August issue comments, part 2

[Peggy Wilkins]

>>>>> "Brian" == Brian Wallace <brian_c_wallace@yahoo.com> writes:

    Brian> I don't understand WHY so many people have this aversion to
    Brian> the Carnie Wilson pictorial.  Everyone is entitled to their
    Brian> opinion, blah, blah, blah but I don't understand why it is
    Brian> a "poor choice".

I thought it was a poor choice because of the lack of interest for
PLAYBOY's intended audience.  Before we even ask if men in general, or
young men in particular, want to see Carnie Wilson nude, first ask if
they would want to see her non-nude in a men's interest magazine.  I
am not one to second guess men, but my feeling is that the answer to
this is more likely than not, no.  If PLAYBOY is trying to attract the
interest of this audience, I don't think this pictorial helped them to
do that very much, no matter how good the pictures were.  It did make
a lot of press, but how much of that press was positive, or made
people sit up and take notice as an indication that PLAYBOY is back
and they should check it out?  If anything, it goes with a
par-for-the-course PLAYBOY that features second tier names with a
story to push.  Even the story isn't of much interest to most men, who
don't tend to understand or sympathize with women's weight struggles,
even in extreme cases like this.  To stretch this even farther, in the
context of PLAYBOY it is like carnival journalism.  (I will refrain
from making this into a terrible pun...)  They certainly didn't intend
it that way, but that is how it comes across.

    Brian> The most depressing thing for me is that this all smacks of
    Brian> elitism.  Certain women are "Playboy material", certain
    Brian> women are not.

One of the points I have stated before is that PLAYBOY should only
feature PLAYBOY-worthy women.  Should public figures be given easier
selection criteria merely because they are known?  I think that is one
of the things PLAYBOY should be trying to move away from at this
point.

    Brian> Why would someone cancel a subscription because there was
    Brian> an eight-page Carnie Wilson pictorial?  What was that
    Brian> person so angry at?

That person was part of this project, but left it, presumably for
personal reasons which he did not share with me.  My understanding is
that he considered it the straw that broke the camel's back -- it was
the latest in a long line of disappointments PLAYBOY had brought him
and so he felt obligated to speak with his money.  I can't speak for
him, though; but that is my understanding.

    Brian> I don't understand your comment, Peggy, that a woman editor
    Brian> came up with this idea.  Maybe a male editor wanted
    Brian> something different and unique for a pictorial.

I made that remark knowing full well of how irresponsible it was of me
to make it, but it was part of my making the point that this feature
really doesn't belong in a men's interest magazine.  Women are
interested in a woman's struggles with weight loss, men don't read
their magazines, or look at pictures of nude women, to find stories
like that.  I also knew that Marilyn Grabowski had approached Carnie
about doing the pictorial; when I read the quote about how Marilyn
told her that people would find her story inspiring, I cringed.  I
have nothing against Marilyn Grabowski, and it's not that Marilyn's
statement was false -- Carnie's story is indeed inspiring -- but
again, I thought it inappropriate for PLAYBOY's intended audience.

    Brian> Why do you think the pictorial is only of interest to
    Brian> women?  Maybe a male would think that Ms. Wilson is
    Brian> attractive as well.

I do like the pictures, and I know some men liked them as well, from
some of the comments I have read.  The biggest problem to me is that
PLAYBOY chose to feature this pictorial now -- when they are trying to
prove that they are the new and improved PLAYBOY.  This is why I
mentioned that PLAYBOY was sending mixed signals by featuring this
pictorial.  I think the timing was quite bad.

I very much liked Donna's suggestion of featuring Carnie in a career
context rather than just glamourized in a corset.  Perhaps a different
approach like that could have turned this feature around.  It looks
too formulaic and loses Carnie's individuality, as it is.

    Brian> I'm just puzzled by the harsh vitriol focused at Ms.
    Brian> Wilson.  A while ago, there was talk of a pictorial
    Brian> featuring "plus-sized" model Emme.  I can't imagine how
    Brian> much everyone would have hated that.

My criticism is with editorial decisions, not with Carnie.  I also
think there can be a place for the right plus-sized model (and I will
also mention PLAYBOY has gone that route before, though I don't know
what the reactions were); but a better context can be found to present
such a layout than the one that was chosen here.

Peggy Wilkins
mozart@lib.uchicago.edu