brent吧 关注：23,520贴子：285,899
30 Mar
What’s Wrong: Lagerfeld & LaBruce
Posted by BrentCorrigan
I know I won’t be the last to retort upon how cursory, shallow,
pretentious and even desultory Kaiser Karl Lagerfeld is. Upon
reading his latest interview for Vice Magazine, I couldn’t resist
the opportunity to expand upon some of the sentiments expressed
there in the online thread. While at first glance it may be hard
not to get lost in the many pages of madness there. Here’s why
in that interview there lies something far more significant than
even one of the greatest fashion icons alive today.
A week or two ago now, I ran across an interview conducted by
Bruce LaBruce. He’s a controversial photographer/filmmaker and he
conducted the below”in conversation” with Karl Lagerfeld.
Lagerfeld is the director of The Fashion House Chanel as well as
heads up Fendi. He used to run with Andy Warhol and the gang from
The Factory – though he claims to have never once experimented
with drugs. I don’t know designers but I know who Karl is.
Because I don’t spent a whole lot of time looking at woman’s
clothing; I’m not speaking from a connoisseur’s point of view.
The bulk of my experience in that department amounts to a handful
of seasons of Project Runway. Today, I write as a member of the
working class, the middle class.
What’s Wrong: Lagerfeld & LaBruce
Posted by BrentCorrigan
I know I won’t be the last to retort upon how cursory, shallow,
pretentious and even desultory Kaiser Karl Lagerfeld is. Upon
reading his latest interview for Vice Magazine, I couldn’t resist
the opportunity to expand upon some of the sentiments expressed
there in the online thread. While at first glance it may be hard
not to get lost in the many pages of madness there. Here’s why
in that interview there lies something far more significant than
even one of the greatest fashion icons alive today.
A week or two ago now, I ran across an interview conducted by
Bruce LaBruce. He’s a controversial photographer/filmmaker and he
conducted the below”in conversation” with Karl Lagerfeld.
Lagerfeld is the director of The Fashion House Chanel as well as
heads up Fendi. He used to run with Andy Warhol and the gang from
The Factory – though he claims to have never once experimented
with drugs. I don’t know designers but I know who Karl is.
Because I don’t spent a whole lot of time looking at woman’s
clothing; I’m not speaking from a connoisseur’s point of view.
The bulk of my experience in that department amounts to a handful
of seasons of Project Runway. Today, I write as a member of the
working class, the middle class.
The reason why I am regurgitating some of this interview, which is
largely trash, is because I find it fascinating at how self-
obsessed and lost these two appear to be. Namely Lagerfeld,
especially when he talks about not ever witnessing homophobia in
his life. Not ever?
Like most who read this article, I was drawn to Karl Lagerfeld’s
comments on gay marriage. He calls it bourgeois. He drops it like
a bomb. Surely gay marriage is not merely the plight for
mediocrity he thinks it is? Is it really necessary for me to point
out just how capitalistic, commercial & industrial the fashion
world is? It, too, falls on the bourgeois category.
The excerpt below is from page 2 onto page 3 of 7.
Being the sort of hard worker that you are is like being a monk.
But hard work is like being politically correct. Be politically
correct, but please don’t bother other people with conversation
about being politically correct, because that’s the end of
everything. You want to create boredom? Be politically correct in
your conversation.
What does being politically correct mean to you?
It means people talking about charities. Do it, be charitable, but
don’t make a subject of conversation out of it because then you
bore the world to death. It’s very unpleasant. But I don’t go
out a lot so I’m not so exposed to people.
And being isolated is not a problem for you?
I have no problem. That’s the miracle of my life. There are no
problems, only solutions—good ones or bad ones.
You are against the idea of gay marriage. I totally agree with you
on that.
Yes, I’m against it for a very simple reason: In the 60s they all
said we had the right to the difference. And now, suddenly, they
want a bourgeois life.
It’s normalizing.
For me it’s difficult to imagine—one of the papas at work and
the other at home with the baby. How would that be for the baby? I
don’t know. I see more lesbians married with babies than I see
boys married with babies. And I also believe more in the
relationship between mother and child than in that between father
and child.
I take it you don’t want children.
If I were interested in children, I would be a godfather—or a
godmother. I don’t like the idea of taking people out of their
lives and their contexts. If there were a child I wanted to adopt,
I would try to find the family of the child and give them the
money for an education in his life and his context.
