How Hugh Hefner and Playboy staked a lasting claim to musical hipness

[mjzee]

Exactly how did jazz acquire this curious cultural cachet? I commend your attention to “Playboy Swings!: How Hugh Hefner and Playboy Changed the Face of Music,” a well-researched, fascinatingly detailed new book by Patty Farmer that comes out next month. Written with the assistance of Will Friedwald, a frequent contributor to the Journal, “Playboy Swings!” goes a long way toward answering that question.

Full review here:

WSJ

(Full article title: The Man Who Made Jazz Sexy.  You may need to Google the title to read the article.)

[JSngry]

 

 

 

[danasgoodstuff]

Hipness?  Really, now?

[mjzee]

Hipness?  Really, now?

Not now, but back then.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

Wasn't hip then. What was hip in the early sixties was 'The Doctor's boogie' - Dr Feelgood & the Interns; 'Soul motion' - Don & Dewey; 'I got a woman' - Jimmy McGriff; 'So far away' - Hank Jacobs; 'You can't sit down' - Phil Upchurch.

What you mean is, it was what the excessively unhip THOUGHT was hip.

Sorry, but that never counted.

MG

[fasstrack]

I always thought their 'polls' were silly. A lot of clashes if those folks played together.

At least they covered jazz, though....

 

[sidewinder]

I've got a couple of those Playboy 2LP sets somewhere - with Med Flory's band featured among others.

[JSngry]

I had easy access to jazz a few years before I did Playboy, and by that time, Penthouse was the thing. There was this dude I knew in college who subscribed to both, and it was the old cliche, I get Playboy for the articles, but I noticed that his old Penthouses had wear, his Playboys were still mint, so I guess he was reading the articles with x-ray vision or something.

Frankly, for as long as I've had an opinion, I've found Playboy kinda corny, and Hefner kind of creepy. Of course, it was around long before I was here to have an opinion, so maybe you kinda had to be there. But from what i can see in retrospect, they treated everything, including jazz, as a lifestyle accessory, and the lifestyle they were recommending accessories for was kinda silly. Naked chicks everywhere and sex at will, sure, yeah, All without pubic hair or exposed vaginas.

What kind of jazz you gonna have without exposed vaginas in the metaphorical mix?

Now, to the practical point - when was Si Zentner THAT popular?

[JSngry]

Better than Si Zentner, how about how Paul Desmond, perennial Playboy Reader Favorite, and Gloria Steinem, short-time Playboy Bunny and significantly longer-term Feminist Of Note, were a couple there for a while in the1970s.

[danasgoodstuff]

I had easy access to jazz a few years before I did Playboy, and by that time, Penthouse was the thing. There was this dude I knew in college who subscribed to both, and it was the old cliche, I get Playboy for the articles, but I noticed that his old Penthouses had wear, his Playboys were still mint, so I guess he was reading the articles with x-ray vision or something.

Frankly, for as long as I've had an opinion, I've found Playboy kinda corny, and Hefner kind of creepy. Of course, it was around long before I was here to have an opinion, so maybe you kinda had to be there. But from what i can see in retrospect, they treated everything, including jazz, as a lifestyle accessory, and the lifestyle they were recommending accessories for was kinda silly. Naked chicks everywhere and sex at will, sure, yeah, All without pubic hair or exposed vaginas.

What kind of jazz you gonna have without exposed vaginas in the metaphorical mix?

Now, to the practical point - when was Si Zentner THAT popular?

Dude, we all knew you'd 'go there' eventually, not that I disagree exactly, but still.

[JSngry]

What, Si Zentner? I don't recall that guy EVER being that popular for that long.

Or do we not remember the "difference" between Playboy & Penthouse, an oft-noted difference among consumers of the time?

If there's a nicer yet just as accurate way to put it in terms of the topic, I apologize for not being able to find it. But last time I looked, "exposed vaginas" is a term of simple, factual description, devoid of any vulgarity or salacious intent. "Unshaven underarm hair", "pierced earlobes", "painted fingernails", "exposed vaginas", I see no difference there.

