid to making sure that the products featured within are actually affordable for a family of average income. Who really buys a $5,000 sofa, or a $2000 end table?
I toured the most recent winner of their annual house design competition, the NextHouse, and I have a hard time believing it is "affordable to the masses" as they say it is supposed to be. I will admit though, it was a beautiful house with some really nice spaces. The finish work was a little rushed but overall it was very nice.
one thing I don't really like is that they are very much involved pushing the single-family home sub-ruban/rural ideal. I actually don't read the magazine much (I think it is pure fashion), but I have never seen denser housing options and serious conversations on what it means to dwell (design, waste, politics, etc...).
what is this? a brainstorm session to help a overly commercial magazine make more money? are we going to get paid to offer them suggestions? my suggestion - more H3 ads!
i'll echo that the real battle for dwell's 'soul' (as it were) is to which audiences they are most beholden to - those of their advertisers, which tend more and more to be the luxury end of the market, or to the 'original' audience -joe everyday who's more design savvy, but not deep pocketed.
dwell may respond that it's not an either/or - you can focus on both segments (the rich get tricks and tips while slumming it; the masses see another price point to aspire to). but i don't think it's possible to truly serve both masters.
if we're all honest here, dwell has always been more of a skin mag than a 'you can live the dream as well' or nuts and bolts mag. it's just now they appeal to the same demographic as wallpaper, but want to keep the common man hanging around...
one thing i hope geoff can influence - someone needs to go back and re-design the layouts and flow. the ads are soooo interspersed now, it's damn near impossible to see where the article starts/stops and where the advertising is. metropolis is at least a decent example of how to isolate content from fluff.
laru, re: ads, that's the way the ad companies make them now. They pay more for those spots than for more segregated spots. So unfortunately something like that is not just a design decision, but a financial one as well.
oh, i understand how ad revenue works, but you can also direct your sales team to target certain companies and demographics. it may not be an easy decision to say 'no' to that kind of ad or layout, but it is possible.
(who are we kidding - dwell's just a pimp for the pseudo eco-riche)
in addition to the drastic increase in luxury advertisements (how many pages do i have to flip through before i can find the table of contents) i'm a bit bothered by the constant pimping of chris deam... sure, he does some decent work... but something about a magazine founded by his wife (lara hedberg deam)covering so many of his projects just rubs me the wrong way...
in all seriousness, i like glossy, sexy old dwell and would not want to see it become more serious or critical. it's not its schitck, so why try to reinvent it as something different?
if anything, i'd probably push the development angle harder. perhaps go into greater depth on how contemporary modernist work gets built, stories/interviews with developers, what's the process like to get funding for such a project, how does marketing work, etc. i'd find that very interesting and useful to my own practice.
vado, i linked to and quoted from that discussion in the original post.
cracker, i can't imagine how this conversation or any potential results could make them more money...
...i don't think it's altogether useless to consider what a magazine such as dwell could be...it has tapped in to a large audience (likely those outside of design fields), and frankly, i don't think it's too late for it to steer itself in a more useful direction...
Do you think that this is potentially a case of a bunch of critics being a little too self-critical? I liked Dwell well enough to subscribe when there wasn't already an issue coming into the house with my roommate's name on it. I admit that the whole "competition with no prize for the victor" thing made me a lot less likely to open it up, but I think comparing it to Architectural Digest is a bit harsh.
picture of a weekend home in dwell.
caption says, "To avoid constant maintenance issues—after all, “durability is part of sustainability”,
somewhere in the text, “green to his inner core”,
again owner says thoughtfully, “You know, my biggest fear used to be that we would become the quintessential Manhattanites whose digestive systems would shut down if there wasn’t a bagel in sight. This house has prevented us from that.”
frankly, if you don't like dwell, then don't read it. if you don't like it and don't read it then why are you complaining? because you enjoy bashing something simply for the sake of bashing? dwell has never tried to position itself as a serious architectural criticism/theory magazine. it was founded for people who have an interest in modern design (specifically homes) and may or may not be designers/architects. there have been a few things about the magazine that have annoyed me in the last year or so, but i still enjoy reading it and if i really wanted to complain or contribute some constructive criticism, then i'd send a letter to the editor, rather than whining to a bunch of people who don't work for the magazine, and thus, aren't going to make a difference.
well Geoff works there now, so its not just a bunuch of frat boys talking smack. But seriously its debates and things like this in outside forums that have spurned the creation of things like Blueprint and MARK, people frustrated and feeling that things could be better
I for one really enjoy it for what it is, a necessary literature on modern design. It is really light reading although nowhere near as bad as architectural digust.