What about famous gay artists like Francis Bacon or Wilhelm von
Gloeden? They both had important relationships that were almost
like marriages.
I knew Francis Bacon; he was the sweetest man in the world, like a
Middle English lady with the finger up drinking tea in Monte
Carlo. My best friend, who is dead now, was very friendly with
Bacon. They gambled and drank together.
Did Bacon have his protégé with him, or was it his lover?
I think that he was dead already—the famous one was dead.
Ah, George Dyer.
I only saw Bacon with my friend, drinking and gambling heavily.
Your best friend is…
He’s dead, too.
largely trash, is because I find it fascinating at how self-
obsessed and lost these two appear to be. Namely Lagerfeld,
especially when he talks about not ever witnessing homophobia in
his life. Not ever?
Like most who read this article, I was drawn to Karl Lagerfeld’s
comments on gay marriage. He calls it bourgeois. He drops it like
a bomb. Surely gay marriage is not merely the plight for
mediocrity he thinks it is? Is it really necessary for me to point
out just how capitalistic, commercial & industrial the fashion
world is? It, too, falls on the bourgeois category.
The excerpt below is from page 2 onto page 3 of 7.
Being the sort of hard worker that you are is like being a monk.
But hard work is like being politically correct. Be politically
correct, but please don’t bother other people with conversation
about being politically correct, because that’s the end of
everything. You want to create boredom? Be politically correct in
your conversation.
What does being politically correct mean to you?
It means people talking about charities. Do it, be charitable, but
don’t make a subject of conversation out of it because then you
bore the world to death. It’s very unpleasant. But I don’t go
out a lot so I’m not so exposed to people.
And being isolated is not a problem for you?
I have no problem. That’s the miracle of my life. There are no
problems, only solutions—good ones or bad ones.
You are against the idea of gay marriage. I totally agree with you
on that.
Yes, I’m against it for a very simple reason: In the 60s they all
said we had the right to the difference. And now, suddenly, they
want a bourgeois life.
It’s normalizing.
For me it’s difficult to imagine—one of the papas at work and
the other at home with the baby. How would that be for the baby? I
don’t know. I see more lesbians married with babies than I see
boys married with babies. And I also believe more in the
relationship between mother and child than in that between father
and child.
I take it you don’t want children.
If I were interested in children, I would be a godfather—or a
godmother. I don’t like the idea of taking people out of their
lives and their contexts. If there were a child I wanted to adopt,
I would try to find the family of the child and give them the
money for an education in his life and his context.
What about famous gay artists like Francis Bacon or Wilhelm von
Gloeden? They both had important relationships that were almost
like marriages.
I knew Francis Bacon; he was the sweetest man in the world, like a
Middle English lady with the finger up drinking tea in Monte
Carlo. My best friend, who is dead now, was very friendly with
Bacon. They gambled and drank together.
Did Bacon have his protégé with him, or was it his lover?
I think that he was dead already—the famous one was dead.
Ah, George Dyer.
I only saw Bacon with my friend, drinking and gambling heavily.
Your best friend is…
He’s dead, too.
中间一段审核，先贴后面的
Honestly, I don’t think Karl Lagerfeld knows anything about
po*nography at all. And no, just because he claims to “admire”
po*nstars does not mean he’s redeemed himself. The truth is,
this entry isn’t really about Karl Lagerfeld or po）n or fashion.
Afterall, the man was quoted in The Times August 2008 saying this
of himself:
“I want to know everything, but I’m not an intellectual, and I
don’t like their company.
I’m the most superficial man on Earth.”
There’s nothing fresh about this new break, oh I know! Especially
the Vice Magazine Article because it’s 2 weeks old and any online
news break is already old 48 hours after posting.
Hopefully you, too, can see past this man and his haute lifestyle;
his breathlessly grandiose and overblown place in the world.
This is what happens to old people who obsess, specialize, and
isolate themselves from the world at large. The truly scary part?
It doesn’t just happen to old people, either. In the midst of
the digital age when everything is experienced in a movie theatre
or on your computer screen, we too as the bourgeois middle class,
are in danger of conducting our lives with such disregard as this
Fashion Icon does. Don’t let it happen to you.
Get off Titter and leave the Facebook alone for a few hours. Get
out into the world! Go on! It’s waiting for you!