Really, by the time I came of age, Playboy was on the way to being considered square, and that was a big part of why. That's history. We gonna talk about Playboy and hipness, let's talk about that then, All of it. Because there was a Playboy "ethos"., and it did fall out of favor, all of it.

"Metaphorically", yes, the Playboy "brand" of jazz, or hipness, or nudity, or whatever, seemed very much about leaving some of the parts out, mostly the parts that could make a mess. Everything cool, calm, controlled, and just as they wanted you to think that you wanted it, because, that's how you build customer dependence loyalty.

Mr. Teachout is correct in pointing out that Playboy did advocate for jazz, but not all jazz, and the notion that all jazz is "hip" is as fallacious as the notion that adopting it as a lifestyle accessory confers hipness on the adoptee. Personally, I think it's a reach of a premise, the whole "lasting claim" thing, and definitely an overreach as far as being a fully accurate look at things.

But between Si Zentner, Bob Brookmeyer, and Slide Hampton (and I'm trying to remember anything ca. 1973 that would have given Slide Hampton any visibility at all, or for that matter, Bob Brookmeyer in 1970...wasn't eh pretty much "off the scene" then?), my hunch is that a lot of trombone players were Playboy subscribers.

and let me tell you what periodical had a helluva lot more jazz/hip thing going on in the same years as Playboy - Saturday Review. Not Stereo Review (although they had some good coverage), not Saturday Evening Post (as if...), but Saturday Review. More, more ongoing, and broader/deeper coverage than anything I've ever seen in Playboy. don't nobody remember them now, but check 'em out. Not a "hip magazine", but some above average jazz coverage for about 15 years, mid 50s to very early 1970s..

[xybert]

Jazz ceased to be cool and hip the moment it started advertising itself as being cool and hip. Shouting "Hey everyone! I'm the coolest and cool people like me" is the antithesis of cool. I'm trying to think of any other genre that's made that mistake since, and i can't.

Back in my early twenties there was a period where i'd pretty much blow my whole paycheck at the local comic shop. One day when i went in they had two or three boxes of old Playboys from the sixties and seventies that someone had brought in, and i couldn't resist buying them. From memory there were definitely some interesting articles, serialised books etc. Good interviews with Gary Gilmore and Kurt Vonnegut among others off the top of my head. Some quite elaborate, like, cardboard inserts and things. A lot of the more overt lifestyle articles etc were of course pretty funny and dated. And of course the ads. I still have the one with Robert De Niro before he was Robert De Niro for a hot comb or something. 

[Mark Stryker]

Couple quick thoughts: I for one would have LOVED to hear what some of those all-star bands would have sounded like in real life, especially that first one from '67. What a glorious mess. But, really, who wouldn't want to hear THAT.

Playboy's circulation peaked at 7 million in 1972. That's a pretty astounding number in context.

I've posted this before but this 1964 round table discussion on the state of jazz with a stellar panel (Dizzy, Cannonball, Schuller, Mingus, Brubeck, Russell, Kenton, Ralph J. Gleason) ran for an amazing 17,000 words in Playboy. It's fascinating on many levels, including the fact that, even allowing for Hefner's love for jazz and its centrality to the Playboy philosophy, the music was still considered interesting enough and relevant to the wider cultural dialogue that any general circulation magazine, including Playboy, would devote so much real estate to such a rarified discussion. That would never happen today. Hell, even the jazz magazines never take on some of these big issues in this way. This issue was billed as a special Jazz & Hi-Fi Issue on the cover. I've told the story before, but I found a copy in a used bookstore down by the University of Chicago about 13 years ago. The issue just happened to be sitting on the top of a stack in the corner. I really did buy it for the articles! I'm fairly certain tne unnamed moderator is Nat Hentoff, who also wrote a separate overview piece.

http://www.cannonball-adderley.com/article/playboy2.htm

 

 

.

Edited September 28, 2015 by Mark Stryker

[JSngry]

This comment from the WSJ article:

There was also the factor that Playboy's market predecessor and partial competitor in the "sophistictaion for males" category, Esquire, had been heavily committed to jazz coverage and celebration, too. No?

I've only known Esquire since the late 1960s, by which time it was reputable fare found in doctor's offices and such. But other than the Vargas Girls, etc things, how "racy" was it, ever?

