The blog of author Dennis Cooper

Month: November 2020 (Page 4 of 12)

Spotlight on … Alan Warner Morvern Callar (1995)

 

‘I first read Morvern Callar when I was about the same age as the eponymous heroine, living in Glasgow, depressed and increasingly isolated. A rare friend came to visit and gave me the copy of the 1995 novel I still own – a red-toenailed foot on a deep blue background, and a coy blurb on the back that gave me little warning of what I was letting myself in for (“What she does next is even more appalling …” OK!)

‘I read it feverishly on my breaks at the chain coffee shop where I worked. At the time I felt strongly that I was failing at most things, including the very basic acts of living. In my spare time I flailed towards something by sporadically writing. My stories were populated with neat, functional characters, characters you could root for. Their goodness was signposted from the get-go; they “deserved” the happy endings that, increasingly, I didn’t feel I did.

‘So I was struck then by the inscrutable Morvern, who blindsides us from the start. She narrates Alan Warner’s novel, and yet we rest glacially on the surface, often literally – she’s more likely to describe in detail the painting of her nails than her feelings. Her focus on her physical self has been criticised as that of a male writer trying to imagine the bodily preoccupations of a young woman, or taken as a comment on the blank-eyed capitalistic ennui of young people in the 90s – so dead inside! – but I now read it more as emphasising the boundaries between Morvern’s mysterious internal world and her external. Her self-containment cannot be breached for long. Events from the mundane to the horrific are narrated with equal calm, brand names scattered here and there. The levelling effect is disconcerting.

‘Badly behaved heroines are more celebrated now, but they still generally have to be made palatable with charm, or an explanation. They still operate within recognised moral codes. They might get their comeuppance. Morvern, though, reminds me that doesn’t need to be the case. She remains gloriously strange. She’s laconic, strangely innocent, drifts along under her own logic with no discernible masterplan. At no point is she punished, or even at risk of being punished, for her actions. And the only place where she does let us in, in the end, is not through eventual regret, but through small moments of joy. In the feel of sun on skin. In landscapes both Scottish and Spanish, the anonymity of a rave. In the music she listens to constantly through her Walkman, soundtracking her every move, highlighting her dissociation even as it provides us with a way to get in closer. She doesn’t question this joy. She doesn’t have to do anything to earn it. It’s just there for her, if she looks closely.

‘It’s a novel that taught me about control, about the space of what’s underneath a story and what can be left unsaid. About our capacity to root for a character who is, seemingly, totally amoral. And it also taught me there was artistic, even aesthetic, value in my grey little life; things I could use and transform.

‘In the novel, cheap Mediterranean hotels and supermarkets are given a gravity and poetry. The world itself starts to feel like a dream – there are no consequences, ugliness metamorphoseses into something more transcendent. There is a surreality to elements like the sinister resort bar where you can pay for your beer in blood, the glitter left in Morvern’s knee from an accident, a nightmarish swimsuit-swapping competition. It’s our world, but it’s not, because when the moral code is upended, questioned, anything can happen. And in the gaps ambiguity creates, beauty can rush in.’ — Sophie Mackintosh

 

___
Further

Alan Warner Site
Alan Warner @ goodreads
BOOKS OF MY LIFE BY ALAN WARNER
Alan Warner | Five Things Right Now
Alan Warner: Imagining Scotland
Heimat, masculinity and mobile narration in Alan Warner’s The Man Who Walks
Alan Warner on Can’s ‘Tago Mago’
Podcast: “Their Lips Talk of Mischief” with author Alan Warner
Interview: Alan Warner
A literary Withnail and I
INTERVIEW with ALAN WARNER
Alan Warner: Escape from Masculinity
‘With each novel I dare myself to try something risky, asking – have you got the guts?’
Small talk: Alan Warner
Just a Big Silver Light
Alan Warner: In tune with material girls
Buy ‘Morvern Callar’

 

___
Extras


Trailer: Lynne Ramsay’s film adaptation of ‘Morvern Callar’


Alan Warner – Les étoiles dans le ciel radieux


Alan Warner Interview – Director’s Cut

 

____
Interview

 

Scottish Review of Books: In Morven Callar, you write, ‘The hidden fact of our world is that there’s no point in having desire unless you’ve money. Every desire is transformed into sour dreams… There’s no freedom, no liberty, just money.’ Am I right in thinking that money, what it can do for a person, how it oxygenates the class system, is a theme that still interests you? For example, in The Stars in the Bright Sky Kay tells Ava, ‘I think you can afford any failure,’ after Ava describes how ‘There are two sets of drug laws in this country. One for the rich and famous and one for the people in the housing estates.’