Just in case you aren’t convinced, here’s one very dated
monologue from Margaret Cho. She finds a less roundabout way of
arriving at her point than I do ;-)
Honestly, I don’t think Karl Lagerfeld knows anything about
po*nography at all. And no, just because he claims to “admire”
po*nstars does not mean he’s redeemed himself. The truth is,
this entry isn’t really about Karl Lagerfeld or po）n or fashion.
Afterall, the man was quoted in The Times August 2008 saying this
of himself:
“I want to know everything, but I’m not an intellectual, and I
don’t like their company.
I’m the most superficial man on Earth.”
There’s nothing fresh about this new break, oh I know! Especially
the Vice Magazine Article because it’s 2 weeks old and any online
news break is already old 48 hours after posting.
Hopefully you, too, can see past this man and his haute lifestyle;
his breathlessly grandiose and overblown place in the world.
This is what happens to old people who obsess, specialize, and
isolate themselves from the world at large. The truly scary part?
It doesn’t just happen to old people, either. In the midst of
the digital age when everything is experienced in a movie theatre
or on your computer screen, we too as the bourgeois middle class,
are in danger of conducting our lives with such disregard as this
Fashion Icon does. Don’t let it happen to you.
Get off Titter and leave the Facebook alone for a few hours. Get
out into the world! Go on! It’s waiting for you!
Just in case you aren’t convinced, here’s one very dated
monologue from Margaret Cho. She finds a less roundabout way of
arriving at her point than I do ;-)
What happened to him?
AIDS. That happened 20 years ago.
How did you cope with that whole period? I’m sure you knew so
many great people who died of AIDS.
I don’t want to go back through that age. In those days it was a
hopeless case.
It was a death sentence.
You may be a bit young to remember. It was horrible. Beyond
horrible.
It decimated the fashion world.
It killed a whole generation of people.
You know, Fran Lebowitz said that AIDS killed all the cool people.
Yes, exactly.
Which I quite agree with, because it was usually the people who
were living really hard and experimenting who got hit with it.
Perhaps things went too far then. But now they want to be too
bourgeois.
Exactly. It’s swung back the other way. This bourgeois idea of
gays wanting to take on a traditional family life—I just don’t
understand it. It’s like the oppressed are becoming the
oppressors.
In a way, yes. Exactly.
They want to be the type of people who have always despised them.
When I was a child I asked my mother what homosexuality was about
and she said—and this was 100 years ago in Germany and she was
very open-minded—“It’s like hair color. It’s nothing. Some
people are blond and some people have dark hair. It’s not a
subject.” This was a very healthy attitude.
You were lucky in that regard.
Some people make drama out of it. I don’t even understand. It’s
not a problem. It doesn’t exist. It’s not a subject. For me it
never was.
What about your relationship to the whole political gay movement?
I have nothing to do with it. This is just a part of normal life.
I mean, the 20 percent or so who are like this, made by God or by
whoever, they are as they are supposed to be. So where’s the
problem?
The argument would be that the more organized and political they
are, the more they are able to fight against things like
homophobic violence.
I never met anything like this in my life. I had an overprotected
life. What can I fight about? I don’t know what to do. It never
happened to me, and it never happened to people I know.
It’s like Marianne Faithfull says, “What are you fighting for?
It’s not my reality.”
Exactly. And I’m mad for her. She’s great.
I’m wondering if gay political groups have tried to enlist you.
Yes, but I’ve never voted in my life—for any kind of politics.
Me neither.
I’m a stranger here; I’m a stranger in Germany. I’m just
passing by.
I’m amazed at how disconnected an international man like Karl
Lagerfeld is. I didn’t even know a man of his magnitude could be
so distant and disconnected from the world. It’s clear he fails
AIDS. That happened 20 years ago.
How did you cope with that whole period? I’m sure you knew so
many great people who died of AIDS.
I don’t want to go back through that age. In those days it was a
hopeless case.
It was a death sentence.
You may be a bit young to remember. It was horrible. Beyond
horrible.
It decimated the fashion world.
It killed a whole generation of people.
You know, Fran Lebowitz said that AIDS killed all the cool people.
Yes, exactly.
Which I quite agree with, because it was usually the people who
were living really hard and experimenting who got hit with it.
Perhaps things went too far then. But now they want to be too
bourgeois.
Exactly. It’s swung back the other way. This bourgeois idea of
gays wanting to take on a traditional family life—I just don’t
understand it. It’s like the oppressed are becoming the
oppressors.
