The Times Magazine Dapples Sunlight On Its Memoirist
Ex-Gawkerite Emily Gould Exposed, Is Posed for ‘Intimacy … Dreaminess’

one-on-one photo session at Ms. Gould’s Brooklyn apartment.
MORE Off the Record
This past winter, Paul Tough, a story editor at The New York Times Magazine, brought Emily Gould, a recently retired editor of Gawker.com, to the sixth floor of the paper’s skyscraper on Eighth Avenue. Sometimes, writers meet with the magazine’s editor in chief, Gerry Marzorati, and this was one of those times.
Mr. Marzorati had never before heard of Ms. Gould, he told Off the Record. They talked for around an hour about her “wanting to write some memoirish piece about having lived a fair amount of her life on the Internet in her first years in New York; I was interested.”
The assignment was made. The piece arrived in Mr. Marzorati’s in-box around six weeks ago. “It was a lot better written and more ‘thinky’ than I could have imagined,” he said. “I think she’s really a good writer, it turns out.” The task of illustrating fell to Elinor Carucci, a freelance photographer who said she does mostly fine arts work and spent several hours over two days in a one-on-one photo shoot at Ms. Gould’s apartment in Brooklyn.
“I got some direction: ‘We want it to be personal,’” Ms. Carucci said. “‘What’s her day like? Does she type on the bed? At the desk?’ They wanted her clothes, or maybe something that will be more intimate.”
Mr. Marzorati said his instructions were “to try to convey this sort of intimacy and dreaminess and sort of intimate detachment—if that’s a meaningful oxymoron—that is in the piece. They worked that out together.”
And this is how an image of Ms. Gould, poured upside-down onto a rumpled bed wearing a camisole, no bra and a come-hither look, landed on New Yorkers’ laptops and brunch tables over Memorial Day weekend. The writer was involved in winnowing the photos to a dozen, Ms. Carucci said. Still, “when I saw the cover, I was shocked,” Ms. Gould said on the phone from Bryant Park on May 27. Did she feel a tad exploited? Ms. Gould paused. “Yeah, I really don’t want to talk about it.”
She referred Off the Record to an online Q&A she gave for the Times Web site, in which she describes the photos as “vaguely cheesecakey.” “I am starting to wish the Magazine had chosen to illustrate the piece some other way, though,” she wrote.
“I don’t think it was terribly complicated,” Mr. Marzorati said of his cover calculus. “You’re always trying to entice people with a cover, whether it’s a story like this or it’s a story about Afghanistan. I mean, this just happened to be an intimate story written by a young person who happened to be attractive.”
“The photos speak for themselves,” said Kathy Ryan, the magazine’s photo editor, before ending a conversation with Off the Record.
Sex sells, of course—but this was not Maxim. And women writers in Manhattan could be forgiven for a slightly sickly feeling as they regarded the images. This again?
Photographing the young, attractive female writer of first-person narratives has become something of a tradition in New York media. There was Katie Roiphe writing about her divorce in New York magazine a few years ago, posing in a tight trench coat, with her baby and her designer purse hanging off each arm (there were no such images for Philip Weiss’ discussion of adultery on May 26). Ms. Roiphe’s visage also graced her Times Magazine cover story about date rape back in 1993. Then there was the one-two punch of Lucinda Rosenfeld and Nell Freudenberger, young fiction writers discovered by The New Yorker (Ms. Freudenberger was then fiction editor Bill Buford’s assistant), and photographed, both in -- wouldn’t ya know it?-- camisoles.
Where are they all now?
Ms. Freudenberger has published a book of short stories and a novel, and married an architect in 2006, according to The Times’s Styles section. Her agent, Amanda Urban, said she recently had a baby and was unable to comment.
Ms. Rosenfeld also recently had a baby, her second, and is married to New Yorker writer John Cassidy. “I remember some creepy guy at Connecticut Muffin in Park Slope asking me if I was the ‘girl on the stoop,’” she e-mailed, when asked about the photo shoot. She added that long term, she didn’t think it had affected her career one way or another. “Magazines come and go—every seven days. In the end, it’s the quality of the book that counts.” She said she’d had no time to read Ms. Gould’s cover story.
Joyce Maynard, who appeared on the cover of The New York Times Magazine back in 1972, at age 18, wearing dungarees and a crew neck sweater, was more voluble.
“I felt a motherly concern for that young woman, who is clearly a talented writer who now can’t quietly develop and will not have the opportunity to develop,” she told Off the Record by phone from California. “I would say now there are many better and few worse ways to launch one’s career and to develop as a writer than to plunge onto the cover of The New York Times Magazine.
“She’s the age of one of my sons,” she continued, considering Ms. Gould. “And I think a young artist is going to make all sorts of embarrassing mistakes. It’s best to make them a little less publicly.”
Did she think the younger woman was exploited? “Twenty-six is a little old to be exploited,” Ms. Maynard clucked. “I think she may have exploited herself.
“A serious writer should take her growth and development seriously,” she said. “Wait, that’s a bad sentence. A serious writer should put in the time to locate her own voice before she goes singing to the balcony. And that’s all very good advice given to me by J. D. Salinger in 1972 in somewhat different language in how I stated it, but that was pretty much the gist of the letter he sent to me.” (Mr. Salinger famously wrote to Ms. Maynard after seeing her story, and they had a relationship that she wrote about in a 1998 memoir, At Home in the World. In 1999, she auctioned off his letters for $156,000 at Sotheby’s.)
Ms. Maynard recalled that she got the story in the magazine after writing a letter to the paper’s Sunday editor, Max Frankel. (Mr. Frankel, now retired, said he hadn’t read the Gould piece. When asked about the cover, he said, “I’ll never judge a story by its cover!”) A few years later, Ms. Maynard got a reporting job at The Times.
“That was the beginning of my serious development as a writer, to begin to look outside myself and look at the world,” said Ms. Maynard. “So I got a job, and that’s a very good thing to do.”




















I see, so it's the fault of the Times Magazine for "exploiting" a crass narcissist who obviously can't bear the thought of not being paid attention to?
Has the author of this piece actually read the writing of Nell Freudenberger, Katie Roiphe, etc., and does he actually believe that Emily Gould is in same league? Or even playing the same game?
Preposterous.
She is a great beauty. She has a forehead that Michelangelo would honor and Lindsley Lohan envy.
Caroline Knapp, RIP.
Reading about Gould and Marzorati whining about explotation and fighting about whose aims and ethics are more pure, I kept thinking of the old National Geographic photos of monkeys sitting in small groups, busily picking bugs off each other's backs.
How does Mr. Koblin know she isn't wearing a bra? Spaghetti straps and beds don't scream literary seriousness, but then, neither does writing for Gawker, or blogging your relationship with your boyfriend. Piece seems awfully agitated considering the amount of objectification that goes on in media every day.
And the piece is NOT particularly well written, despite the Times assertion that it is, nor is it interesting or new. It seems like old news and the cover is the least of it.
Methinks that Mr. Marzorati's "thinky" comments pretty much say it all. These are relatively unintelligent, inarticulate people who, under the guise of bringing us relevant information about the world, continue to whore themselves and believe their own vapid nonsense (and, believe that they must have relevance, for, after all, someone is paying them to do this.)
Gould is a tool; Carucci, a derivative and unimaginative hack who keeps making the same amateurish snapshots year in and out; Ryan hasn't done anything relevant for years.
The fallout from this piece of onanistic silliness has been wonderful for one very important reason: it demonstrates that, despite all the droning, people really do know better and do see these peons for the talentless charlatans that they are.
Jeez, I wasted 25 minutes of my life reading the NYTimes piece (I'm a slow reader) and need to be more selective.
The pix suited the mood of the piece. Actually, I probably wouldn't have wasted my time if they had a less sexy shot.
PS - those tattoos are gonna look rough when your 45
Truman Capote looked a lot more feminine in his come-hither photo. She just looks pole-axed.
"Did she feel a tad exploited? Ms. Gould paused. 'Yeah, I really don't want to talk about it.'" Comedy gold right there.
yes the pictures are cheesy, but you picked them, obviously because they make you look good. you didnt feel victimized by them at all. the photographer spent two days with you. just because other people are saying they're cheesy doesn't mean you can just resort to an embarrassed i dont want to talk about it quip. i dont understand how someone in their late 20s could have so little conviction. i hated the story for being so spineless. there's nothing worse than a bitch who apologizes for being bitchy.
Writers writing about bloggers writing about blogging
Reality = parody of itself
The amount of dudgeon and pearl-clutching going on about this is ridiculous, this article and most of its commenters included. Wow, a clothed woman laying on a bed, how scandalous. At least we don't get a glimpse of her ankle! Now THAT would cause a ruckus, brouhaha, AND a fooferaw.
