09/9/18

Is Passion Out of Fashion? The Bad Boy Charms of McQueen & McEnroe.

CoiledCorset 2004, ShaunLeaneforMcQueen.

“I want you to be repulsed or exhilarated,” Alexander McQueen offers viewers of his collection in the documentary, McQueen. “If you leave without emotion, then I’m not doing my job properly. I don’t want you to walk out feeling like you’ve just had Sunday brunch.”

You could say that Alexander McQueen and John McEnroe – born a decade and an ocean apart, pursuing distinct talents, and playing them out in completely different arenas – shared a similar passion. A zeal to be real.

With the simultaneous release of documentaries on both enfants terribles, I decided to chase down the theory one steamy summer weekend in Manhattan. (Bad boys are always persons of interest to The Male Harem.)

I worried that McQueen would be a sycophantic fashionista homage but directors Ian Bonhote and Peter Ettedgui have produced a stirring elegy to McQueen’s troubled genius. The film deftly weaves the details of McQueen’s life – distant father, fiercely supportive mother, Savile Row apprenticeship, gigs at Givenchy and Gucci – with rapturous footage of his collections.

The couture wunderkind didn’t need the anointing of established fashion houses to claim his glory. His innate urgency to express himself projected him forward. From his earliest collections, cobbled together on a dime, to the theatrical extravaganzas of his later years McQueen’s vision was utterly personal.

RobotArt. CreativeCommons, Ivanna9867.

His pure, raw, and eventually destructive passion produced collections like The Hunger, Highland Rape and It’s a Jungle Out There. He pushed beyond the limit without ever looking contrived. When he is asked in the film who might take on the brand if he stepped away, he is sincerely flummoxed. There is no ego in his reply. Only McQueen can be McQueen.

As he polishes his public persona – shedding the scruffy working-class kid for the svelte fashion magnate – one senses his denouement. McQueen isn’t wired to fit a mold – fashion or otherwise. He doesn’t care what other people think about him, he says in the film, or even what he thinks about himself. What freedom. The freedom of a true artist. And also the loneliness.

With the death of his close friend and advocate, the relentlessly eccentric Isabella Blow, the oxygen begins to seep out of his life. The death of his mother marks the final emptiness. The darkness he’s held at bay can no longer be tolerated. On the eve of his mother’s funeral, he commits suicide by hanging. There is no air left to breathe.

Yet the film captures more of McQueen’s light than his darkness. When he is in play creating and producing his collections, his joy leaps off the screen. It draws those around him to his flame. Makes them complicit in his lurid vision. His models don’t just swagger haughtily down the runway. They push against mirrored barriers, wring out emotions, breasts exposed and vulnerable.

McEnroe in Play, ‘09 USOpen, CreativeCommons,EdwinMartinez.

Where McQueen battled with darkness, McEnroe seemed to thrive on it. The French documentary, In The Realm of Perfection suggests that he needed to create a hostile environment in order to conquer it. If only the film could have left him alone to prove it.

LA Times film critic Kenneth Turan wrote that this “idiosyncratic, metaphysical meditation on tennis, cinema, human behavior … at times risks being too pleased with itself for its own good.” You think?

In the opening scene, a meticulous demonstration of a hand gripping a tennis racket is repeated. And repeated. We are then marched through an archive of vintage tennis instruction films, stick-figure renditions of McEnroe’s moves, and a tutorial with frames actually titled “A” and “B”.

McEnroeBallet, ‘79Rotterdam, CreativeCommons,Anefo/Croes,RC.

The Sultanette’s Francophilia might be near-fatal but I’m not completely blinded by the glow the French have bestowed on civilization since the Sun King. I even allow that some concepts can be explored without employing the words “paradoxical” and “ambiguity” and the phenomenon of John McEnroe is one of them.

When the drumbeat of analyzing lands on the keen observation that he “plays on the edge of his senses” we are at last treated to un-narrated footage of McEnroe in play. Whatever you feel about the prince of impudence, it’s his individual ferocity that dominates the screen – his inscrutable game strategy, balletic form, obsession to win every stroke.

Alexander McQueen and John McEnroe remind us that daring to be yourself isn’t for the faint of heart. Whether you play it out on the court, the runway, or life’s runway, it takes grace and grit, incalculable risk, and Olympian resilience. If that’s too much for you, there’s always Sunday brunch.

