tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5777454663138389757.post1740337319058011625..comments2023-08-20T05:06:10.517-04:00Comments on The Year in Pictures: CoveredThe Year in Pictureshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03523797971986864363noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5777454663138389757.post-3949031591195522722008-05-22T02:23:00.000-04:002008-05-22T02:23:00.000-04:00cheeky is right. love this.cheeky is right. love this.Joanna Goddardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18109285188206811042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5777454663138389757.post-29195715779951120692008-05-19T22:25:00.000-04:002008-05-19T22:25:00.000-04:00I though I posted a comment before, maybe I forgot...I though I posted a comment before, maybe I forgot. anyways I featured you on my site, I hope you do not mind.Eyeliahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03142659793492938216noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5777454663138389757.post-42446936067126559222008-05-19T10:03:00.000-04:002008-05-19T10:03:00.000-04:00After reading your last post and subsequently the ...After reading your last post and subsequently the article on Pascin, I became obsessed with the image of Gwyneth Paltrow on May's Vogue. Here's an obvious example of cover shot as prime advertising real estate for a star's latest film.<BR/>What I can't understand is who approved this image where one of today's most interesting actors looks like an alien life-form - aggressive retouching erases what we love about these people. What would that cover be without Steve's fabulous lines?jenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07263384686812990223noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5777454663138389757.post-58795581501717118292008-05-18T18:20:00.000-04:002008-05-18T18:20:00.000-04:00It's also worth noting that that cover was the fir...It's also worth noting that that cover was the first time a man had appeared on the cover of mainstream American women's magazine.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5777454663138389757.post-23878696011175082152008-05-17T20:56:00.000-04:002008-05-17T20:56:00.000-04:00what ...love maegan said!what ...love maegan said!nina corvallohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15481563073221111612noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5777454663138389757.post-49703779601116660472008-05-16T12:07:00.000-04:002008-05-16T12:07:00.000-04:00I am in love with that cover. It's perfect.I am in love with that cover. It's perfect.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15540367324651819913noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5777454663138389757.post-91046283140632151762008-05-16T09:39:00.000-04:002008-05-16T09:39:00.000-04:00Indeed!However what also gets me in is his cheeky ...Indeed!<BR/><BR/>However what also gets me in is his cheeky grin and those eyes... and the arm. A great shot.Alice Olivehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09726631444593912661noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5777454663138389757.post-48719633394045271842008-05-16T06:30:00.000-04:002008-05-16T06:30:00.000-04:00And you wouldn't get the crow's feet and laugh lin...And you wouldn't get the crow's feet and laugh lines that make Steve McQueen so appealing!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5777454663138389757.post-87551018848060759042008-05-16T00:29:00.000-04:002008-05-16T00:29:00.000-04:00Your point is spot-on. Although the Bazaar cover s...Your point is spot-on. Although the Bazaar cover shown in today's post is perhaps not the best example, magazine covers in the late 1960s and through the 1970s were driven by concept, not celebrity. That's not to say that covers didn't feature celebrities -- they did, of course. The the featured celebrity was woven into a larger story.<BR/><BR/>Personally, I think the Esquire covers in the late 1960s (can't remember the art director's name) set a standard that no magazine has again achieved. <BR/><BR/>For a great example, check this out:<BR/>http://www.esquire.com/cover-detail?year=1969&month=5<BR/><BR/>By the way, this link takes you to the entire Esquire cover catalog -- quite a remarkable visual treasure.Barryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09412033978642026623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5777454663138389757.post-63603240804537580202008-05-15T23:46:00.000-04:002008-05-15T23:46:00.000-04:00I agree with MB...you chose to show a picture of S...I agree with MB...you chose to show a picture of Steve McQueen circa 1962, which seems to imply that you are saying that the celebrity-as-cover is an old trick. (Although I will predict that you will say "but he is on the cover of HARPER'S BAZAAR!") But you crossed us up. I thought you would've gone the other way, and instead illustrated your observation with a selection or three from the new exhibit at the MOMA on George Lois' Esquire covers over the 62-72 decade. Those definitely had "graphic boldness" that would have defied market research.<BR/><BR/>jaydeeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5777454663138389757.post-45807416469680897112008-05-15T22:31:00.000-04:002008-05-15T22:31:00.000-04:00The media today, be it the fashionindustry or the ...The media today, be it the fashion<BR/>industry or the film industry or <BR/>the magazine industry, is out to<BR/>make a buck. Money is the drving<BR/>force behind the exploitation of<BR/>women, be they celebrities or <BR/>everyday people. We as individual <BR/>consumers, viewing all of this, have to use our common sense, and<BR/>say yes or no to it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5777454663138389757.post-39711390837995250532008-05-15T18:15:00.000-04:002008-05-15T18:15:00.000-04:00That is a particularly fine cover.I'm not sure if ...That is a particularly fine cover.<BR/>I'm not sure if I totally get your point though - surely Steve McQueen was the celeb-de-jour at the time - and putting him on the cover was done to up sales. Is it just that we look back on this image with a certain nostalgia for a time when everything wasn't all plastic-coated and brand-heavy? Sure I agree that, these days, all products - including magazines - are totally driven by sales and achieving the perfect pitch and demographic - but I'm certain that publishing houses in 1962 still had their bottom-lines.<BR/>I do however agree with you that these days we are lacking quality and imagination - and, I'll throw this one in - originality too.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5777454663138389757.post-80169130000876804332008-05-15T17:03:00.000-04:002008-05-15T17:03:00.000-04:00both...everything now-a-days is designed to fit a ...both...<BR/><BR/>everything now-a-days is designed to fit a moldginger bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04287679758445874931noreply@blogger.com