Something really good about the magazine is that it reaches a wider market that traditional (if such a thing exists) market, and is available in many places including airport bookshops (big shock). And because it features the work of architects and designers instead of folks redecorating their million dollar home it connects. But in that same action they've extended the argument about how to make it even better.
archtech, seriously, though, has anyone made any truly insightful criticism here. it's a bunch of "mod arch digest," "magazine for rich people" with a couple "i want it to be more like metropolis."
i don't even know geoff, but when someone gets hired to an important and exciting new position and all people can say is basically, "dwell sucks," well, it's pretty disappointing.
I also enjoy it. It's become a little bloated with ads, but then again, those ads are things I am looking for (alternatives to super expensive furnishings like Cassina or B & B), some unique artists, etc., etc.
I also like the diversity of homes. Some of the recent super small projects were a nice feature (as opposed to Arch Records unlimited budgets homes).
I would like to see more detailed articles on things like prefab, solar, and other strategies being tested out there (beyond the "and this project has solar panels, this one was prefabricated" etc - more details abotu the process, expenses, etc.
I would also like to see more care taken in the quality of the arhictecture (in a design sense). Some of it is good, but most is mediocre modernism, at best (some is just bad). Take a little more time to select projects that have thought and design integrity and depth, not just rectangular forms.
For $20 a year, or something really low like that, I'll keep my subscription. I've learned more from Dwell than any other publication related to architecture.
"a little bloated" is that like a little pregnant?
kalyani, i had a subscription to the mag from its inception, so my comments are relevant. if you examined any of the links regarding what the magazine has done to itself and the profession, you'd see how this forum HAS had an impact on what goes on there and i dare say that people have written the magazine and voiced concern, but perhaps the "constructive" criticism is not published in the letters to the editor, which in and of itself is a problem, don't you think?
let's face it the magazine has gone from connecting the layperson to modern living, to being a conduit for the cultural elite that see coolness in buying the new fangled gadget from their local - or not so local - gadgeteria. they have nothing to do with modern design and my profession right now, and everything to do with the commercial, corporate and capitalist culture we find ourselves.
i always enjoy reading it before bed or with my bagel in the morning. it's not assemblage or any but may be more useful. and i like pictures. hell, i can't afford the stuff in record either.
i don't think there's anything wrong with trying to improve the magazine. however, it annoys me that most of the comments left here have been cynical, sarcastic, irrelevant, and unhelpful. and even if most of it were constructive criticism, would the right people be seeing it? (besides geoff who may or may not be reading all of this). wouldn't you be better served by sending your comments directly to the source? just because they may not print all of your letters, doesn't mean they don't read and consider them.
i find dwell interesting (a dangerous word around here evidently) precisely because it is popular. as much as people say it is elitist, if popularity has any relationship with populist, and i think it does, then dwell is a magazine of the people. perhaps the non-architectural digest reading architecture afficiandos like quality which almost inevitably equals $$$. anyway, i think the connection that dwell makes to a mainstream audience is noteworthy (i won't call it interesting again). in general, it has been far more successful than the aia's outreach efforts. what is that makes people want to read dwell?
i think a self-reflexive exploration of this within the pages of dwell might be a good opportunity for growth. part of that feeling lead me to write earlier that dwell should push the development angle, but actually i think it is more complicated than simply a market-driven impulse. for some reason, dwell makes harsh nasty ol' modernism something palatable to a mainstream audience - awfully rare in this era of nostalgia, but than again are we already nostalgic for modernism?
not sure i understand what you mean - just that the term modernism came about well after these movements were at their peak. true, but i'm not sure how that makes the overarching movement nostalgic?
there is undeniably a nostalgic modernism market out there - eames fetishists, retro chic hipsters, etc. but i wonder if this is the exclusive audience of dwell or if there is another audience beyond the hipster market segment. to account for dwell's popularity, i think there must be. first who are these people? second, how is dwell connecting with these people in a way that, say local aia chapters, are not? is it an aesthetic? the trappings of wealth? or something that may actually have an ideology behind it?
my own guess is that whatever it is, the magazine has created a very focused vision, one that groups like the aia lack. it's also a very telegenic vision which of course helps sell product.
