By Digby Warde-Aldam
Catherine Opie, 700 Nimes
Road, Bedside Table, 2010-11. © Catherine Opie. Courtesy of the artist and
Regen Projects, Los Angeles.
That Michael Jackson was a
strange, unknowable figure is beyond doubt, yet there are a few things about him
that we can take as fact. The King of Pop was one of nine siblings in a working
class family from Gary, Indiana, who was thrown into the limelight before he
had reached his teens. As a solo artist, he bridged the gap between black and
white audiences like no entertainer before him, selling millions of records and
becoming the biggest star of the 1980s.
But from there on, things
got complicated. His appearance changed beyond recognition, and his public
persona, too, took on a new character: His behavior, previously perceived as
charmingly eccentric, now looked worryingly, perhaps dangerously odd. Jackson’s
fall from grace was complete by the time he was arrested on child molestation
charges, and though he was ultimately acquitted, his reputation never recovered.
He died—horrifically young—a few years later, disfigured, broke, and
discredited.
This is the official story.
But the strange thing about Jackson is that, more so than any other star, our
perception of him is defined by subjective individual responses. For almost all
of us born between the 1960s and the ’90s, there will be at least one specific,
emotional memory of the man that transcends the usual parameters of stardom. My
own takes us back to the northeast of England in 1996, where, as a Thriller-obsessed
seven-year-old, I stayed up late to watch Jackson’s appearance on a live
televised awards ceremony. (Remember: Quite apart from appealing to fans from
different racial backgrounds, Jackson also bridged the age divide like nobody
else.)
Gary Hume, Michael, 2001. ©
Gary Hume and DACS, London 2018. Courtesy of the artist, Sprüth Magers and
Matthew Marks Gallery.
I felt acute
disillusionment, and from there on, my relationship with the soi-disant King of
Pop came to be defined by sincere pity. I wasn’t alone. In 2001, Jackson
travelled to Oxford University to give a halting, if heartfelt, speech, in
which he touched on his own tumultuous upbringing. Shortly afterwards, British
artist Gary Hume noticed a photograph of his arrival at the college. Jackson
looked terrible, his face rigid from surgery, loose hairs streaming across his
forehead. Hume had an immediate emotional response to the image, and decided to
use it as a reference for a new painting. The resulting work is notable for
using a circular framing that creates a sense of unbearable, claustrophobic
proximity to the subject, cutting off Jackson’s face at lip level and hiding
his upper hairline. The eyes are rendered as olive-green blotches elaborated
with slug-like black shapes, and those stray hairs dangle wildly, like contours
on a map. Sensitively, Jackson’s nose is represented only by two uneven,
comma-shaped black marks. “I tried to be as sympathetic as I could,” Hume said
at the time. “I wasn’t in any sense trying to ridicule him. I feel for him.”………………..
https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-michael-jackson-remains-thrilling-inspiration-artists?utm_medium=email&utm_source=13655220-newsletter-editorial-daily-06-22-18&utm_campaign=editorial&utm_content=st-
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario