Patti Smith’s memoir, Just Kids, opens with a scene of poignant synchronicity. She has come downstairs to find the TV on, airing a production of Tosca. She is
transfixed by the aria, “Vissi d’Arte” (“I lived for art”). The phone rings and
she knows before she answers it’s the call informing her that “the artist of
[her] life,” photographer, Robert Mapplethorpe has died.
Smith’s
book is a powerful account of the evolution of an artist, or in this case, two artists.
It’s also a story of unconditional love. Centering on Smith’s complex and
passionate relationship with Mapplethorpe, it follows the two as they develop
from unformed 19-year-olds living a marginal existence in Brooklyn, their
subsequent move to that hotbed of creativity and eccentricity, the Chelsea Hotel,
and their eventual development into cultural
icons. Muses, lovers, artistic collaborators, soul mates, the two shared a bond
so deep it survived Mapplethorpe’s blossoming homosexuality and Smith’s own
romantic diversions (including an interlude with Sam Shepard).
Tall, lanky with
dark mops for hair and large, arresting eyes, if not exactly twins, the two looked
like siblings and must have cut quite a figure among the Chelsea denizens with
their theatrical thrift shop finds and natural élan. Smith credits Mapplethorpe
with giving her self-confidence, always insisting they should view themselves
as artists—not wannabes, but “ares.” Yet,
despite the chutzpah, they come across as enchantingly down to earth, even
after fame finds them.
New York was a
different place then; in the 1960s and ’70s it was possible for the indigent to
coexist with the well-heeled in a place like the Chelsea Hotel.
Money wasn’t the god that was worshipped, it was talent and individuality and
if you had those, you were in. So they rubbed shoulders
with Jimi Hendrix, Allen Ginsberg, Janis Joplin and the like.
Neither Smith nor
Mapplethorpe had a clear vision of their artistic path. All Smith knew was that
she “wanted to infuse the written word with the immediacy and frontal attack of
rock and roll.” Mapplethorpe’s journey from Joseph Cornell imitator to consummate
photographer was a circuitous one. As Smith deftly explains, Mapplethorpe found
his artistic voice as he discovered the true nature of his sexuality.
“Robert took areas
of dark human consent and made them into art. He worked without apology,
investing the homosexual with grandeur, masculinity, and enviable nobility.
Without affectation, he created a presence that was wholly male without
sacrificing feminine grace. He was not looking to make a political statement or
an announcement of his evolving sexual persuasion. He was presenting something
new,something not seen or explored as he saw and explored it. Robert sought to
elevate aspects of the male experience, to imbue homosexuality with mysticism.
As Cocteau said of a Genet poem, “His obscenity is never obscene.“
For most of us, a
lover’s “switching sides” would have been a bitter pill, but Smith takes it in
stride, even resuming their intimacy after Mapplethorpe’s
initial (pre-AIDS era) gay experimentation. When asked in a Fresh Air interview
if Mapplethorpe’s homosexuality bothered her, she said it didn’t because she knew
that no man or woman could ever have what they had — a
very evolved, egoless attitude that extends to how Smith comports herself in
all aspects of her life and art. Raised in a household where there was little
money but abundant love and a reverence for culture, Smith embraced Arthur
Rimbaud at an early age, crediting him with saving her from the drudgery of a
mind-numbing factory future. When she moved to New York all she carried in her
plaid suitcase was a copy of his Illuminations, her paints, a pad of art paper and a few clothes.
A true intellectual, her focus was the world of the mind, never the world of
material things.
Smith writes
beautifully, with a poet’s touch, as this paragraph attests:
Smith and
Mapplethorpe’s art developed within the crucible of hard times. A brave art battalion
of two, they had no distractions, no money to go anywhere, no gadgets to eat up
their time. Off the grid, they could focus all their spare time and energy on
their art. Today, cell phones and computers, gaming, social networking, provide
so much distraction one doubts if the kind of concentrated thought and
experimentation that was necessary for Mapplethorpe and Smith to develop their
oeuvres is still possible.
Artillery 5.2 (2010)
Artillery 5.2 (2010)
No comments:
Post a Comment