Alan Warner: I am not sure it is a theme at all so much as an inevitable trope of writing about contemporary society. Especially in such a socially divided Britain – which is becoming more divided. The drama exists in the class difference alone. There’s nothing to write! (laughs). Also these are views expressed by characters – and characters don’t necessarily express themes, or of course, the author’s views. In the first quote by Red Hanna – Morvern’s foster father – he is essentially expressing the process of Thatcherism – that there are few societal goals and achievements remaining for people – apart from cars and houses and the things we fill them with. Values and experiences of solidarity and happiness outside of that are diminishing. Of course he’s an old socialist who has seen almost all he believes in withered away. He and his wife Vanessa have fostered Morvern since she was little. They’ve taken in other female kids too, who Morvern mentions. Kids who have been sexually abused and their stories have – I believe – traumatised Morvern in some deep way. So I find Red Hanna and his wife very admirable in many ways. They practise what they preach despite their faults. There are dramatic and plot reasons why he makes that statement as well – since later in the narrative Red Hanna is suspended from work for drinking in a pub “on duty”. His words are prophetic as he is going to see his own full pension threatened. But it’s also wildly irresponsible of him that Morvern’s foster father has a sexual relationship with Morvern’s best friend. I do think Red Hanna is cracking up at this point and I do think Lanna does things just to test Morvern, but it seems to me Morvern is betrayed again and again by those closest to her, which adds to this terrible loneliness she seems to embody.

SRB: You were saying that when you first started writing you were fired up by wanting to see the life you’d known growing up represented in fiction. Was the fact that it hadn’t been seen until then an oversight, a book waiting to happen, or was the omission cultural or political? If it was political, should I take it as read that something of the same thing goes on today? I’m thinking of the paragraph you wrote that concluded your recent review of Ross Raisin’s Waterline: ‘There is a sly, unspoken literary prejudice at work in Britain today, and it is not against how the novel is written, nor what happens in it. The battleground consists of who the novel can be about, with a reluctance in a certain readership to accept that profundity can be found in working-class as well as middle-class experience.’

AW: I wonder now if the “oversight” was largely personal and familial? It always stuns me how invisible literature and specifically Scottish Literature was to me, until one or two specific days when I was aged 15. And I’ve never known who to lay that at the feet of other than myself. It feels pompous and self-important to be pointing fingers and moaning about the majority culture of the late 70s, the programming at the BBC, etc. I wanted for nothing as a child in an affluent household. But my parents had both left school at age 15 and there was no history of reading or art or further education in any branch of our family or relatives. Everyone was a grafter. Except me. We didn’t have many books in our house and certainly no fiction – that is true – but we did have some books and it was me who didn’t read them, nobody else. I’ve talked before in interviews about how, shortly after I started to read a great deal – when I was 15 and 16 – I saw a first copy of Lanark in an Oban art shop and actually turned to my friend and stated, ‘So is there actually a Scottish person writing novels today, in Scotland?’ How could that happen in a culture? How did I grow up in a vacuum like that? I guess that was my Oban in 1980/1; culture and art was not on everybody’s lips! I had presumed novels were an art form which only happened elsewhere and had died out in Scotland around the time of Walter Scott. What a very curious but genuine assumption. On the other hand, I could argue this was because local bookshops were stuffed with Scott and not a single work of modern Scottish literature or otherwise; not even Compton McKenzie or Buchan. It was only when I reached Glasgow independently when we went to rock concerts that I found a wonderful surfeit of books. Ach well. I can’t lay the blame of my cultural impoverishment on the stock-taking policy of John Menzies newsagent. Fifteen is a good age to discover the whole world has a literature. I might have been turned off at some younger age.

What was it Melville wrote about whalers before Moby Dick? ‘Theirs was an unwritten life’? There are still so many unwritten lives and I greedily and expectantly wait for writers to bring these forth. When I spy men in harnesses working at the top of electricity pylons, I immediately want to read a great novel about these guys. Novelists are going to emerge in disparate and unpredictable ways, geographically, culturally, ethnically. We can’t make a demand that so many novels must emerge per-hundred square miles or per-thousands of our population! Yet simultaneously, I would argue that in Britain today there is an overpopulation and overexposure of what I would call the Oxbridge novel. I think the definition of an Oxbridge novel is extremely obvious.

