Aside from the prototypical images of the pop star, there was always something a bit ridiculous or indeed tragic, about some of Morrissey's poses that always managed to slap me around the metaphorical face. They were of course poses; both for the photographic image and the live performance.
I was intent on finding a particular image captured whereby he is draped across an amplifier on stage at a live concert. He was upside down if I recall. Anyway, he would do this quite often in his younger years, during an unspoken chorus or the fading out guitar solo of a song. We were never quite sure why he did this (he was probably just taking a breather) but it certainly dramatised the event.
Being the 'anti-pop star', throwing himself into the audience was never an option. Presenting himself as an 'object' to his eager and willing fans however, was imperative. Fans then and still, 20 years on (and dare I say, 20 years older, heaven forbid) climb the stage to grab a piece of him. Meat maybe murder, but on these occasions it was raw, cold and waiting on a plate to be devoured by the most ardent vegetarians.
I realise this isnt the original image I was looking for or have even described, but the construction amounts to the same reading of performativity albeit without a chanting audience. What's strikes me even more is the surrounding context of the image. Whilst he is hardly tied to the train track (by a moustached villan as depicted in some of the old silent movies), he offers himself up as the victim and therefore as the culturally represented role in the female, passive postion. However, before I digress into some kind of queer analysis and ramble on any further, I just want to quote Morrissey's words describing the descent of popular music back in the 80's as "slowly being laid to rest" ...
Read as you will.
2 comments:
Hey Rie. Just getting round to comment on blogs.
I think I should apologise first as I made the classic mistake of reading your notes before analysing the image, and then after reading and looking I became very unsure of what to write which would be of any use. So i will do my best and look before I read with the next post. Before I move on though, i think you said something about Morriseys images being either ridiculous or tragic. I hope I don't sound unsympathetic, as the image is obviously of a supposedly disturbing scene, but I find this image both.
*firstly, if viewed unknowingly, the man appears well dressed, his expression is very strange, almost complacent? a posed unemotional appearence, i think.
*secondly, the image is glamorised by the coordination and the way the situation is presented. I know the it's in black and white, but the contrast of Morrisey in his black boots, dark trousers and light shirt seem to mirror the interior of the tunnel with its black rails and light walls. it looks too perfect.
*thirdly, i'm not sure how to put it, and I guess in a way this is quite relevent for your conclusion on how people perceptions are influenced by their environment? maybe, but, especially on moving to London, on the underground, at least once a fortnight there is an accident on the tracks. It becomes a regular occurence, whether it be some form of dealing with it or because there isn't a direct association with the person, people on tubes when this happened will pursue reading their papers etc. I sometimes feel awful, I think it's really sad at that moment, but the day after I won't remember where or what time it happened. I think perhaps we become desensitised to the event because of its regularity. I mean I was talking to a couple of other people about it too and they pretty much had the same opinion having to commute to and from work everyday on the underground. Im waffling - to the point. An image is certainly different, more shocking in its vision rather then in words said by a conducter or news presenter. However, most tragic incidents are photographed after the event - this one is before. It becomes problematic to understand why someone is documenting an event, a fatal one before it has happened, (unless its a wildlife programme where by the presenters don't interfere for certain reasons.)
And when documenting, the subject is zoomed in on, there are deatils of injury or specific parts of that person. Details of expressions or movements, or pose. As I mentioned before, I think his expression remains conspicuous, his pose is dramatic but not in keeping with the awful thing about to happen and the angle is sideways - would someone not be looking down from above?
I think that's why I find the picture both ridiculous - because of it suggests something absurd in an aloof manner (im not sure that makes sense actually) and tragic because of the way it so obviously relates to a fatal tragic incident.
On to the next!...might keep the next ones a bit shorter - edit as I go along - ha ha
ooh! I just realised - because these works don't have titles - can we make suggestions (how fun!)- I have one!
ok.
'A Man on Track' - that's my contribution!
Post a Comment