{{ 'fb_in_app_browser_popup.desc' | translate }} {{ 'fb_in_app_browser_popup.copy_link' | translate }}
{{ 'in_app_browser_popup.desc' | translate }}
.No cover feature
.No categorized sections
.Lots of text
.Lots of photographs
.Visually stunning
.Published on 11/27
Buy Together and Save More (At most {{ addItemQuantity }} item(s))
Not enough stock.
Your item was not added to your cart.
Not enough stock.
Please adjust your quantity.
{{'products.quick_cart.out_of_number_hint'| translate}}
{{'product.preorder_limit.hint'| translate}}
Limit {{ product.max_order_quantity }} per order.
Only {{ quantityOfStock }} item(s) left.
With over a decade of experience at EVERYDAY OBJECT profiling objects and spaces, we have developed a keen understanding of diverse stylistic expressions and have also come to know our own preferences well. However, when we shift our focus—pulling the lens back from the objects to the people who use them—a more intriguing, and simultaneously perplexing, question arises:
How are we to perceive lifestyles that are so radically different from one another?
Through stories of diverse styles, EO's seventh annual issue poses this central question to you, our readers: 《Agree to Disagree?》
We are all too familiar with this phrase. It acts as a social safety valve, elegantly deployed when discussions over light versus dark roast coffee, or minimalism versus maximalism, reach an impasse. It allows us to politely retreat to our respective corners, preserving civilized friendships and ending a conversation that might otherwise escalate.
But has this courtesy—this politeness—come at the cost of understanding?
Therefore, this year, through the content we create, we want to transform "agree to disagree" from a period—an end point—into a question mark. And then, through open discussion, morph it into a comma: an intermission, one that sparks curiosity.
It should not mean, "I don't want to talk about this anymore," but rather, "Let me first process what I've seen, and then I will tell you what I think."
We acknowledge the impasse in the conversation, but we do not negate its value. This is a phase, not a conclusion.
You might ask me, "Will there ever be a day we reach a conclusion?" To be honest, I'm not sure either. But my conviction is this: no matter what, the dialogue must continue, even if it's just a simple back-and-forth.
As long as there is dialogue, new ideas will emerge, changing the world little by little.
We invite you not just to read the interviewees' choices, but also to understand the stories behind those choices and the values they represent.
— Eric, Editor-in-Chief
Specifications
Pages: 300+
Size: 19 × 26 cm