SRB: You’ve written two “sequels” of sorts now, although they don’t feel particularly like sequels. Taking the first one, These Demented Lands, which is a “sequel” to Morvern Callar – or is it? The Morvern who appears here has a distinctly chattier tone, less “blank” (or perhaps I should say “practical” following on from your earlier answer). Is it the same Morvern? And why kill off a character (as The Man Who Walks confirms) you and her readers were clearly fond of?

AW: I am very fond of These Demented Lands. I wanted to do a novel completely outside social realism at that juncture. Morvern Callar had been a “big success” in publishing terms and I think I was perversely looking for my own Reichenbach Falls moment for the poor lassie. I was being kept up late with too many telephone calls from film producers! When I sat down to write it, I clearly recall saying to myself: ‘Alan, you can go anywhere and write exactly what you want, so just let rip.’ That’s exactly what I did. That novel seemed to just come out of my dreams. Of course it is surely clear it is set in some antechamber to Hell? Thus the glaring references to Golding’s Pincher Martin. But many critics seemed to take it not as a fever dream (possibly a dream Morvern is having, safe in her bed, pregnant?) but as a work of pure realism! I think that dreamlike quality accounts for Morvern’s more proactive nature. I am very heartened as there is a fine Irish writer called Sean O’Reilly who once told me reading These Demented Lands just freed him up to realise he could proceed writing his own stuff with no need to be bound by hard realism. It’s odd. I can’t believe I’ll write in that manner again but I’ve learned you never know where you will be stylistically – if you are blessed enough still to be breathing – ten years further down the line.

SRB: Going back to Morvern Callar, there are a good number of unanswered questions in the book. Unanswered and even unraised by Morvern. I don’t want to rob the book of its mysteries, but I wondered if we could hover over one or two of the more intriguing aspects of the plot. The book for example she claims credit for. Would one be right in deducing that the reason she gets away with it is that the novel is in some way about her, which is also why the unnamed boyfriend also tries to cut his hand off; some sort of extreme authorial guilt? On which subject, many of the stories that feature across your “Port” novels have the feel of great yarns told in the pubs. Have you ever felt a throb of authorial guilt over borrowing from local myths and stories?

AW: I’m jumpy that there is something pejorative about the term, “pub yarns” – and also I believe it’s a chicken and egg scenario. But to answer the first part of your question, I agree. One imagines the novel Morvern’s dead boyfriend has written isn’t about pylon repair men. Those publishers (I’d never met a publisher then) seem to accept without question that Morvern is the author. Possibly a certain wryness seems to be apparent in that mysterious, unseen work? You are correct, it must have some “female perspective” – which is of course, doubly ironic. I also have the feeling the boyfriend’s novel is rather beautiful, in some subtle way. It is pretty much apparent that Morvern doesn’t bother to even read “her” book which I think is wonderfully arrogant. Or has she read it at some later date outside the temporal scope of her text, and she has been deeply moved? Are we now reading the text she has written in response; is it a form of correction, a search for grace and redemption, a guilty true confession in reaction to the conceit of His fiction? Because it’s obvious we are reading a text, with pasted-in maps and illustrations which Morvern herself has written down and knowingly epigraphed. Has she too become a reader? I recall the actress Samantha Morton, who played Morvern in the film version, told me that when she auditioned for the part, she read the opening sequence of the novel, ‘As if it was a confession to the bloody cops.’ I thought that was very interesting. But for me it’s a definite written text. I think Morvern Callar is a very angry first novel. It is a subversion of the “first novel” concept, because of course I wasn’t confident enough to believe it might ever get published – like Morvern’s boyfriend seems to be. I think Morvern Callar grew out of those insecurities and that cultural isolation in a very smart way which still surprises me today. It is very much a “manuscript found in a bottle” which was designed to be discovered long after my own demise. A first novel about a ghost first novel which is appropriated by a cold and sometimes chilling voice, hostile to pretence and to artifice. Of course all my sly moves were left-footed when the bloody thing was quickly published!

I’m concerned your suggestion about the severing of the boyfriend’s hand is straying into The Symbolic Use of Colour in the Work of Marcel Proust territory. I have had a hundred academics tell me how I was playing with concepts of the Death of the Author – and I guess they are correct. The boyfriend died for sure! I wanted the boyfriend’s suicide to be very savage and without doubt, thus the very decisive, violent attack on himself which seems to suggest a real self-hatred which is sad. Is he guilty about his own privileged upbringing and this is why he passes all his money on to Morvern? Suicide has always disturbed me and I have lost friends to it. But to be pedantic, is it not his left, non-writing hand he has almost severed, with the weapon in his stronger right hand?

