January Jones' breasts: All real

GQ's photo editor says the "Mad Men" actress received no cleavage enhancement on its November cover

Tracy Clark-Flory
October 15, 2009 9:45PM (UTC)

I feel like a total boob. This morning, I got an e-mail from GQ alerting me to a new interview about the magazine's November cover shot of January Jones, which I speculated yesterday was heavily Photoshopped to make her breasts pop. Asked whether they messed with her cleavage, photo editor Dora Somosi responds: "No, absolutely not." She explains that Terry Richardson, the extremely talented photog behind the shoot, has a preference for "harder lighting" which "can create a stronger shadow -- that, and body position and perspective could give the illusion that her breasts are bigger." 

There you have it: I was wrong. 


Let me offer a glimpse of how this all transpired behind-the-scenes: My editor Sarah Hepola sent me an e-mail Wednesday morning with the subject line, "What the hell happened to January Jones' breasts?" She linked to the striking image and signed off with: "Bazoonga!" Yes, I thought, her cleavage does look rather unnatural. (For the record: I called them "porny" in my original post not because they were big but because they defied gravity in a manner that looked rather fake to me.) I published the item -- thinking of it as fun, ephemeral -- and turned to more pressing matters.

Then readers began questioning my assumption in the post's letters thread. A couple male coworkers argued that, hey, they also thought the photo looked legit. Hah! Sarah and I laughed. They just didn't understand. After all, women know real breasts and we know the ubiquity of heavily retouched women.

Oh, but I should have known better: As a teen, I spent uncountable hours propping up my breasts and smooshing them together to simulate the cleavage-to-chin look of Victoria's Secret models. I well know that slender women like Jones with anything above a B-cup can achieve this look with the right pose, outfit, lighting, camera angle or all of the above. Heck, I've been insulted in the past when a friend asked if my breasts were fake simply because of the way they sat on my slight build -- but there I was doing a very similar thing to Jones.

Why was I so quick to jump to the Photoshopping conclusion? Because it is so pervasive. My default setting is: Objects in magazine are other than they appear. After seeing the glossy rag beauty ideal you've grown up with revealed as a sham, it's easy to develop a defensiveness about such things. I wasn't the only one whose retouching radar was set off by the cover shot, either. Regardless, I'm sorry GQ. I said in my original post that I thought you were better than all that --  and you are.

Tracy Clark-Flory

MORE FROM Tracy Clark-FloryFOLLOW TracyClarkFloryLIKE Tracy Clark-Flory

Related Topics ------------------------------------------

Broadsheet Love And Sex Mad Men


Read Now, Pay Later - no upfront
registration for 1-Hour Access

Click Here
7-Day Access and Monthly
Subscriptions also available
No tracking or personal data collection
beyond name and email address


Fearless journalism
in your inbox every day

Sign up for our free newsletter

• • •