on saleRhodia Goalbook Dot Grid A5 Hardcover Journal - Chocolate (Ivory Paper)

This has a smooth high end feeling cover on it, and the paper is phenomenal. No bleeding or feathering (expected of Rhodia but still). Love the index and dates in the front of the book, I can mark what page is on the current date and never forget where things are.

To have a journal with certain attributes is good. The Rhodia Goalbook in incredible. It's got everything you could want or need in a journal. The pages do not bleed through,. There is eight pages of index at the beginning followed by a yearly day by day calender with each month carrying its own header. Next the months listed three to a page. The cover is super smooth with a tecture that makes it slip-resistant. Three page ribbons and an enclosure strap and the back cover has an envelope pocket. Awesome!

I was always intrigued with Rhodia's Goalbooks but they were initially first soft covers. Hardcovers are preferable for practical reasons: writing of soft surfaces like beds, lap, or holding it open with one hand and writing with the other, while standing up, I've done that many times. The pages are smooth as expected from Rhodia. Unlike the regular Leuchtturm 1917 A5 the fountain pen inks used in this Goalbook does not feather or bleed through. Now this is with the grey dot 1917. I never had the same experience with the, more expensive, red dot 1917. The Goalbook has more table of content pages. future log, and columns for every month of the year, good for birthdays. The dots are not too dark or too light. They are there but not there. When I write with a medium nib and Noodler's Empire Red ink in the 1917 it feathers and bleeds excessively causing the back page to be unusable. Not with this Goalbook. Along with the red dot 1917 I'm definitely buying this again.

This may be a special collaboration with Goulet, I am not sure, but this is the only hardcover version I have found anywhere. This version of the Goalbook addresses my main complaints with the softcover version everyone else carries - it is hardcover, it has three bookmarks, and it has a pen loop. I regularly journal and primarily use Leuchtturm a5 journals, and have been using their bullet journal all year. When it is finished, I will try this journal out.Here are my first impressions:The cover feels amazing. Something about it begs to be touched.Brown and orange are my favorite color combination. I loved the chocolate Leuchtturm, but they stopped making it. (this is actually what prompted me to look around at other brands). It is well set up for use as a journal, planner, or bullet journal. It doesn't waste pages with instructions, but does have open layouts for an index, detailed calendar, and a short monthly planner. For the way I work, which is a hybrid of different approaches with bullet journaling, the flexibility is nice. I also appreciate that it is numbered, unlike some of their other journals.What I am looking forward to most is the paper. It seems thicker than the Leuchtturm I'm used to, and may hold up a little better against my fountain pen. It's also soft and luxurious feeling, like the cover. I never thought I'd care about that, until I did. It's nice to hold something comforting first thing in the morning as you plan your day. It isn't a bright white, but the warm tone appeals to me. Perhaps whiteout will look odd on it but it's a minor issue. I have a few negatives, for me personally. I wish the dot grid had a margin. I just like how nice and neat things look with a margin. Sure, I can start one dot in and create my own margin, but then it's a margin full of dots. And the dots on this journal are rather dark. I just personally prefer visual clarity and hierarchy, probably because I am a designer.My other negative is just wishing it had more pages, but I don't think I'd want it a lot thicker, so I'm ok with it. It's not like the longer Leuchtturm books make it all year for me anyway.Overall I really look forward to trying this journal out!NOTE: the form is requiring me to comment on dry time, feathering, and bleedthrough. I have not personally written in this journal yet, so I put medium, hopefully to have the least impact on the results. Note to Goulet: perhaps don't make this field required? I can also see how subjective it is--maybe someone who's only written in a Mead composition book will give a better rating than someone coming from a Moleskine, for example. It's relative.

I've only just started using this journal, but it works very nicely with my fountain pens!