Pub Yarns. I do solemnly confess, too much of my life was once spent in pubs and I still convince myself there is a noble literary tradition attached to this. I hardly drink at all anymore but I believe that I’m using fiction and imaginative tales in the FORM of a pub yarn or a local myth. I think it is that roving, versatile structure I am attracted to. I have used tales and stories from family and from friends; things that have happened to me, to others, all mixed up with invention. I find as years go by I forget the sources of many of these anecdotes. Many are invented, some I believe happened to so-and-so but actually happened to such-and-such – and even more bizarre, I genuinely have believed certain things have happened to me whereas I’ve been corrected and they definitely happened to someone else! Such are the dangers of too many pubs and a fantastical if meagre imagination. But there’s something else more significant.

Since my parents ran a hotel, as a kid I spent long summer holidays with a Gaelic speaking family on Uist and Barra. I am the last type of personality to claim membership of some kind of ersatz culture here. We did not cluster round a two bar electric fire swapping fabulous stories of the islands. (Though Tales of the Toddy was one of the few books always sitting in our house – and I later read it with delight). But among the adults on Uist and Barra there were drams and tales swapped at night – in English and Gaelic – and we children often listened with absolute fascination before we were sent up to bed. I used to have a wee bit of childish Gaelic that has since been nudged aside in my storm-tossed mind. Often tales were translated for my benefit alone, as I was the only non-native speaker there. So I have heard stories from an early age from Gaels and a good few of them put shivers up my spine. Also, my mother’s family is a very large farming one, of brothers and sisters and cousins galore on Mull, and tales would and still do fairly fire round the scullery there. In a completely unpretentious way, my mother, father, sister, uncles and aunts were often relating wild and very funny stories and I was exposed to that long before I was a reader. It’s inevitable this was a big influence.

 

___
Book

Alan Warner Morvern Callar
Penguin

Morvern Callar, a low-paid employee in the local supermarket in a desolate and beautiful port town in the west of Scotland, wakes one morning in late December to find her strange boyfriend has committed suicide and is dead on the kitchen floor. Morvern’s reaction is both intriguing and immoral. What she does next is even more appalling. Moving across a blurred European landscape-from rural poverty and drunken mayhem of the port to the Mediterranean rave scene-we experience everything from Morvern’s stark, unflinching perspective.

‘Morvern is utterly hypnotizing from her very first sentence to her last. She rarely goes anywhere without the Walkman left behind as a Christmas present by her dead boyfriend, and as she narrates this strange story, she takes care to tell the reader exactly what music she is listening to, giving the stunning effect of a sound track running behind her voice.

‘In much the same way that Patrick McCabe managed to tell an incredibly rich and haunting story through the eyes of an emotionally disturbed boy in The Butcher Boy, Alan Warner probes the vast internal emptiness of a generation by using the cool, haunting voice of a female narrator lost in the profound anomie of the ecstasy generation. Morvern is a brilliant creation, not so much memorable as utterly unforgettable.”‘ — Penguin