Dwell - suggestions/future directions
In light of the recent announcement that Geoff Manaugh of BLDGBLOG will be taking a position as Senior Editor at Dwell this coming September, it seems timely to continue the ongoing conversation about the magazine's past, present and future.
Most recently the Archinect community took part in a discussion revolving around Dwell's Infinity Design Challange.
In early 2005 Archinect member Suture started a thread that offered his take on Dwell's slow commercialised descent. Here is a quote taken from Suture's original entry:
I have recently received the latest March issue of Dwell to much disappointment. Slowly but surely, over the past few months, that magazine has slowly changed. What started as a great magazine whose goal was "a minor revolution" that could democratise a modern design vocabulary "within a budget" "with the occasional aesthetic lapse" and also be about "real life" has quickly descended into an opportunistically self-serving commercialised "design" rag.
Land + Living picked up this discussion and carried it a bit further.
So here we are, halfway through 2007...
What is your take on Dwell today?
Has it become a modernish version of Architectural Digest?
In its current state, does it provide you anything of real worth?
Should it even try to appeal to the architecture and design community, or should it be directing content primarily to the masses?
Either way, whether the magazine is for you to read or for you to gift to your family, what direction would you like to see it go?
Granted, they aren't asking us what we think, but that hasn't stopped us before...
I think that if they decide the goal is to bring modern design "to the masses", they more attention should be paid to making sure that the products featured within are actually affordable for a family of average income. Who really buys a $5,000 sofa, or a $2000 end table?
my aren't archinectors busybodies this last couple of weeks? cleveland, archinect, wikipedia, and now dwell. we'll fix 'em all!
We're all just full of suggestions.
I toured the most recent winner of their annual house design competition, the NextHouse, and I have a hard time believing it is "affordable to the masses" as they say it is supposed to be. I will admit though, it was a beautiful house with some really nice spaces. The finish work was a little rushed but overall it was very nice.
one thing I don't really like is that they are very much involved pushing the single-family home sub-ruban/rural ideal. I actually don't read the magazine much (I think it is pure fashion), but I have never seen denser housing options and serious conversations on what it means to dwell (design, waste, politics, etc...).
This goes back to the Buying into Green idea.
http://archinect.com/news/index.php?id=P60358
what is this? a brainstorm session to help a overly commercial magazine make more money? are we going to get paid to offer them suggestions? my suggestion - more H3 ads!
i'll echo that the real battle for dwell's 'soul' (as it were) is to which audiences they are most beholden to - those of their advertisers, which tend more and more to be the luxury end of the market, or to the 'original' audience -joe everyday who's more design savvy, but not deep pocketed.
dwell may respond that it's not an either/or - you can focus on both segments (the rich get tricks and tips while slumming it; the masses see another price point to aspire to). but i don't think it's possible to truly serve both masters.
if we're all honest here, dwell has always been more of a skin mag than a 'you can live the dream as well' or nuts and bolts mag. it's just now they appeal to the same demographic as wallpaper, but want to keep the common man hanging around...
one thing i hope geoff can influence - someone needs to go back and re-design the layouts and flow. the ads are soooo interspersed now, it's damn near impossible to see where the article starts/stops and where the advertising is. metropolis is at least a decent example of how to isolate content from fluff.
laru, re: ads, that's the way the ad companies make them now. They pay more for those spots than for more segregated spots. So unfortunately something like that is not just a design decision, but a financial one as well.
oh, i understand how ad revenue works, but you can also direct your sales team to target certain companies and demographics. it may not be an easy decision to say 'no' to that kind of ad or layout, but it is possible.
(who are we kidding - dwell's just a pimp for the pseudo eco-riche)
this discussion happened AlReAdY
in addition to the drastic increase in luxury advertisements (how many pages do i have to flip through before i can find the table of contents) i'm a bit bothered by the constant pimping of chris deam... sure, he does some decent work... but something about a magazine founded by his wife (lara hedberg deam)covering so many of his projects just rubs me the wrong way...
dear god, do not bring up the graphic design in metropolis. you'd think a bunch of architects designed the damn thing.
in all seriousness, i like glossy, sexy old dwell and would not want to see it become more serious or critical. it's not its schitck, so why try to reinvent it as something different?
if anything, i'd probably push the development angle harder. perhaps go into greater depth on how contemporary modernist work gets built, stories/interviews with developers, what's the process like to get funding for such a project, how does marketing work, etc. i'd find that very interesting and useful to my own practice.
vado, i linked to and quoted from that discussion in the original post.
cracker, i can't imagine how this conversation or any potential results could make them more money...
...i don't think it's altogether useless to consider what a magazine such as dwell could be...it has tapped in to a large audience (likely those outside of design fields), and frankly, i don't think it's too late for it to steer itself in a more useful direction...
I don't work for dwell...there for I do not care. I ended my subscription more than 4 years ago...their decline is nothing new.
There are more than enough great design magazines to spend time trying to help dwell for free.
If you really want a change, start your own mag.
i just bought the most recent issue at jfk. the other choice was digest. so, who reads dwell? probably, the same people who read digest.
dwell, evidently from the vitriol of these posts, the paris hilton of design mags.
gets my money...but i like bldgblg too
that you did, ap.
dwell is Architectural Digest for 20-40 yr old hipsters
I'm still waiting for a shelter magazine to complement my life style, you know, like something called HELL!
Do you think that this is potentially a case of a bunch of critics being a little too self-critical? I liked Dwell well enough to subscribe when there wasn't already an issue coming into the house with my roommate's name on it. I admit that the whole "competition with no prize for the victor" thing made me a lot less likely to open it up, but I think comparing it to Architectural Digest is a bit harsh.
dubK
they are both lifestyle magazines...essentially trying to get you to but product. They both cater to different audiences
I think they should do a magazine about apartment living on an architect's salary
dubk, seeing that magazine balloon with advertising has left me quite ill.
I flipped thru a Dwell once while at the beauty parlor.
I like the little address stickers dwell sends me like twice a year as an incentive for me to subscribe to the magazine. Keep up the good work.
[How did they get my new address so quickly? It's probably because I just sold a house and they look up records like that for potential subscribers.]
765 i think we are full of something, but I wouldn't say its just ideas
I don't know about you, techno, but I'm full of energy and enthusiasm!
(and shit)
picture of a weekend home in dwell.
caption says, "To avoid constant maintenance issues—after all, “durability is part of sustainability”,
somewhere in the text, “green to his inner core”,
again owner says thoughtfully, “You know, my biggest fear used to be that we would become the quintessential Manhattanites whose digestive systems would shut down if there wasn’t a bagel in sight. This house has prevented us from that.”
great, great...
I like her as well...she is one hell of a woman
oh bitch, bitch, bitch......can't we find something productive to talk about?
this is productive, criticism is at the core of architectural education and practice. It helps us to be better at what we do
granted its important to be constructive and say more than "I don't like it" explain and clarify your thoughts
I've never read it, but judging from some of the comments here it should be called Shell not Dwell - pretty on the outside, hollow on the inside.
frankly, if you don't like dwell, then don't read it. if you don't like it and don't read it then why are you complaining? because you enjoy bashing something simply for the sake of bashing? dwell has never tried to position itself as a serious architectural criticism/theory magazine. it was founded for people who have an interest in modern design (specifically homes) and may or may not be designers/architects. there have been a few things about the magazine that have annoyed me in the last year or so, but i still enjoy reading it and if i really wanted to complain or contribute some constructive criticism, then i'd send a letter to the editor, rather than whining to a bunch of people who don't work for the magazine, and thus, aren't going to make a difference.
well Geoff works there now, so its not just a bunuch of frat boys talking smack. But seriously its debates and things like this in outside forums that have spurned the creation of things like Blueprint and MARK, people frustrated and feeling that things could be better
I for one really enjoy it for what it is, a necessary literature on modern design. It is really light reading although nowhere near as bad as architectural digust.