[mjzee]

There were two components to the book mentioned in Teachout's review.  One was about Playboy, but the other was the use of jazz as makeout music.  I firmly believe that's the reason Kind Of Blue is the largest selling jazz album in history.

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

What, Si Zentner? I don't recall that guy EVER being that popular for that long.

 

Yeah, he only had 4 hit albums out of seven zillion. First was the only one in the Billboard top hundred, end '61. Last was on in Sep 63, so that's less than two years.

MG

[JSngry]

From http://www.swingmusic.net/Zentner_Si.html

Si began recording for Liberty in 1959, and after assembling a large touring swing outfit, toured steadily. A great PR man and promoter, Zentner's bands won an amazing 13 straight Down Beat polls for “Best Big Band.”

Did this really happen?

http://www.downbeat.com/default.asp?sect=cpollindex

I see no immediate evidence that it did.

[danasgoodstuff]

Interesting thing about those downbeat readers (and critics) polls is that the're not really any/much 'hipper' (whatever that is) than the Playboy Readers.

[JSngry]

Music has always been hipper than its fans (and often enough, players), which is not a dis on fans (or players), just an expression of awe about how deep music can be. As arrogant as people want to be about themselves (sometimes justifiably, sometimes absurdly), music itself is more of all that than all of all that combined. And then some.
 If music cannot make you humble, you had better watch out for what's coming.

along those lines...Si Zentner, wtf? Liar? Bald-Faced liar?

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

 If music cannot make you humble, you had better watch out for what's coming.

 

Saying of the YEAR! (Or maybe the decade.)

MG

[johnblitweiler]

The best article that Rex Stewart wrote was his long piece about racism in jazz during the swing era etc. It was in Playboy in the Jazz Poll issue in, I think, the year he died - the would make it about the Feb. 1967 issue. It was not reprinted in Stewart's book "Jazz Masters of the Thirties" because Playboy would not give him the rights to reprint it. I'd love to see that article again. Do any Organissimo folks collect 1967 Playboys?

But last time I looked, "exposed vaginas" is a term of simple, factual description, devoid of any vulgarity or salacious intent. "Unshaven underarm hair", "pierced earlobes", "painted fingernails", "exposed vaginas", I see no difference there.

Jim, put on your glasses

[JSngry]

Only if it helps me see Si Zentner!

[Guy Berger]

OK, for a Terry Teachout piece that wasn't awful.  He nails the bottom line - an important artifact of mid-to-late 20th century American culture (Playboy magazine) - also happened to be a footnote in the history of jazz during the same period.  I hope Farmer's book title is her publisher's fault rather than an accurate reflection of its content; it drives me crazy when people shift the credit for music from its creators to people with only a secondary or (in this case) tertiary link to the music.

 

Edited September 30, 2015 by Guy Berger

[JSngry]

I'm blaming Si Zentner until proof to the contrary can be provided.

[medjuck]

This comment from the WSJ article:

There was also the factor that Playboy's market predecessor and partial competitor in the "sophistictaion for males" category, Esquire, had been heavily committed to jazz coverage and celebration, too. No?

I've only known Esquire since the late 1960s, by which time it was reputable fare found in doctor's offices and such. But other than the Vargas Girls, etc things, how "racy" was it, ever?

Esquire was into jazz before my time but I do have an old Esquire Jazz Yearbook that gets pretty heavily in to the moldy fig/bop controversy.  People forget that the Great Day in Harlem photo was taken for Esquire. Not only that, but it was part of an issue devoted to "The Golden Age of Jazz"-- by which they meant right then:1958.  I'm sure people laughed at that but they were right, it was a golden age  and people rarely know when they're living in one. . Though Bird had died, The Sound of Jazz had just been broadcast and many of the older greats were still alive and working.  Miles in '58 had Trane, Bill Evans and Cannonball in his group. The list goes on.  

I don't have a copy of that issue and I forget what else is in it. (I think an article on John Hammond-- IIRC he went on and on about how much he hated Artie Shaw.)  Remember the Esquire jazz polls and concerts?  I   don't know when they started covering jazz or when they stopped but for a time they were a force for the music.