Excerpt

He’d cut His throat with the knife. He’d near chopped off His hand with the meat cleaver. He couldnt object so I lit a Silk Cut. A sort of wave of something was going across me. There was fright but I’d daydreamed how I’d be.
——He was bare and dead face-down on the scullery lino with blood round. The Christmas tree lights were on then off. You could change the speed those ones flashed at. Over and over you saw Him stretched out then the pitch dark with His computer screen still on.
——I started the greeting on account of all the presents under our tree and Him dead. Useless little presents al­ ways made me sad. I start for me then move on to every­ body when I greet about the sad things. Her from Corran Road with all sons drowned off the boats. She bubbled till she lost an eye. I greeted in heaves and my nose was runnmg.
——I dropped the Silk Cut and it burned to the filter on a varnished floorboard. I stopped the greeting cause I couldnt breathe and was perished cold. I slowed down the speed of the flashing Christmas tree lights. I put on the scullery light then the immersion heater then the bar fire but I didnt put a record on.
——I supposed I was stewing over going out to the box by the garage to phone police or ambulance or whoever took things to the next stage. Then all in the port would know. They’d print a photo in the paper. His old dad who lived away in a country would have to be told. My fosterdad and the railway and all in the superstore would know.
——That immersion heater took a half hour and it was eightish on the video. I needed to boil the kettle to get the mess offof my face, what with the greeting and that.
——I couldnt get past Him without stepping in His blood and I was scared to go too nearish so’s I got my things in the bedroom. I took the last pill in that cycle.
——I came back towards the scullery then took a run­ ning jump over the dead body. The sink was full of dishes so I had to give them all a good rinse. The face was by my bare foot. I fitted the kettle spout under the tap. Then I put my underwear over the spout and tugged the elastic round the sides. When the kettle boiled I put the warm knickies on. I jumped back over Him ready to throw the kettle away, after all you don’t want to scald your legs. My foot came down in blood. I stepped forward and swore out loud. I wiped my foot on the rug.
——I washed my face in the sort of burnt-smell kettle water then I needed toilet.
——Sitting there I saw I’d locked the door even though He was dead. I did a number-one then a number-two remembering always to wipe backwards. Though He was dead I used the air freshener spray.
——For sake of something to do I tidied away all the presents for Him, Red Hanna, Vanessa the Depresser and Lanna into the boiler cupboard. I lit a Silk Cut. I lined up the presents for Him to me then just tore them all open one after another like apple boxes at the work: a polished steerhide jacket, a packet of yellowish low denier stock­ ings, a lighter that looked goldish, a basque thing all silky and a dear-looking Walkman with batteries in. I started to greet again as I stepped in the blood and knelt. I ended up touching His hair cause the rest was cold. All floor­ blood had a sort of skin on. When I saw it burnt down I pushed the Silk Cut butt in the blood and it hissed snub­ bing out.
——I’d been greeting so long the water would be hot. Bits of the blood-skin hung from my legs when I stood up and fresh drops came off. My bare feet left blackish foot­ prints across the floorboards. I wiped the footprints into smears with the shiny Christmas wrapping paper.
——I kneeled in the bath. I washed my knees and legs and in me. I got my legs warm so there were no goose­ bumps then shaved them and that. I gave my shin a wee nick with the razor and blood lifted in a bubble then trickled quick. I put in a splash of the bubblebath and filled the tub. The water was too burny so I put in cold.
——The flat had warmed up and was quite cosy. I used every clean towel on me. In the bedroom I used mois­ turiser all over and put the knickies back on. I adjusted the straps on the new basque thing and buttoned up a long shirt over it. I used a touch of Perfect Plum Glim­ merstix and Raspberry Dream powder blush then did my lips with Unsurpassed Wine. When I held the tissue taut to take the excess off the paper ripped, so I did a deep breath and used another. My nails were in a state as per usual so I sat blowing on them after putting a little more Dusky Cherry on.
——I tied the reddish scarf into my hair and put the greenish socks on. I was stewing over the yellowy stock­ ings under the velvet trousers which feel quite rampant, or the jeans with the knees out and all the slashes up the back to the bum with tights under. I plumped for just the velvet trousers. I laced on the baseball boots and used the goldish lighter on a Silk Cut. When I put the steerhide jacket on it had a smell and creaked as you moved the arms. I put the Walkman in the pocket and the plugs in my ears after fitting the long ear-rings on. I took some cassettes: new ambient, queer jazzish, darkside hardcore and that C60 I’d made with Pablo Casals doing Nana on his cello again and again.
——I sat on the toilet with the door locked listening to all the stuff on the Walkman; the Auto-Reverse turned the cassettes without having to take them out! I tried the goldish lighter on Silk Cuts. Every now and then I lifted the toilet seat to drop the butts in.
——When I came out, the video showed twelvish. Every­ one who was going to work from down the stair would have gone so there would be less chance of nosey-parkers when the ambulance or police came to take Him away.
——On the computer screen was:

——NOTE ON THE DISC
——xx

——I pressed the diddleypush to eject the floppy disc after Z&Y-ing the keyboard then I pulled out the plug. I put the disc in the jacket pocket. I grabbed two packs of Silk Cut out the carton and put some of the cassettes in the jacket pockets. I switched off Christmas tree lights, fire and immersion heater then counted the change in my purse for phoning police or ambulance or whoever, from the box by the garage. I wasnt going to have enough till payday. On the mat was a catalogue from a model shop in the south. I chucked it in the bin, locked up careful then moved down the stair past the doors of other flats.

