Esquire vs. GQ

[Herbert Anchovy]

I think you'd find some objection to Esquire or GQ being stocked with the best writers in the business. Or best writing. Two separate things.

 

[Boom_70]

The New Yorker has the highest renewal rate in the industry, not because of Anne Hathaway in her undies or the scoop on the latest ear-nose hair trimmers (retail: $300).

The New Yorker is the gold standard of magazines. Their stable of writers is second to none.

 

[Boom_70]

Just want to add my standard rant about the lack of a women's equivalent. Vanity Fair makes an attempt, but doesn't quite get there--to me it's still People with better verbs. Incredible to me that Esquire and GQ can fill a monthly men's magazine with the best writers in the business, and women are still relegated to Vogue's portrayal of First Ladies.

I guess you did not like the Oprah subscription I got you.

 

[Bubba Fett]

Every time I think about ditching my Esquire subscription, two or three issues in a row will feature some incredible writing and I'll remember why I signed up in the first place.

I like GQ, but it doesn't blow me away from time to time like Esquire does.

 

[lcjjdnh]

... I also noticed a Klosterman piece in there this month on Stephen Malkmus - did they hire him away from Esquire?

Would this be the March GQ? I don't subscribe but I will search out the issue for this.

 

[Dyno]

... I also noticed a Klosterman piece in there this month on Stephen Malkmus - did they hire him away from Esquire?

Would this be the March GQ? I don't subscribe but I will search out the issue for this.

Yes, the March issue with Kobe on the cover.

 

[novelist_wannabe]

Esquire is the better of the two. GQ is good, but has too many ads and too much male fashion stuff.

This is my sentiment exactly. I know they have to pay the bills, and I know that there is interest in the male fashion stuff. But 50 pages of it before you can even find the table of contents annoys me every time. If I want the fashion stuff, I know I can get it in Esquire. There is plenty of other stuff in there to keep my attention, though, and it seldom disappoints.

 

[BobSacamano]

I get Esquire at 90% c/o my employer. So I prefer them, obviously.

 

[FreddiePatek]

Something 21 said piqued my curiousity. Why do you think it is that there are quality mags like Esquire and GQ out there for guys with nothing equivalent for women? Is there an antiquated sense of what women want permeating the industry?

I wonder, too, if part of the problem is the fact women can pull of a "guy" story better than most guys can pull of a "women's" story. Lisa Taddeo comes to mind. That said, there are a number of features in Esquire that seem more than capable of appearing in a women's read. Take away the pictures (NO!) of Kate Beckinsale in a recent issue and it seems to me that story would have worked for women, too.

Of course, I could be speaking out of my ass.

 

[Ben_Hecht]

Something 21 said piqued my curiousity. Why do you think it is that there are quality mags like Esquire and GQ out there for guys with nothing equivalent for women? Is there an antiquated sense of what women want permeating the industry?

I wonder, too, if part of the problem is the fact women can pull of a "guy" story better than most guys can pull of a "women's" story. Lisa Taddeo comes to mind. That said, there are a number of features in Esquire that seem more than capable of appearing in a women's read. Take away the pictures (NO!) of Kate Beckinsale in a recent issue and it seems to me that story would have worked for women, too.

Of course, I could be speaking out of my ass.

I don't think the Ebert story can be pigeonholed as a "guy" story. Am I missing something?

 

[BRoth]

I've subscribed to both for years, but mostly for different reasons.

I enjoy the fashion aspect of GQ, despite the fact it's all far beyond what my price range will ever be. Once in a blue moon, they'll have a quality article I'll care to read. If I wanted to, I could spend 30 minutes and be done with it.

I get Esquire first and foremost because I love the writing, no matter what it is. Even after I'm done reading it, I'll usually keep it around until the next issue comes if I want to pick it up again. Some of the articles/briefs can be silly or useless, but I still enjoy reading it.

 

[21]

Something 21 said piqued my curiousity. Why do you think it is that there are quality mags like Esquire and GQ out there for guys with nothing equivalent for women? Is there an antiquated sense of what women want permeating the industry?

I wonder, too, if part of the problem is the fact women can pull of a "guy" story better than most guys can pull of a "women's" story. Lisa Taddeo comes to mind. That said, there are a number of features in Esquire that seem more than capable of appearing in a women's read. Take away the pictures (NO!) of Kate Beckinsale in a recent issue and it seems to me that story would have worked for women, too.

Of course, I could be speaking out of my ass.

I don't think the Ebert story can be pigeonholed as a "guy" story. Am I missing something?

Not a 'guy' story at all. But you wouldn't find it in a 'women's' magazine.