skin and ads

[Dan Stiffler]

On 11/10/03 5:56 PM, "Brian Sorgatz" <bsorgatz@hotmail.com> wrote:
 
> I, for one, am bummed.  I loved that show.  Maybe it wasn't great art, but
> it was topical enough.  I thought it would be a hit by resonating with the
> national red-state-versus-blue-state zeitgeist.

I will reserve judgment on Brian's taste in TV shows, since I didn't watch
Skin (indeed, I don't watch serial TV, so I don't have the right to judge
any of it, except the promotional ads).

Even so, I think Brian's "great art" vs. "topical enough" very much gets at
the dilemma that faces PLAYBOY today.

Honestly, there once was a time when PLAYBOY aspired to "great art."  The
magazine enjoyed winning awards for content and design, awards that it
deserved because it was a great magazine (one of the nation's best).

Today, it rides on its reputation of greatness but often aspires to be
"topical enough" to sell copies at the newsstand.  From my point of view,
greatness does not come from the "added celebrity trend."

People magazine is not "great art"; but it damn sure is "topical enough."

Regards,

Dan Stiffler