Out there were no people. Puddles were frozen and wee­ ones off from school had burst all ice. A car passed and you saw smoke clinging round the exhaust. Miles Davis doing He Loved Him Madly offof Get Up With It was going in the ears. My hands were in the jacket pockets, the nose was cold like it was pinched between finger and thumb; I touched the computer disc in the other pocket, as I walked up to the phonebox I felt the cassette moving next to one pinkie, and it was that bit where the trumpet comes in for the second time: I walked right past the phonebox. It was the feeling the music gave that made me.
——It was a dead clear freezing day with blueish sky the silvery sun and you saw all breath. I walked by the Phoe­ nix and the Bayview. Across the bay between the walls of St John’s and Video Rental you saw snow on the moun­ tains of the island where my fostermother lay buried. Along at the seawall people were crossing the road into shops. All cars and buses had smoke showing round the exhaust. A man inside a car moved his hand at me from across the road. I waved back: it was just Ramraider my driving instructor giving a lesson. A fishing boat was com­ ing in with a light on the mast. I stopped and watched the boat pass over to the railway pier. I took a big breath of the bright morning and used the goldish lighter on a Silk Cut.
——I changed cassettes to Music Revelation Ensemble at the railway station looking up to see the time. I knew my fosterdad was away down through the pass on the early train so I crossed the square. The Christmas tree with the coloured household bulbs was still switched on. The other phones were there so I walked round the corner the way I had for eight year.
——I stopped in the superstore carpark to finish the Silk Cut then when the drums came in after the solo bass on Bodytalk I strode on through the sliding door and up to the signing book. Trust Creeping Jesus to be stood there and he moved his mouth at me. He flicked one of the earplugs out. Youre late by forty-five minutes so get up there, I heard in his south accent. Christ had Christmas already? he says nodding at the steerhide jacket and the Walkman. I put the plug back in my ear and took the door up to the ladies’ staffroom.
——Lanna from bakery was there lifting her hand to lick round her fingers. They were all sugar from stack­ ing donuts. Where did you get the jacket? she says. I put it round her shoulders and, touching it, she asked if my boyfriend give it me. She called Him by name. I got my locker key and took out the nylon uniform, the apron, the tights in a ball and the schoolish shoes. When I saw the uniform it nearly made me turn round and tell Lanna He was dead. She was playing with the Walkman, winding forward so you heard Music Revela­ tion Ensemble all far-away-like. Lanna was laying off how bakery had kept her on over five hours without break and there was a law against it. Have you bought all His presents? she says. I nodded and tugged a leg out the velvet trousers then undid the buttons and took off the shirt. You could see the basque thing. I put on the brownish tights and the uniform while Lanna but­ toned the neck up and smoothed the nylon onto me with her palms. Then she gently.took my earrings out and was biting her lip. You werent allowed jewellery on the section. Why did you go to the fuss of putting these in Morvern? she says. I put the jacket and the Walkman in my locker. Theyre lovely, so is your slip thing, Lanna says, pointing at my chest. Then she goes, since we were off for three day would I come to The Mantrap and get mortal after closedown? She would meet me with a summerbag: shoes and the little black number, though it had a totey hole at the shoulder; I could change in the bogs on the north pier. I nodded, she told me a time and place then showed the half bottle Southern Comfort hid in her locker. She lit a Regal and I took a drag. I nodded. Smiled.

Down the stair the section was pandemonium. Smugslug had gone and let them put too many tatties out on the shelves. Loads had fallen and were getting kicked about by shoppers’ feet. I kneeled to pick them up then stepped in and shoved the tatties to the back of the shelves. I could never grow nails on that job: my hands were all soil.
——Down the tunnel by the fridges, Smugslug tried to give me hell for lateness. I was too famished and walked away. In the fridge I pinched plums and polished them on my apron. I bit leaning forward so the juice dripped on the floor. I loaded a six-wheeler with loose carrots, prepack tomats, icebergs, cos, watercress, loose mushies, prepacks and caps.
——Smiler came out the tunnel, empty boxes stacked on his six-wheeler. He started breaking the boxes down for the baler. Going out tonight? he says. I goes, Mmm. He says, Mantrap? I goes, Uh huh.

