Sunday, February 7, 2010

Henry Art Gallery Part 1: Polaroids: Mapplethorpe






Last Sunday was the last day of the Polaroids: Mapplethorpe exhibit at the Henry Art Gallery at the University of Washington. And after hearing Patti Smith discuss her relationship with the photographer I felt very compelled to see the work. I also took time to reflect on how much my thoughts about Robert Mapplethorpe have changed over the years.

ROBERT MAPPLETHORPE AND ME
My first knowledge of the work of Robert Mapplethorpe came in my first semester at ASU in my very first art history class taught by my favorite; Dr. Eli Bentor, or as I call him The Human Library. We had to do group presentations about the topic of obscenity so naturally Mapplethorpe was an easy target as well as painter Georgia O'keefe and I also think photographer Sally Mann. I was in charge of the introduction of the presentation which involved me standing in front of the class with a Mapplethorpe slide projecting on the screen behind me. This Mapplethorpe slide: Man In Polyester Suit
It was from this time on that I had come to know him as someone whose artistic purpose was merely based on shock value. A Google image search of just his name will result in pictures that would make Larry Flint blush. Doing research on him has always left me with imagery that one cannot simply UNSEE. His content often involves portraiture of celebrities and his own lovers. They are often homo-erotic in nature and sometimes a bit sadomasochistic. They are typically in black and white however I have seen some of his work that is in color and they usually involve at least one body part that we as citizens are required by law to have covered when in public.
None of this even makes me flinch. I am mostly desensitized by art classes actually it was a few select female artists that were responsible for my inability to become shocked by the human figure. But there was something that never sat quite right with me regarding his portraits of nude children. To be fair they are all commissioned by the parents of the children in question. And who doesn't have that picture that their mom took of them getting bathed in the sink as a baby? But still I could never get past these things to see clearly into Mapplethorpe as an artist.
Other experiences I have had with Robert Mapplethorpe have included the time that my 8 year old nephew and I were at the Scene in America exhibit at The Mint which was focused around the contemporary image of the black man and Mapplethorpe's piece was a wonderful nude in which my nephew upon seeing replied, "Why is that guy naked?" To which I said, "Well, being naked in art is different than being naked in everyday life." Thank God he accepted that and we were permitted to move on.
I came across Mapplethorpe again in my Art Criticism and Theory class while we were reading Camera Lucida by Roland Barthes. This time the discussion surrounded the relationship of photographer to subject and the way that Mapplethorpe's subjects were almost always his lovers. We talked about what that meant for the image and whether or not it reflected in the photographs. In my opinion, it does. Blatantly in his case.
Another time I utilized Mapplethorpe for another discussion about obscenity in a paper/presentation that I did for my Philosophy of Art and Beauty class. I was critiquing his nude portraits of children in comparison with Sally Mann's nudes of her own children. The discussion was about small technicalities that determined Mapplethorpe's to be more offending to audiences than Mann's. This is a whole different topic but I presented copies of the paper to everyone in the class with an attached image of one of Mann's photographs and then separately I distributed a folded image of Mapplethorpe's Jesse McBride. My class responded to my presentation of the image as a sign that not one of them wanted to see it. I don't personally condone censorship as much as I myself, hate being surprised, and wished to give everyone the option of not permanently having the image burned into their minds.
My opinion of him was pretty low. It had become completely impossible to move past his subjects and content to see his artistic contribution to the world of photography. That all began to change when I saw a piece of his at The Weatherspoon Art Museum in Greensboro. Up until this point I had only seen the images on computers, in books and never in person. The Weatherpoon image (which I have never since been able to locate) was an 8x10 of a man dressed head to toe in some sort of latex situation. Kind of reminiscent of 'the gimp' from Pulp Fiction. Disturbing yes, but something about the size and actuality of the picture made it somehow less frightening.

NOW
Patti Smith's apparent love and tenderness of Mapplethorpe made a huge impact on my perception of him. The way that she talked about him, his death, and her need to feel as though he is still around and a part of her own life, was not unlike the way that I feel about my friends. She talked about how they first met and the life that they had led together and suddenly I began to realize that he was just a person like anyone else.
The Henry show took my understanding of the man to a whole new level. The fact that they were all Polaroids made them seem so personal to his life. I kept thinking about how Polaroids are so different from the way that people take pictures today and how we are given the luxury of seeing instantly whether or not we wish to save a picture, take another one, or delete it forever.
The show also made it seem as though he had a multitude of lovers but the images of them almost seemed painfully distant and added to my idea that he was in fact very lonely.
Over time my idea of Robert Mapplethorpe, the man, has gone from being this semi-great photographer, maybe even child pornographer, who has less talent and more of a desire to shock and appall the public to something completely different.
Now he is just a human. A person like anyone else. He seemed to fall in love constantly with the whole that is a person. His photographs leave little to the imagination because that is what people permitted him to see. I cannot imagine the personality that one must have in order to persuade others to be that visually open with themselves and their bodies and their love affairs. Now he just seems brave.

Henry Art Gallery / Polaroids: Mapplethorpe

The Robert Mapplethorpe Foundation

Images (from top):
1. Self Portrait
2. Marianne Faithfull
3. Robert and lover Sam Wagstaff
4. Arnold Schwarzenegger (obviously)
5. A self portrait for the publications for one of his exhibits in NY.

1 comment:

  1. I must say that I have ultimately lost interest in most things ¨shocking¨ as they really do tend to leave very little for the imagination, and wholey expose ideas (and body parts) that really aren´t even that shocking in the first place. I do, however, believe that from my own experience and emotional attachments to polaroids, they make a piece of art much more ethereal and nastalgically artistic... Whether ot not it is a photo of some ranom naked person or not.

    ReplyDelete