And it's such a shock that the NYT Magazine puts young attractive people on the cover and not old, wrinkled men like Philip Weiss. Oh wait, didn't they just have John McCain in extreme close-up? How could they exploit McCain like that?
Seriously, what's the problem here?
Not a terribly interesting article Sunday. Twenty-something navel-gazing at its dullets. Who cares?
Why are the comments about this article so much more interesting, entertaining and insightful than the article itself?
This is typical New York: an unabashed aspirant and commercialist trying to distinguish herself from the throngs of other wannabes by pretending to loathe the attention that she so desperately seeks.
It's laughable in all cases but especially pathetic in this instance, given the transparency of Gould's ruse. Was she not the person in those pictures? Did she not take them willingly? She knew full well what this was going to be, and the truth--as markedly distinct from her professed upset--is that she is loving every minute of it.
As an aside, I'll note the increasing media tendency to exaggerate the aesthetic merits of rather ordinary-looking people. I can't imagine that many readers would look at these pictures and find themselves taken with Gould's physicality. Yet she shamelessly invites precisely that response by oh-so-subtly referring--with contrived, disingenuous derision, mind you--to "cheesecake." As if! Cheesecake?! Let's be honest: between the face and tattoos, this woman is one step removed from having a code name on a CB.
Get over yourself, babe. No one is trying to objectify you, and your not-so-veiled suggestion that someone would even try is the worst sort of self-flattery.
Pretty girls make covers. Stop the presses.
Non-issue fittingly tied to a meandering non-story.
Cliff Notes version of Gould's piece: "Gee, maybe I shouldn't have outlined my most intimate moments in a public forum. But here they are again, in case you missed them the first time."
If Emily is lucky, she will someday do the sort of humanitarian work and intelligent reflective essays that Joyce Maynard eventually became known for, once she escaped from the infamy of that Times photo (and from Salinger's clutches.)
Gee, isn't that the point of the piece, which the pictures captured: a young woman who lives her live perhaps too exposed. Perhaps sharing too much. Shares private stuff that is interesting but perhaps too personal. The photos captured that beautifully. People are really not thinking.
I don't get it -- how are these pictures any different from most of the fluff that shows up in Vanity Fair, on a monthly basis? I mean, this *was* for the Times Magazine, and not the Times new section. How are these photos crossing the line in any way? If they had an Annie Liebovitz photo credit on them, would that make them "respectable" to New Yorkers?
The NY Times magazine has just about crashed on it's slide downhill. I rarely read it anymre (use to be a cover to cover read). And the T magazine. Good lord.
Hey--let's move on to relevant topics. In case anyone missed it, there's this hot memoir out by the former press secretary to Preident Bush that essentially calls him a liar and a drug addict.
Why the &^%% aren't we talking about THAT instead?
First off, "attractive"? Says who? And as with Miley Cyrus, don't sit for the photo if you don't want it used. Don't want to look like a whore slung seductively across your bed? There's a surefire way to avoid it. That said, the piece was fine, and the insular NY media gossip circlejerk about it is more telling (and more amusing) than anything Gould could have possibly written.
oh, Christ. can someone at the NYT please, please, please exploit me like this?
It's a career-maker, people. Get yer old-school knickers out of the twist.
Joyce who, now?
Oh, come on. In this age, it takes talent to take over the head space of so many people. To become celebrity. Paris Hilton has it, as does Tom Cruise, as--it appears--does Emily Gould. These are fascinating people. I enjoy them. Don't you? If you don't, why are you paying attention at all to them?
"Come hither"? "Cheesecakey"? Outside of New York, trailer parks, and biker bars, tattoos like hers and and attractiveness are mutually exclusive.
Christov--you mean like the essay Joyce wrote about dating Steve Martin? She's a real deep thinker, that Joyce!
http://www.joycemaynard.com/audio-stories/my-date-with-steve-martin.shtm...
POV
Paris Hilton Photoshot - Photo gallery - Pictures //
http://philton.blogcu.com
Great.
hoteles madrid
wholesale jewelry
handmade jewelry
wholesale fashion jewelry
handcrafted Jewelry
wholesale handmade jewelry
pearl jewelry
wholesale pearl jewelry
wholesale gemstone jewelry
wholesale turquoise jewelry
wholesale coral jewelry
wholesale shell jewelry
wholesale swarovski jewelry