 

 

*

p.s. Hey. ** Ian, Hey, Ian! Thanks about the post, man. November is always a weird one, but now? Whoa. At least it’s trickling out. What are the carpentry classes like? Is it learning basic skills and tools and stuff? Do they make assignments, like … build a mailbox or something? Congrats on the cat and the love. Hang in there, take care. ** David Ehrenstein, Hi. I’m certainly happy that you managed to get through the rent crisis. That stuff is so stressful. And excellent about the LARB hook up. Easily one of the best venues extant, in my opinion. ** wolf, I can’t top that, ha ha, so here’s just a good old interspecies hi. Oh, yeah, I guess if I were writing something where it was important that it be set right now, that would be an interesting dilemma. I guess I don’t care about timeliness and that. It’s like super politics-based art. I’m not interested in making that, obvs., but if I was I think I would be too aware of how flash in the pan it would be to actually make something. Not that there isn’t charm to, oh, anti-Vietnam art. But only charm in almost every case. Fuck charm. Maybe. Hm, yeah, I don’t feel like I have any problem reading or watching things set back when there weren’t phones or TVs or microwaves or whatever and where families played board games and stuff. Maybe there’s just a tenderness there that only helps? I don’t know. Something to think about. Oh, I’m restoring one of your old posts tomorrow. Prepare for flashbacks. ** Tosh Berman, Wow, you’re going to interview Paul Morley on your show? That’s amazing. I’m very excited for that. He’s great. Very, very cool. ** Sypha, Hey. It’s not hatred, it’s boredom. Going to the Warhol museum is still in my dreams. Never even been to Pittsburgh. Can’t even picture what it must look like. New Mauve Zone product! Been a while, no? Great! Everyone, Here’s Sypha with a big treat. Follow his lead. Sypha: ‘New full-length 2nd studio album from +Passover- posted at Mauve Zone Recordings today: SYMPHONY FOR THE DEGENERATE AGE. As always it may be downloaded/listened to for free at the Internet Archive.’ Nice cover. ** Barkley, Hi, Barkley! Oh, that’s okay, time moves strangely and very flexibly around here. Great to see you! Good news and congrats about the job, notwithstanding the tiredness part. No, I was deprived of my Halloween LA trip this year for the obvious reason. That was sorely painful. Not much to do in these parts re: Halloween. I went to the Halloween makeover of the local theme park Parc Asterix before it got shut down, and that was fun. And to the Halloween haunted house at Paris’s mighty year-round haunted attraction Le Manor de Paris, and that was excellent. And that is all Halloween wrote for me this year. Wow, no, I didn’t specifically know about gifcities.org. Holy moly, that’s a huge find. Thank you a veritable ton. Huh, I feel like I should know The Garden since they’re from Orange County, but I don’t know that I do. I’ll get their new album immediately. Thank for the mega-generosity. I’m okay, getting through the quarantine and all of that in one piece so far. You all right? You getting through everything in tact and more? Take good care, and I hope I’ll get to see you again soon. ** _Black_Acrylic, I agree that the films are his greatest work. Today is the day I get to be Played by your Therapy as yesterday ate me alive. Looking heavily forward. Have fun with the interview today. That’s so cool. ** Nik, Hey, Nik! Excellence to see you, sir! I’m good. Lockdown has proved to be fairly doable. Zac and I just got a green light for our new film, so we’re starting to think/work seriously on that and very excited. Otherwise, fiddling with some stuff. The showing of my gallery-friendly gif works seems to have gone quite well. A couple of them even sold. Searching for ideas re: how to maybe do that again. Very happy that you’ve managed to get great writing done even with the busied-up last semester. And you’re proud of it, awesome! And it’s short, which, you know, I’m all for. My new forthcoming novel is very short too. Oh, I always work heavily and intently on my sentences but how depends on the project. Yeah, ‘My Loose Thread’ was written chronologically as an experiment. Only time I’ve ever done that. Although I’m thinking I might try that again for a new novel I’m vaguely thinking about. Yes, I edit as I go along, but I try not to get too anal at that stage so I can keep barreling forward because getting a first draft done is the hardest part for me. And then I work and rework the sentences like crazy once I have a solid draft. But, yeah, I fiddle from the beginning. I can’t help myself, and my raw sentences tend to suck. Great that you’re loving editing. I think that’s really, really key to being a writer longterm. Great news, man! And I’m glad you like Warhol’s films so much. Me too, obviously. When I first discovered them when younger, they had a really massive impact on my thinking about how to make things. I read Lonely’s poem the other day. It’s beautiful. I didn’t realise that was your doing. Great work. Everyone, Nik is, among many other awesome things, an editor at the great Fence, and he recently published a poem by the excellent Lonely Christopher about Warhol’s ‘Lonesome Cowboys’. A very fine read if you haven’t and would like to. Here. ** Bill, Hi. Me too, about not having done up his films before. I think my Warhol general exhaustion got in the way or something. I’m about to order that S.D. Stewart book. Atlas Press is such a joy. I should do a post dedicated to them. Hm. Here’s hoping for a blinding start to your week. ** Damien Ark, Hi, D. I’ll go find your email. Thank you! Moving can definitely have a great, refreshing impact on all sorts of one’s things. Hope that happens if it’s meant to. ** Steve Erickson, Hi. No, I do not know why. I assume the Warhol Foundation has some plan for the release, maybe even through their own auspices. Ha ha, man, the word on ‘Stardust’ is as bad as words can contain, I must say. ** Okay. The blog turns its spotlight on Alan Warner’s really great first novel today. Maybe you know it? Maybe you know the film based on it? The film is cool, but the novel is much, much greater, if you ask me. Which you didn’t. See you tomorrow.

