ummm… URL?
The book sold out within weeks. It now appears on eBay and other auction sites for many times its original price.
I liked parts of it. But appreciating art is subjective.
:eek: :eek: :eek: Jesus H. Christ! I think I just had an orgasm when I read that. I think I need to get out more…
The only good thing to come from that book was the Saturday Night Live sketch. Phil Hartman as Charleton Heston performing the book-on-tape version of Madonna’s “Sex” book. “I like to play with my vagina. Sometimes I look at it in the mirror and imagine what it would look like without hair.” That man was brilliant.
(Phil Hartman, in case I wasn’t clear. He’s the one who was brilliant.)
Haven’t seen the book myself, but I guess it’s just like every single other aspect of Madonna: way too much ado about nothing.
And kids, if you call in, I will send you a book with pictures of me naked! ::Krusty holds up a book labelled Sex::
From the Simpsons 138th episode spectacular.
Ok, so it had been years from when I saw this book. So I hit up Google with “Madonna Sex Book” and within a few pages I found a site that contained scans of the entire book.
I made it about 20 pages in before I got bored.
Oddly, I am not turned on -nor do I feel like I want sex. But I do crave oatmeal.
I have no idea what Freud would say about that.
Ummm… No.
It was then a mediocre, uninspired, low-octane mildly kinky fetish book. Today, it’s not even mildly kinky. Betty Paige did it better, and years before. Oh, and it was way over-priced, to boot. No, I didn’t buy it; I borrowed a friend’s copy (He said he didn’t much care if he got it back).
OTOH, as mentioned before, it was a masterpiece of publicity, the one area where Madonna has consistantly excelled.
Url? You can email it to me …
I found it. It was in italian so I was thrown off.
Indeed people, some very witty and insightful posts here to be sure. In particular, that post about some pal who’s soul was being rotted by the presence of the book in his house? Now THAT was funny!
I think it’s safe to say we all agree here about something - namely, that Madonna is a truly world class example of ‘marketing made good’ - and yet, I’m hearing an underlying tone of ‘not so great on the musical front’ however.
My point is this - and forgive me for a slight hi-jack here but it DOES tie in in a way - I was recently reading a wonderfully well written piece about the explosion of MTV in the 1980’s - and Madonna’s concurrent explosion in exposure as a result.
The question was asked by one particularly isightful woman - “In a world of sightless people, would ANY of us ever heard of Madonna? I mean, come on?” And when you think about it, she really does have a point.
Most of us here are real music lovers it seems, and we often bemoan how much the visual aspects of ‘image marketing’ hijack the music business.
Accordingly, I recently came to the decision that, in regards to music file sharing amongst PC users around the world, that it’s ACTUALLY a good thing - for music itself that is. It’s unquestionably a bad thing for the record company’s - but in the purest context of music being disseminated and spreading ‘via word of mouth’ due to it’s quality alone - it’s a great thing because the ‘image marketing’ people are TOTALLY excluded from the manipulation process. The music itself thrives or falls based on it’s quality alone and I personally condone anything which will promote such a thing.
Coz I gotta tell ya, Madonna, and Britney, and Shakira, and Gabrielle, and TIffany, and Mandy, and Destiny’s Child? They all shit me off big time. They’re all examples of ‘marketing minds’ exploiting a ‘visual medium’ to hijack music - which is an AURAL medium. Gimme Aretha Franklin or Carol King or Anita Baker ANY DAY. Or even Natalie Merchant or Fiona Apple. True musicians.
With the slight difference that Reed Waller was a far better auteur of erotica 
Me, I like and enjoy her performances, but her whole Erotica/Sex career period leaves me scratching my head…
Yes! Yes! My point exactly!
DrFidelius, do what he did. I can’t post the URL here, as it violates the SDMB restriction against linking to porn. Even boring, crappy, over-hyped porn.
The responses to his thread have reaffirmed my faith in my artistic sensibility.
She had a lousey photographer.
I remember thinking at the time, why is she doing this with some third rate Helmut Newton wannabbe? Why the hell doesn’t she get Helmut Newton?
For that matter, why, as big as she was at the time, couldn’t she convince Helmut Newton, Bruce Weber, Herb Ritts- and while we’re at it, Nan Goldin and Cindy Sherman, to weigh in on her famous naked body? Could have been an interesting book.
Instead she goes with a hack. Honestly, was it really just 'cuz she was sleeping with him?
But Betty wasn’t famous when she did it. I agree that the content of Sex wasn’t any different than other photographic erotica on the market at the same time. But unlike any other book on the market, it featured one of the most famous celebrities in the world.
Personally I’ve always admired Madonna. In my opinion she’s not a great entertainer, but for twenty years she’s been consistently brilliant at marketing herself.
Oh yes.
I remember when it came out. I remember being in awe at the evil genius of her self publicising skill. The teasers in all the womens magazines, implying that they were soft or toned down compared to the rest of the book. The way she managed to imply so much with so little. The “exclusivity” somehow allowing her to sell herself without becoming cheap.
Singer? Musician? Actress? Bah.
Publicist extraordinaire. Oh. Yeah.