Wednesday, April 8, 2009
People's favourite magazines essentially reflect who they are. Sophisticated, style-minded Brodan reads Vanity Fair, clean cut Kim reads Cosmo with the sealed-section torn out by overpotective sister-in-law, and "quirky" Izzie basically has a lifetime subscription to Frankie. However, despite a plethora of publications for every age and interest, I cannot find a favourite. TIME magazine is basically a love letter to Obama, and its pages are too thin. Rolling Stone with it's strong, pretentious focus on Australian rock music is mundane (call me unpatriotic but no one really cares about John Butler or Bernard Fanning). All men's "lifestyle" magazines tread a fine and tired line between being masculine and fashionable, and the result (articles on penis size, metrosexuals and perfect women) comes off looking so superficial that the whole genre is just a gaping, monstorous void. The sad thing is, Zoo magazine, with its shameless jokes and advertisements for Portable Pussies ("disguised as a torch, so your missus won't get suspicious") provided a good half an hour of enjoyment for my friends and I. ("How photoshopped are her boobs?!!", "Surely you can't have sex sitting like that!") It may be lowest common denominator material, but at least it's not pretending to be anything it's not.