04/28/17
Photo: TheSultanette

100 Reasons To Love Jane

Photo: TheSultanette
Up Fifth Avenue from the Washington Square Park Arch

How have your last hundred days been? No doubt you’ve been engaged in peaceful reflection if not bored out of your mind from the lack of controversy, acrimony, and world turmoil.

No?

Well just in case you’re looking for a story about little guys giving creeps their due, The Sultanette has a film for you.

Citizen Jane: Battle for the City is the story of a woman’s fight for urban preservation but its most stunning scene celebrates destruction. Spoiler: The bad guys get obliterated.

The slow motion collapse of failed housing projects reflects the filmic elegance of director Matt Tyrnauer (Valentino: The Last Emperor). But in this latest documentary, to watch these massive structures crumple in nuclear clouds of dust and grime is to celebrate the fall of the Titans. Goliath unhinged. Money, arrogance, power … poof!

After reading Joe Morgenstern’s Wall Street Journal review last Friday, “In ‘Jane,’ a Real Urban Legend Comes to Life” I escaped to the IFC (International Film Center) to catch it on opening day. Nothing like taking in a Greenwich Village flick in the middle of a Friday afternoon to staunch the internal bleeding of a week spent manacled to the computer.

For Jane Jacobs, the city was a living breathing organism and its streets were the veins where people gathered, gossiped, watched, kissed, cried, sighed, prevailed. Morgenstern describes her as “the apostle of street life” whose work “remains a guiding light for city planners.”

In the film’s riveting narrative she confronts her dark arch rival, the “master builder, redeveloper and implacable scourge of New York neighborhoods” Robert Moses and his “wrecking-ball alliance.”

Photo: TheSultanette
Around the fountain at Washington Square Park

The freelance journalist, wife and mother, with no college degree or training in urban planning should have been a pushover for Yalie Moses and his power elites. Jacobs liked to pen polite articles for the Sunday Herald, Vogue and Architectural Forum, and hang out in her Greenwich Village neighborhood. But when Moses proposed to cut Fifth Avenue through Washington Square Park, an iconic Village gathering place, it was her tipping point.

Though his brutal re-shaping of the fabric and geography of the city is legendary, Moses did not succeed in that project thanks to the opposition lead by Jacobs. The Greenwich Village housewife, as portrayed by the press, was also arrested for standing up to Moses’s Lower Manhattan Expressway proposal which also failed.

Morgenstern suggests that after this victory, the film’s climax is reached and the narrative flags – shifting its focus from Jacobs to America’s urban renewal disasters that conclude with the montage of public housing projects brought down by dynamite.

Photo: TheSultanette
Springtime in the City at Washington Square Park

But to watch the fall of these monuments to arrogance – such failures that the only solution was demolition – is to understand that abstract models on a table aren’t always a solution for problems on the street. After hearing the cocky rhetoric of Moses and his urban henchmen, the sight of these buildings going down is proof in plain sight that occasionally the certainty of power can be just plain wrong.

The movie concludes that it was skepticism not certainty that served Jane Jacobs. Where she saw urban life as an “organized complexity” Moses looked on it as numbers on a balance sheet. “Just give them cash,” he responds when asked how he plans to gut a neighborhood to build an expressway, “They don’t own anything, so they’ll take it.” Today, her treatise, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, published in 1961, is considered a bible in the field of urban planning.

Photo: TheSultanette
Reserved for People. No cars allowed.

When I walked out of the IFC, the Village was revving up for the weekend. Freshly released from offices and classrooms, the citizens of New York were filling up bars, bodegas, and smoke shops. Why not swing by Washington Square Park a few blocks away?

As I approached the square, I heard strains of live jazz. Students clustered on benches and around the edge of the fountain. A couple of guys huddled over a chess board while a third refereed. A row of trees burst pink blossoms along a makeshift fence. A trio of Japanese guys played Mac the Knife and a young mom balanced her teetering baby as it bounced to the music. No cell phone rants. Just jazz, laughter, and conversation. Somewhere somebody clapped.

Was it for Jane Jacobs? Without her, this turf would be ruled by traffic lights.

Don’t wait a hundred days to see Citizen Jane.