Cubism reaches magazine writing
Jul. 19th, 2005 06:50 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
imomus
I'm back in Britain after my one-month stint in the New York art world. I'm riding the tube from Heathrow to New Cross, listening to endless announcements about closures "following the incidents of July 7th..." (half the network is still out of order) and looking around nervously for people carrying backpacks. Dozens are, but they're mostly Australian tourists. One good thing about 7/7, if I might be callous for a moment, is that for once there are empty seats on London-bound planes. You can stretch out on the Red Eye Express across all the seats left empty by American tourists who've gone to Mexico instead.The Indian food in London is excellent, and the magazines are pretty good too. I buy Wire, Frieze and Modern Painters. Modern Painters has got vastly better recently. There's a really fantastic piece this month by Benjamin Weissman called The Autobiography of Paul McCarthy. Not only is it illustrated by amazingly grotesque photos of McCarthy (like the one on the left) in which he outdoes Matthew Barney, Cindy Sherman and Leigh Bowery with the attractive absurdity of his persona, but the article itself, beautifully written, blurs fact and fiction in a similar way, adding prosthetic prose to the plastic appendages McCarthy wears. Is that his real belly, or an invented one? And is the first person narrator speaking throughout this article Weissman or McCarthy? The ambiguity makes the article a kind of artwork in its own right, as provocative as the art it's about.
I've done quite a bit of this kind of "unreliable journalism" myself. In fact, I'd say it's my preferred mode: non-fiction that's also fiction, and leaves it up to the reader to decide where the line runs. The trouble is, it makes editors (and some readers) uneasy. For instance, when I wrote a piece about laptop girls for Vice a year or so ago in the persona of a girl called "Jasmine Cone", the editor sought legal advice and published a disclaimer: "Just so you know and we don't get sued, this piece isn't by some quasi-human conglomeration of multiple women. This was written by Momus and what he's used in this piece is a "literary device." Christ. He even wanted to use a pseudonym. In fact, we'll still let him."
The piece in Modern Painters magazine contains no such disclaimer (though I notice on the website they've added a footnote saying "this is fiction"). My Vice fiction ended "you used to jerk off to a bald Canadian in a labcoat. Now you jerk off to me, naked in a forest." The Modern Painters fiction ends "I think about myself existing in the world, born into the body of Paul David McCarthy with seven natural holes in my face: two nostrils, two ears, a mouth, and, my most valued holes, my eyes. When I hear someone say 'Go fuck yourself' I take a step back and think, you can't invite me into my own hole, my rear door, especially if you don't have a clue what's inside."
What was it Picasso said about "the lie that tells the truth"? It's nice to see Cubism reaching magazine journalism, a mere century after it reached painting.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Leigh Bowery Ate My Sister
Date: 2005-07-19 06:06 pm (UTC)viva you
maf
(no subject)
Date: 2005-07-19 06:48 pm (UTC)Pfsh, so far it has nothing on Yorkshire, though I am becoming an evangelist for the Royal Bengal takeaway on Plough Way (not a million miles from New Cross). Meal for two for £9, on the good side of edible. Where are you finding good?
(no subject)
Date: 2005-07-19 06:53 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-07-19 07:10 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-07-19 07:20 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-07-19 07:23 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-07-19 06:51 pm (UTC)Tell all the Truth but tell it slant -
Success in Circuit lies
I'm bummed I didn't get to see you at Tonic. I planned on it, but had to deal with other shit. Next time.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-07-19 08:15 pm (UTC)Authorship and ambiguity.
Date: 2005-07-19 09:25 pm (UTC)Re: Authorship and ambiguity.
Date: 2005-07-19 09:46 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-07-19 10:20 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-07-20 12:59 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-07-19 10:21 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-07-20 12:09 am (UTC)Not true. The majority of the tube was up and running on the day after the bombings.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-07-20 01:11 am (UTC)Still, I have to admire your Blitz spirit, Rhodri!
(no subject)
Date: 2005-07-20 07:45 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-07-20 10:15 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-07-20 01:11 pm (UTC)Not everyone, I promise you (not that I am remotely PC - however, I've noticed many people besides myself making a point of remaining unremarkably a part of a multi-racial culture). Also, King's Cross opened a few days ago - not for Piccadily line trains, however; but the tunnels around the explosion on that line are dangerously frail now and might collapse. And have you noticed how full the tubes are again, already? I think the bombings looked worse if you were outside London listening to our Western newsreaders' hushed-hysterical spiel, or was worse (much, much worse, of course) if you were on one of the bombed trains. I like your expression "audible wound," however; it would make a good name for a band, though they would probably play some ghastly, corporatised "heavy rock" (full of tedious imagery)!
Hope your trip back to Germany is nice and easy; and have you started work on your "friendly" album yet?
Best wishes
Simon
damnit...
Date: 2005-07-20 06:32 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-07-20 01:01 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-07-20 06:39 am (UTC)