Art in Playboy

[Peggy Wilkins]

>>>>> "Donna" == Donna Tavoso <dtavoso@earthlink.net> writes:

    Donna> I think what is crucial for Playboy in the debate of
    Donna> artwork vs. photography is to find the right balance.  In
    Donna> my opinion in the past there was too much artwork, much of
    Donna> it I found would turn me off to a story before I even read
    Donna> it -- I always felt like the magazine was holding on to its
    Donna> tradition of using art work simply for the sake of holding
    Donna> on to the tradition.

I think that PLAYBOY became very much ingrained in its approach to
feature illustration not for the sake of upholding tradition, but
rather out of habit.  I think that the editors held certain
assumptions about how features should be illustrated, and that was
never (or rarely) challenged, and so they maintained the status quo.
In fact, I think this has been the case all around and in my opinion
for the past several years PLAYBOY was running on autopilot most
months out of the year.  That to me is part of what has made the
issues seem stale or tired.  There were exceptions -- in particular
the December and January issues consistently have good features, and
the illustrations are no exception.  I was recently looking through
the January 2000 issue, and I was very impressed with the overall look
of the magazine: very attractive, sophisticated, and inviting.  Of
course that issue is a special one, and it is obvious from start to
finish that the editors (or some particular editor?) were making an
extra effort at everything in that issue.

If they can do that good a job for a single issue, why can't that be
the case for every issue, or even most issues?

Donna's point about being turned off by some illustrations is very
valid, but in addition to art vs. photography, that may also be an
issue of well chosen art vs. less well chosen art.

In my experience, I have been particularly turned off by the
illustrations accompanying the PLAYBOY Profile feature.  These
illustrations gave a very out-of-date feel to this feature, and I
think that the use of photographs of the person being profiled is an
obvious and preferable alternative.

PLAYBOY has always used a full page photograph in the 20 Questions
feature, and that has always seemed a particularly strong point to me
-- it's always been a good, interesting photograph in that feature.

The issue of balance of art vs. photography is interesting.  What I am
seeing in some recent issues is a mishmash of illustrative approaches
(and some of this may be layout, not just art or photographic) that
results in a perceived lack of visual unity.  Integrating the older
layouts (Advisor, Interview, etc.) with new graphics (additional
photographs and sidebars) seems quite visually conflicted.  Finding a
consistent visual approach for features seems to be a real challenge,
and I think it needs more work.


Peggy Wilkins
mozart@lib.uchicago.edu