one more letter to one more editor

I know, I know, Modernism has come and gone, but I’ve always thought that “form follows function” was a good principle to follow.  I’m having a tough time negotiating the form of your latest issue with its function.  If I’m supposed to hold and open it in order to read it, or even to look at its ads, you have finally found the magic formula that thwarts such action: a 10”x10” magazine format with 550 pages.

There is a certain beauty in the symmetry of those numbers, but their combination yields an issue that is finally so heavy, and so squirmy that it is impossible to hold, much less behold.  I keep trying to read it; but every time I pick it up, I find myself putting it down.  The only way to get into it is to put it on some kind of podium as if it were an unabridged dictionary in a library.

If the intention for your 50^th anniversary issue was to help readers correct their posture by forcing them to read it on a flat surface, then maybe form still follows function.  However, I like to slouch on the couch while reading about art criticism in a “glossy”.  Next time you want to investigate your own history, please put it out in a format that facilitates reading, such as a hardback book that holds itself rigidly together, or maybe two skinnier magazine issues…. Of course this implies that legibility be one of ArtForum’s functions.

Sincerely

addendum weeks later:

I wrote a few weeks ago to complain about the size and weight of your 50^th anniversary issue whose mass only equals that of your 2007 summer at the height of the housing boom.  I am now sheepishly writing to tell you how much I enjoyed its written content after getting over my comfort issues with its form.   

Sincerely

...weird how this blogspot graphic interface works