Wild is the Wind

I am a big fan of magazines. In fact, there's a side table in my house that stores tens of them at any given time in our living room.  While the content (the actual articles) may be lackluster at times, the bright colors and fun layouts appeal to the visual part of my brain.  And of course, when it comes to fashion magazines, there are the clothes.  Lots of beautiful clothes. In addition to loving graphic design, I'm also a fan of really well designed clothes (and accessories).

It may be a bit nerdy, but one of my favorite things to do at newsstands is stand in front of rows of magazine covers and take them all in.  What color palette is being used on the cover?  How's the typography and typesetting?  And finally, how was the cover star photographed (and by extension, to what extent was he/she photoshopped…)?  I like to take in the elements I like, and apply them to the things I get a chance to design and (beginning today!) write critiques about the elements I wasn't too keen on.

This brings me to the cover of the latest Rolling Stone featuring three of the stars of HBO's True Blood. The cover (as you can see to the right) shows all three characters naked and covered in blood. Anna Paquin is the only female of the bunch and she is positioned between the two men (Alexander Skarsgard and Stephen Moyer, respectively). There is a lot of buzz around this cover for obvious reasons. Personally, I'm not offended that they are naked. The naked body is a beautiful (even magical, if you think about its potential) thing. Moreover, I'm not really bothered by the blood. The show is about vampires and the name of the show includes the word "blood," it comes with the territory, so to speak. However, what bothers me about the cover is the posing of the bodies. The positioning is borderline pornographic. If you removed Anna Paquin's recognizable face and replaced it with a porn star's, I would have totally believed this photo to be the cover of a Pirates-esque vampire porno.

Now, I'm not a prude. I don't think there's anything wrong with porn (as long as everyone involved in the making is getting tested and paid). But I do take issue with mainstream media exploiting sex when it is convenient. Rolling Stone didn't put this photo on their cover because it's a great photo. It's actually pretty lame as far as sexually charged photos go (the eyes are, for lack of a better word, lifeless — I mean, I get that they are vampires but really?). They put this on their cover because sex sells and they desperately needed to move copies of the magazine. And truthfully, I probably wouldn't be talking about Rolling Stone had it not been for this unfortunate cover. So, from Rolling Stone's perspective, perhaps the mission was accomplished? However, it seems like a missed opportunity for HBO to better promote a show that it seems a lot of people are excited about.