A Non-Blog Disliked by Google
She surely loves him for his looks and not his money. This is so sad and pathetic on so many levels. He will not cheat the malach hamoves with this trick. Or perhaps this is just a publicity stunt - kabuki theater to sell magazines. No one knows what goes on behind closed doors. I suspect not much. Even viagra has its limits.K
I understand that Lloyd, Koko's fiance, is being employed to entertain the new Mrs Hefner, during Hugh's short absences for chelation therapy, dialysis, ventricular assist device insertion, coronary re-perfusion, carotid endarterectomy, genital implant surgery and cognitive fitness exercises. Anon.
This is no season to be negative...According to actuarial tables, Hef has 15 years more of healthy life left. With the loving geriatric care from his new wife, he can easily live to 100. He can still have one or two viable sperm so they can become happy parents of wonderful children (his brains, her looks). We wish them all the best!
The real tragedy about Hefner is that with all his access to women, he is only on record as having 4, perhaps 5 children. Had he been an African, he would have had about four or five hundred.Anon.
4 or 5 is very good for a high class American.
Sadly, that is true. And rarely accomplished with only one woman.Anon.
The whole Playboy culture is pathetic. The magazine tried to be more than a girlie magazine by commisioning short stories from famous writers, which I am certain no one read. I say this as I was once upon a time an avid reader of fiction and could barely read a single one. And the jokes too were trite even by the standards of the times.
Ivan,Playboy had really good and serious articles. I for one read them.
I must have generalised from limited data. Then (late 1970s) as now Playboy magazines are prohibited items in Singapore. But one can always get copies if you want them.
"The magazine tried to be more than a girlie magazine by commisioning short stories from famous writers, which I am certain no one read."A roommate in college had a subscription. I read the short stories. I'm sure plenty of others did too. Why wouldn't they? What kind of idiot would avoid reading a short story by John Updike or Saul Bellow because there happened to be some tasteful photos of naked women in the same magazine? The articles were good too, as J mentions. I remember one from the early 90's, an interview with Stephen Hawking, where he made pretty much the same ontological/cosmological arguments he recently warmed over for his latest book.
Interesting article about the Jewish editors of Playboy in the 60s and 70s: http://www.tabletmag.com/arts-and-culture/books/26418/my-son-the-pornographer/"By the 1960s, Playboy and its founder had become household names. But while Hugh Hefner was out making his brand synonymous with the good life, a team of Jewish editors made his magazine one of the liveliest, sexiest, and most progressive reads around."
Oh and there are some free issues from the archive dating back to that era available at playboyarchive.com
Maybe I am that idiot.
My (unscientific) impression was that they often published short stories by major authors (and at a time when there was a decreasing market for such works) but that they were not necessarily the best works. Also, the oft-repeated cliche' (which is nevertheless true) is that nobody bought (I put it in the past tense because increasingly no one buys it at all) Playboy for the articles. The articles were there as filler to give some fig leaf of respectability to the pictures of naked women. By the standards of modern internet pornography, which leaves NOTHING to the imagination, the Playboy photos were quite tame. They are caught between a rock (and you should pardon the expression) a hard place - if they leave the photos as they are (so wholesome despite the nudity that some parents want their daughters to appear in Playboy) then they lose all but their existing loyal (aged) reader base because young men want spicier fare. If the adapt to modern standards then they lose their air of semi-respectability and ability to be sold in mainstream outlets (Borders bookstores & such). So far they have not squared the circle and their business teeters on the brink like a blonde in 6 inch heels.It is difficult to say what Hef's fiance looks like in real life. In her photos, she is surgically enhanced, shaved and plucked, chemically bleached, all blemishes have been (digitally) airbrushed away to the point where her skin looks like a CGI special effect, etc. She is probably a nice looking girl but who can tell anymore? I think they should just skip the human completely and go right to the CGI.K
In my youth, Playboy was considered obscene; but now, with the wisdom of hindsight, I can see it merely catered to, and still caters to entirely normal, heterosexual tastes, featuring normally-proportioned, healthy young women who were likely to conceive children with normal men.Paradoxically, this is why today's culture considers it obscene.Anon.
I know that no one will believe me, but I bought Playboy in the early seventies for its intellectual content. It had excellent, long articles and interviews that appeared nowhere else. My taste in girls was/is different. The models were too artificial and old-looking for me at the time.
I think I've only pored over a few Playboys in my life. I do remember one joke from an issue a 15-year old friend had under his bed:What did the leper say to the prostitute?Keep the tip.
That's like the old joke about the ritual circumciser (mohel). When asked about his profession, he replied that, "the pay is lousy but the tips are good."K
Post a Comment