PLAYBOY: Your Father's Oldsmobile?

[Dan Stiffler]

On 2/4/03 3:16 PM, "Mark Tomlonson" <tomlonson@wmich.edu> wrote:

> 
> So how do you make a centerfold for the 21st Century? Obviously a pretty
> woman is going to be the subject, but what's her attitude? Does the
> co-ed in a dorm room still work as a theme? Should it be harder? Softer?

Well, these are key questions and you, Mark, have studied the centerfold as
much as any of us, so I thought you might have some answers.

I will say this: PLAYBOY's early centerfolds were definitely influenced by
the golden age of pin-up art (30s through early 50s).  PLAYBOY's was a
natural progression.  I wrote an academic paper on this subject a few years
ago and, even during this last decade, many of the old themes are present.
For example, the phone theme established by Petty has been repeated many
times in the centerfold.  The athletic "new American girl" of the early 20th
century has seen her great-granddaughters in PLAYBOY's centerfold.

I think most of these themes are timeless and they can be revisited to very
good effect.

Harder? Softer?  I like the way they are doing it these days, with the
centerfold a little softer than some of the layout pictures, a lot softer
than some of the cyber pictures.  But then I had no objections to Debra
Peterson's centerfold (6/76).  Mainly, I think that the centerfold ought to
be an image that a guy can hang up on the wall because it is more art than
porn (it is of course both).

Btw, the first "co-ed in a dorm room" centerfold was Jean Moorehead's
(10/55) and it is wonderfully self-referential because it includes two
PLAYBOY centerfolds hanging on the dorm room wall.

> You won't argue with me (play on words there) about that. But you want
> to capture the feel of the old Art Paul covers, not duplicate them. As
> good as some of them are graphically, they're still products of the fifties.

I agree 100%.  The occasional homage would be okay (as the Uma Thurman cover
[9/96] repeated 6/67), but the covers need to be fresh.  Surely Art Paul had
a unique creative genius, but I have seen some fine covers since he retired,
just not enough of them to argue that PLAYBOY cover art matters much
anymore.  I think everyone knows this: at least 75% of the covers in recent
years are formulaic.  As predictable as the rising sun.  More like Cosmo
than Cosmo.  I have been harping about this point on the PML since I first
joined.  PLAYBOY could make a very strong statement about the new leadership
if those new editors would just think carefully about the long tradition of
PLAYBOY cover art and then get out of the current rut.

If I could change only one thing about the magazine, it would be the covers,
most of them anyway.
 
> I was thinking more like Delta 88. That rolling living room didn't
> inspire much of anything, except as a convertible.

Well, I am thinking that the back seat of that old Delta was quite
inspirational, but that is another story...

> 
> Good idea, unless you want a mass-circulation number to take to advertisers.

Again, why do we think the magazine has to sell 7 million?  What's wrong
with approximately 3 million?  As Peggy pointed out, PLAYBOY is still the
best selling men's magazine.  Just because we see Maxim at the 7-11 doesn't
mean it is outselling PLAYBOY.  The proof is in the numbers and Peggy has
given us the proof.

But even more to the point: I have complete confidence that there are at
least 3-4 million sophisticated males in this country who are either reading
PLAYBOY now (and hoping for the best in the future) or who would read the
magazine if it regained some of its former substance and aesthetic.  Our
nation is not devoid of culture and sophistication.  It wasn't in the 50s
and it is even less devoid today.  The democratization of education is a
wonderful thing.

Mark, your comment suggests that advertisers are only interested in the
"quarter-educated."  If all we do is watch FOX TV (the channel that carried
PLAYBOY's venture into reality TV this last summer), then I suppose we might
have that impression.  But TV land is full of advertisers who have made
investments in cable channels that appeal to the sophisticated audience.
And last time I checked, The New Yorker, Harper's, and The
Atlantic--magazines that PLAYBOY used to associate with--are still selling
ads.

> 
>> And have you seen the new Mercury
>> Marauder?
> 
> It's the antithesis to the signs pointing to the collapse of Western
> Civilization. I haven't experienced so much raw lust since Elisa
> Bridges' PMOM appearance

It's all in the details.  When I dropped by my local dealership to check one
out, I refused to take it for a drive because I knew I would be a goner.
Indeed, I wouldn't even climb inside, fearing it would be like a first kiss.
But when the salesman fired up that V8 (300+ horses), I still went home with
a fantasy that has endured for weeks.

PLAYBOY used to do the same thing...

Dan Stiffler