Get the Paper VIP Newsletter

Subscribe to RSS Feed
 
 
Monday, September 8, 2008

Monday, September 8

GIVE A SHOUT TO WORD UP! wordup@papermag.com

Word of Mouth

Fifteen Warholian Minutes with Christopher Makos

By PAPERMAG Editors

christopher makosText and photos by Phil Smrek

Multiple films (I Shot Andy Warhol, Basquiat, Factory Girl), a myriad of books and countless magazine articles have all tried to capture the essence of “Warholia.” Few, save for The Andy Warhol Diaries, actually have. That is, until photographer Christopher Makos placed Andy Warhol in the context of his own life with his latest book, Warhol/Makos in Context (PowerHouse Books), and an exhibit “Warhol: Vintage Portraits” at Yancey Richardson Gallery through June 29.

With In Context, Makos presents, in chronological order, an unexpurgated visual review of his days as Andy’s collaborator, sidekick and close friend. Via never before seen contact sheets reproduced in full, and prints from parties, events, projects, behind the scenes hoopla and trips the two made together, one is afforded a rare look into the circumstances surrounding the images from the final decade (1977-1987) of Warhol’s life.

“Vintage Portraits” is an exhibit of the Warhol-in-drag series Christopher and Andy teamed up on over a two-day period in 1981. They used May Ray (with whom Makos earlier apprenticed)'s portrayal of Marcel Duchamp as Rose Selavy (wearing a woman’s hat and dress) as a starting point and explored their own ambiguous sexualities with the help of eight different wigs and two different make-up applications, juxtaposed with the shirt, tie and jeans Warhol was already wearing. The result was 349 images of Warhol’s “Altered Image,” a highlighted selection of which are on view at the Yancey Richardson Gallery.

I got a personal peek at the Punch and Judy show that the two put on while working as an assistant at the 32nd Street Factory just before Andy died. I’d often see Christopher buzzing about, full of boundless energy and enthusiasm, with discoveries of the latest “it” boy or girl or the newest undiscovered talent he’d invited to lunch at the Factory. Andy, whose place was at the end of the lunch table, would glance over his beloved New York Post and sheepishly reply, “Oh… that sounds great.” Let us not forget it was Christopher, after all, who introduced Andy to Keith Haring.

Some 20 years later, I was granted 15 minutes from the man who so uniquely chronicled the man who made 15 minutes so meaningful.

Phil Smrek (from cell phone): Chris. It’s Phil! Hey, I just got out of the subway… I’m so sorry, we were delayed in a tunnel and there wasn’t anything I could do… I’m two blocks away. I’ll be right up.

Christopher Makos: (from studio) OK but hurry... You’ll only have 15 minutes. The rest of my day is booked.

(at studio)

PS: OK, let’s get cracking. Why did you wait until now to publish this book?

CM: It was the 20th anniversary of him passing. It’s called In Context because I got tired of going to all these gallery shows and events and people trying to convey what they thought these times and moments were like. I wanted to put the whole thing in context by publishing all the contact sheets. This way I could show at least my version of it and people could draw their own conclusions. Besides, people always want to see behind the scenes.

PS: Have the pictures of Andy as a woman aged gracefully since they were taken over 25 years ago?

CM: I think so. I don’t think they have really aged at all. They appear to be better than ever.

PS: What did Andy say about upon seeing the results?

CM: He loved them.

PS: In the context to your life now, what has Andy’s influence been?

CM: I mean, the fact that I put out a book like this is this notion… the idea of popular; making things easy and accessible and to make people understand that time in history. I’m a by-product of that whole period, weather it was him or further back, Man Ray, or all the different artists that were around at the time… we were all a product of that moment. He stands out because he was so visual -- not only in terms of the way he looked, but in the way he referenced American art exclusively. He didn’t look to Europe for inspiration; he looked at America.

PS: Speaking of America, you have images in the book from Andy’s last tour in ‘85 to promote his photo book America. What do you think he’d say about our country’s current state of affairs?

CM: He wouldn’t like it.

PS: The book is in Spanish and English… how’d that come about?

CM: My first trip to Spain was in 1983 when Andy did his “Guns, Knives and Crosses” show opening in Madrid. I’ve been back and forth to Spain ever since. They love me there and I love them. I wanted to give something back to them and wanted them to see my life during this whole period.

PS: Which trip with Andy stands out as the most memorable?

CM: The last one, just before he died. It was to Milan for his “Last Supper” painting, so it was rather appropriate in retrospect. But that was the last trip for Andy and for me with him.

(I looked down at my digital recording device and indeed 15 minutes had elapsed. For more on Makos see: http://www.makostudio.com/.

christopher makos

Comments

I use to be very curious about WArhol but I think that Truman Capotes quote about him being a Spinx with no secrets just about explains it all....I dont think there was anything really going up until he came along...that is he brought his obsessions( like underground chic,movie stars,fame obsession) into world wide attention becoming a stereotype for artists ...or at least what artists should be.....he really had nothing to say which made him seem completly mysterious and interestinG....Yet I do think there was some weight to him and he knew what art was ....or how our generation would become such a narcissistic society...( reality television ).....what do the Warhol diaries really say but that he was a gossip queen who revealed to the world that Bianca Jagger had Body odor.....yeah he knew everyone and everything about theM....but in the end it comes off as kind of shalloW...I think for the most part great men are created and that the real deal is never what we think ....which is why never really knowing is always better... .....but I still love the philosophy of Andy Warhol ........ I think warhol was simple for the most part ..but a great social navigator.

Posted at 6:43 p.m. ET on May 17, 2007 by randy focazio

Anyone who believes that all that is revealed on the topic of Warhol (as an artist and a man) in The Andy Warhol Diaries is that he was a "gossip queen" clearly hasn't read the book closely enough (or possibly at all). Virtually every rumor in regards to the "simple" nature of his being that I had ever heard was dispelled for me upon reading the Diaries, and probably for anyone else who has ever taken a basic Psych. 101 class.

Posted at 1:14 a.m. ET on Jul 16, 2007 by Annie Jane Vitki

...since I more or less said that I would venture to say that The Philosophy of Andy Warhol was more revealing of the man .....
......I think Warhol was genius in that he created his Warhol persona ....and from what I have heard by people that knew him he was never to be trusted and very rarely was anyone truly close to him and that he was a notorious user.I admire his social navigation skills and as I said there was weight to his art...Hmmm even if it was not intentional....I think he simply said " wow I love that soup mom fed me as a kid why not make it art " .....I believe when he was approached by someone before he got big he said I dont know what to paint and they said well what do you like..? paint what you like .....and it went from there ...so simplistic yet entirely genius at the same time. It is a fact ( and anyone who has read the diaries knows this ) that Warhol consistantly embarrased or exposed many of the uber rich peoples private secrets... to take the warhol diaries as who he really was is completely ludicrous .Considering how he knew of his public persona and how some of the entries read as though he knew they would be published after his death...it is impossible to say that they are not somehow contrived or created for public consumption much like his public persona was...as a eternal epitaph.

Posted at 10:18 p.m. ET on Jul 16, 2007 by randy focazio

Post a Comment

Subscription Services | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | Media Kit
© Paper publishing company. All rights reserved.