Something really good about the magazine is that it reaches a wider market that traditional (if such a thing exists) market, and is available in many places including airport bookshops (big shock). And because it features the work of architects and designers instead of folks redecorating their million dollar home it connects. But in that same action they've extended the argument about how to make it even better.
archtech, seriously, though, has anyone made any truly insightful criticism here. it's a bunch of "mod arch digest," "magazine for rich people" with a couple "i want it to be more like metropolis."
i don't even know geoff, but when someone gets hired to an important and exciting new position and all people can say is basically, "dwell sucks," well, it's pretty disappointing.
I also enjoy it. It's become a little bloated with ads, but then again, those ads are things I am looking for (alternatives to super expensive furnishings like Cassina or B & B), some unique artists, etc., etc.
I also like the diversity of homes. Some of the recent super small projects were a nice feature (as opposed to Arch Records unlimited budgets homes).
I would like to see more detailed articles on things like prefab, solar, and other strategies being tested out there (beyond the "and this project has solar panels, this one was prefabricated" etc - more details abotu the process, expenses, etc.
I would also like to see more care taken in the quality of the arhictecture (in a design sense). Some of it is good, but most is mediocre modernism, at best (some is just bad). Take a little more time to select projects that have thought and design integrity and depth, not just rectangular forms.
For $20 a year, or something really low like that, I'll keep my subscription. I've learned more from Dwell than any other publication related to architecture.
"a little bloated" is that like a little pregnant?
kalyani, i had a subscription to the mag from its inception, so my comments are relevant. if you examined any of the links regarding what the magazine has done to itself and the profession, you'd see how this forum HAS had an impact on what goes on there and i dare say that people have written the magazine and voiced concern, but perhaps the "constructive" criticism is not published in the letters to the editor, which in and of itself is a problem, don't you think?
let's face it the magazine has gone from connecting the layperson to modern living, to being a conduit for the cultural elite that see coolness in buying the new fangled gadget from their local - or not so local - gadgeteria. they have nothing to do with modern design and my profession right now, and everything to do with the commercial, corporate and capitalist culture we find ourselves.
i always enjoy reading it before bed or with my bagel in the morning. it's not assemblage or any but may be more useful. and i like pictures. hell, i can't afford the stuff in record either.
i don't think there's anything wrong with trying to improve the magazine. however, it annoys me that most of the comments left here have been cynical, sarcastic, irrelevant, and unhelpful. and even if most of it were constructive criticism, would the right people be seeing it? (besides geoff who may or may not be reading all of this). wouldn't you be better served by sending your comments directly to the source? just because they may not print all of your letters, doesn't mean they don't read and consider them.
i find dwell interesting (a dangerous word around here evidently) precisely because it is popular. as much as people say it is elitist, if popularity has any relationship with populist, and i think it does, then dwell is a magazine of the people. perhaps the non-architectural digest reading architecture afficiandos like quality which almost inevitably equals $$$. anyway, i think the connection that dwell makes to a mainstream audience is noteworthy (i won't call it interesting again). in general, it has been far more successful than the aia's outreach efforts. what is that makes people want to read dwell?
i think a self-reflexive exploration of this within the pages of dwell might be a good opportunity for growth. part of that feeling lead me to write earlier that dwell should push the development angle, but actually i think it is more complicated than simply a market-driven impulse. for some reason, dwell makes harsh nasty ol' modernism something palatable to a mainstream audience - awfully rare in this era of nostalgia, but than again are we already nostalgic for modernism?
here's an interesting thought: modernism is nostalgia.
Tell it, vado.
not sure i understand what you mean - just that the term modernism came about well after these movements were at their peak. true, but i'm not sure how that makes the overarching movement nostalgic?
there is undeniably a nostalgic modernism market out there - eames fetishists, retro chic hipsters, etc. but i wonder if this is the exclusive audience of dwell or if there is another audience beyond the hipster market segment. to account for dwell's popularity, i think there must be. first who are these people? second, how is dwell connecting with these people in a way that, say local aia chapters, are not? is it an aesthetic? the trappings of wealth? or something that may actually have an ideology behind it?
my own guess is that whatever it is, the magazine has created a very focused vision, one that groups like the aia lack. it's also a very telegenic vision which of course helps sell product.
comparing the aia to a magazine is...well, i'm not sure that makes any sense...
yeah, and i'm saying the aia comes out on the losing end of that stick.
whatevs...i'm sick of this website...
over and out.
jaf don't go we like the contribution
IT is called advertising.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.