I have some reasons why I am not fond of reading it. First, they feature celebrities on their cover. I know, I know. Americans love their celebrities because, somehow, they tie the knot between fashion heaven and the average Joe. But come on celebrities, stop stealing models' jobs! And to think those poor guys and gals just starve and work themselves out to exhaustion just to land a career. I should be blaming the freakin' editors too because their mind works like this: familiar cover model=higher circulation=profit!
Second, GQ's fashion editorials are full of rules! I am not a big fan of rules because, as the trite proverb says, Rules were meant to be broken. However, rules do make sense for the beginners--the ones who need style training wheels. But I just find them very constricting for the creatively inclined, the daring, and the avante-gardes.
And finally, their fashion spreads are plainly uninspiring. They are so close to reality that I find them vapid, lacking and boring. What the heck are the creative editors doing? Their position suggests they be creative, but in this case, they do the opposite. Editors, please take note. If you want to be relevant, you've got to be edgy. Even a smidge is aight.
Nevertheless, I never subscribed to GQ (thank God). And upon typing this, I doubt I would ever. Although, I still wonder why they won't take a chance and be like their foreign counterparts (GQ Deutsch and British GQ are worth flipping through, by the way). But it's not all bad on this side of the page: I still look forward to reading The Style Guy column which answers inadvertent sartorial conundrums in a refreshingly smart yet snarky point of view.