In a way, yes. Exactly.
They want to be the type of people who have always despised them.
When I was a child I asked my mother what homosexuality was about
and she said—and this was 100 years ago in Germany and she was
very open-minded—“It’s like hair color. It’s nothing. Some
people are blond and some people have dark hair. It’s not a
subject.” This was a very healthy attitude.
You were lucky in that regard.
Some people make drama out of it. I don’t even understand. It’s
not a problem. It doesn’t exist. It’s not a subject. For me it
never was.
What about your relationship to the whole political gay movement?
I have nothing to do with it. This is just a part of normal life.
I mean, the 20 percent or so who are like this, made by God or by
whoever, they are as they are supposed to be. So where’s the
problem?
The argument would be that the more organized and political they
are, the more they are able to fight against things like
homophobic violence.
I never met anything like this in my life. I had an overprotected
life. What can I fight about? I don’t know what to do. It never
happened to me, and it never happened to people I know.
It’s like Marianne Faithfull says, “What are you fighting for?
It’s not my reality.”
Exactly. And I’m mad for her. She’s great.
I’m wondering if gay political groups have tried to enlist you.
Yes, but I’ve never voted in my life—for any kind of politics.
Me neither.
I’m a stranger here; I’m a stranger in Germany. I’m just
passing by.
I’m amazed at how disconnected an international man like Karl
Lagerfeld is. I didn’t even know a man of his magnitude could be
so distant and disconnected from the world. It’s clear he fails
to understandthe importance of fitting in and how it plays a role
in so many of our lives. It always has. The truth is, the more you
differ from how the rest of society operates, the more you stick
out. The more you stick out, the more you will be targeted. This
is what real people deal with day to day. Clearly his concerns
aren’t of the survival nature. Must he disregard those who are?
Being the same, or similar, for most people is the most effective
survival tactic.
Now, I am not advocating that we all adhere ourselves to normalcy.
Whatever that may be. Personally, there was a time in my life when
I felt there was nothing worse in life than being ordinary. Even
so – Karl Lagerfeld, we can’t all be fashion icons and clothing
designers! Those of us who aren’t (most of us that is) have to
settle for a little mediocrity. A life partner who will love us
unconditionally – a union and a marriage that provide us all the
same recognition that everyone else has been afforded.
What Karl fails to understand about the movement for marriage
equality is that it isn’t really about GETTING MARRIED for most
of us. We just want the same rights as every one else. We’re a
part of the modern world. That means we deserve the right to file
a joint tax return, to have our partner on our insurance plan, to
make legal decisions that can’t be thrown out because we are
viewed as roommates, to not be blocked from visiting a sick and/or
dying partner in the hospital, to be able to make medical
decisions about each other. Most importantly: it’s about not
accepting less because we’re a minority! To oppose this for any
reason is selfish and pretentious. When someone of his magnitude
opposes or fails to recognize the importance this holds for the
people who work for him, look up to him and even buy his fashions;
what message is he sending to us? That our values don’t matter
because he doesn’t get them?
It’s a good thing Karl does mention he considers himself and his
viewpoints over-privileged which is why he avoids politics,
specifically gay issues.
Just because you can’t relate to the rest of the world doesn’t
mean you’re excused from it. Furthermore, I don’t understand
what Lagerfeld means by, “be charitable but don’t talk about it.
” Have a cause, contribute, but don’t make it a topic or a part
of your life? This is why people get involved in the world beyond
themselves! Because they are human and they want to be connected
in so many of our lives. It always has. The truth is, the more you
differ from how the rest of society operates, the more you stick
out. The more you stick out, the more you will be targeted. This
is what real people deal with day to day. Clearly his concerns
aren’t of the survival nature. Must he disregard those who are?
Being the same, or similar, for most people is the most effective
survival tactic.
Now, I am not advocating that we all adhere ourselves to normalcy.
Whatever that may be. Personally, there was a time in my life when
I felt there was nothing worse in life than being ordinary. Even
so – Karl Lagerfeld, we can’t all be fashion icons and clothing
designers! Those of us who aren’t (most of us that is) have to
settle for a little mediocrity. A life partner who will love us
unconditionally – a union and a marriage that provide us all the
same recognition that everyone else has been afforded.
