Request for comments

[Peggy Wilkins]

As I'm sure you're all aware, I've been working on producing the final
report of this project to send to PLAYBOY.  That report is going to
consist of two distinct parts: an edited down version of what we
discussed here (selected excerpts organized by topic), and a separate
commentary by me.  I have had the excerpts done for quite some time,
with most of my effort going into my own writing about what I think is
most important and useful to say.  I would like to start presenting
some of that writing here and get some feedback toward removing
perceived weaknesses and increasing its accuracy and impact.

First up is my opening page, titled "What Ails PLAYBOY?".  The aim of
this opening is to define the scope of the issue -- why update
PLAYBOY? -- and to suggest a new perspective on PLAYBOY's situation
that can result in some exciting, successful changes to the magazine.

The first page is here:

http://mozart.lib.uchicago.edu/mozart/playboy50/what_ails_playboy.html

I will warn you all that this page casts a very critical eye at
PLAYBOY's situation and their own role in it; but I think that the
potential payoff of my suggested shift in perspective is valuable.

The second page is titled "Editorial Policy and the Old and New
PLAYBOY", and it moves strongly forward from where the previous page
left off.  Read it here:

http://mozart.lib.uchicago.edu/mozart/playboy50/edit_policy.html

One thing I have wondered about myself is if these writings are too
negative.  There is some positive commentary to balance it in the
excerpt section, in particular where we have discussed what PLAYBOY
has meant to us and why, and certainly that inspiring section is a
great motivation to want to continue PLAYBOY's legacy.  The point of
my criticism, to me at least, isn't to beat them down or even to be
right (though I do believe my own points, to be sure), but to offer a
different perspective -- an outsider's perspective, one that is meant
to be both eye opening and useful in a practical sense.  I have tried
to say it all with the respect and love I always have had and still do
have for the magazine.  I hope that comes through.

Now I would like to close with a positive, practical suggestion along
the lines suggested by my writing.  The clearest problem I identified
in contributing to the public's perception of PLAYBOY as tired today
is their long term editorial policy of stagnation, one example of
which is the "geezer yuks" as the Chicago Tribune Art Director
condescendingly called the Party Jokes page.  I think a joke page
belongs in PLAYBOY, but it hasn't changed in either appearance or
location since the mid-50s: a dead certain recipe for being considered
"tired".  Here's a thought: why not move the Party Jokes page off of
the back of the centerfold and into the After Hours section?  It
certainly fits in the humorous nature of that section.  Expand the
presence of the Femlin from the jokes page to appearing throughout the
After Hours section; she would make a fun mascot there.  This might
involve redesigning the After Hours layout to fit her in; I think it
would be worth the effort.  This leaves the back of the centerfold
vacant, so what to put there?  How about putting pin-up art there?
This could be a showcase for both established artists like Olivia, and
for new ones -- the perfect excuse to go looking for some new artists.
It would also give that artwork the higher quality paper that is used
for the centerfold, and advantage for presenting art.  This change
might cause other issues, like would the full page cartoon still work
opposite the artwork?  That is just the kind of change to start
stirring up the whole mix.

That is one example of how analyzing the source of criticism ("geezer
yuks"?!?) can result in practical ideas for change.  I think they can
be ideas that will pay off in a big way.

And to come back full circle... I welcome any serious criticism of my
own work.  I hope it will work toward strengthening the end result.

Peggy Wilkins
mozart@uchicago.edu