What Karl fails to understand about the movement for marriage
equality is that it isn’t really about GETTING MARRIED for most
of us. We just want the same rights as every one else. We’re a
part of the modern world. That means we deserve the right to file
a joint tax return, to have our partner on our insurance plan, to
make legal decisions that can’t be thrown out because we are
viewed as roommates, to not be blocked from visiting a sick and/or
dying partner in the hospital, to be able to make medical
decisions about each other. Most importantly: it’s about not
accepting less because we’re a minority! To oppose this for any
reason is selfish and pretentious. When someone of his magnitude
opposes or fails to recognize the importance this holds for the
people who work for him, look up to him and even buy his fashions;
what message is he sending to us? That our values don’t matter
because he doesn’t get them?
It’s a good thing Karl does mention he considers himself and his
viewpoints over-privileged which is why he avoids politics,
specifically gay issues.
Just because you can’t relate to the rest of the world doesn’t
mean you’re excused from it. Furthermore, I don’t understand
what Lagerfeld means by, “be charitable but don’t talk about it.
” Have a cause, contribute, but don’t make it a topic or a part
of your life? This is why people get involved in the world beyond
themselves! Because they are human and they want to be connected
to others. They want to know they have done their part. For many
people, particularly people who live their lives in the public
eye, talking about issues and making others aware is part of their
very contribution to a cause greater than themselves.
I just can’t accept that a fashion designer and a photographer’s
point of view and opinions are not meant to be taken seriously.
These are two people on top of the world in their industries.
They are looked up to whether or not they are prepared to be role
models.
The “In-Conversation” continues:
And you have no problem with po*n, either.
No. I admire po*n.
This is another thing that we have in common.
And I personally only like high-class escorts. I don’t like
sleeping with people I really love. I don’t want to sleep with
them because sex cannot last, but affection can last forever. I
think this is healthy. And for the way the rich live, this is
possible. But the other world, I think they need po*n. I also
think it’s much more difficult to perform in po*n than to fake
some emotion on the face as an actor.
Yes, there’s a quote from you about how giving a blowjob on film
is more difficult than acting out grand emotions, which can be
feigned. I totally agree. I think people don’t give po*n actors
credit. It’s not easy what they do.
I admire po*n actors.
Me too, and prostitutes as well. There’s a real art to it.
Frustration is the mother of crime, and so there would be much
more crime without prostitutes and without po*n movies.
You got in trouble when you used a po*n star in one of your shows
in the early 90s.
But who cared?
Anna Wintour cared.
Yeah, but I’m still on the best terms with her.
There is so much hypocrisy against po*n. So many people watch it
and then look down their noses at people who are in it or who make
it.
And those movie theaters don’t exist anymore, not like they did
in the 70s.
There’s one left in Toronto, where I’m from.
I never went to one because I think it’s a quite sleazy
situation.
It has its charm.
I’m not sure I want to be charmed.
people, particularly people who live their lives in the public
eye, talking about issues and making others aware is part of their
very contribution to a cause greater than themselves.
I just can’t accept that a fashion designer and a photographer’s
point of view and opinions are not meant to be taken seriously.
These are two people on top of the world in their industries.
They are looked up to whether or not they are prepared to be role
models.
The “In-Conversation” continues:
And you have no problem with po*n, either.
No. I admire po*n.
This is another thing that we have in common.
And I personally only like high-class escorts. I don’t like
sleeping with people I really love. I don’t want to sleep with
them because sex cannot last, but affection can last forever. I
think this is healthy. And for the way the rich live, this is
possible. But the other world, I think they need po*n. I also
think it’s much more difficult to perform in po*n than to fake
some emotion on the face as an actor.
Yes, there’s a quote from you about how giving a blowjob on film
is more difficult than acting out grand emotions, which can be
feigned. I totally agree. I think people don’t give po*n actors
credit. It’s not easy what they do.
I admire po*n actors.
Me too, and prostitutes as well. There’s a real art to it.
Frustration is the mother of crime, and so there would be much
more crime without prostitutes and without po*n movies.
You got in trouble when you used a po*n star in one of your shows
in the early 90s.
But who cared?
Anna Wintour cared.
Yeah, but I’m still on the best terms with her.
There is so much hypocrisy against po*n. So many people watch it
and then look down their noses at people who are in it or who make
it.
And those movie theaters don’t exist anymore, not like they did
in the 70s.
There’s one left in Toronto, where I’m from.
I never went to one because I think it’s a quite sleazy
situation.
It has its charm.
I’m not sure I want to be charmed.