Andy Warhol, Filmmaker Day

 

‘More talked about than seen, more emulated than admired, Andy Warhol’s films will probably survive as legends rather than as living classics that people will want to see again and again. Currently, there is a fairly broad consensus that he is among the most important, provocative and influential filmmakers of the sixties. To the general public, he is best known as the originator of the marathon motionless movie, whose petrified camera dutifully records an inactive image, and as the purveyor of voyeuristic nudity, obscenity, homosexuality, transvestitism, drugs and various other X-rated activities.

‘But to art and cinema connoisseurs Warhol has scored many conceptual coups and stylistic innovations: some see him as a “primitive” who has taken cinema “back to its origins, to the days of Lumiere, for a rejuvenation and a cleansing” (Jonas Mekas); others see him as an especially gifted recorder of “the seemingly unimportant details that make up our daily lives” (Samuel Adams Green). A lot has been made of how scrupulously he records ordinary events “as they are,” and of his beneficent inclination to let his performers just “be themselves.” Finally, there has been a great deal of emphasis on his equation of real-time with reel-time – if it takes a man three minutes to eat a banana, that slice of life is filmed and projected for three minutes without cuts. But far from being literal transcriptions of reality, Warhol’s films are more inventive, artificial and art-directed than some of his admirers would like to believe.

‘Warhol made his debut as a filmmaker with fortuitous timing. Being familiar with avant-garde painting, sculpture, music and dance, he was able to approach film with a broader and more sophisticated outlook than was available to most “underground” filmmakers. Some of his initial experiments in 1963 were with single-frame shooting (photographing one frame at a time with a hand-held camera) a stylistic technique already employed by several independent filmmakers, such as Stan Brakhage, Gregory Markopoulos and Taylor Mead. But he soon realized that long takes were the antithesis of what was by then an accepted convention and so he began making “motionless” movies. Bringing movies to a standstill had less to do with investigating the fundamental nature of film than it had to do with the exploration of a then-emerging esthetic – the Minimalist esthetic. He had already experimented with monotony in paintings made up of images identically repeated in regimented rows; and his Minimalist inclinations were reinforced by his awareness of several musical works: John Cage’s notorious “silent” composition, 4’ 33″; La Monte Young’s “eternal” drone music; and the eighteen-hour performance in 1963 of Erik Satie’s Vexations, an eighty-second piano piece repeated 840 times.

‘The first phase of Warhol’s quasi-fantastic vision was of a spaced-out, slow-motion world in which people really do sleep eight hours, while others devote nearly as much time to such lethargic inactivities as eating a mushroom or smoking a cigar. This is a silent world, rendered in contrasty black-and-white, and stripped of any incidental interest and climax. It is usually inhabited by a single performer, seen frontally and in close-up, whose luxury and torment it is to while away an eternity of time on some simple, relatively meaningless task. The camera is stationary, the image seldom varies within the frame, and any movement, action or facial expression is decelerated to such a sluggish pace that it begins to exert a trancelike effect on the viewer – who, like the person on-screen, feels victimized by torpor. The effect is of a microscopic detail that is senseless in itself but acquires significance through magnification and persistence. Staring at the immobile and inexpressive face on screen, the viewer may think of all the worthwhile things he should be doing instead of sitting here bored out of his mind. Suddenly, the face on screen is charged with melodrama; the performer has uncontrollably blinked or swallowed, and the involuntary action becomes a highly dramatic event, as climactic in context as the burning of Atlanta in Gone with the Wind. (Warhol once said his best actor was someone who blinked only three times in ten minutes. Question: Aren’t you confusing blinking with acting? Warhol: Yes.)

‘The notion of introducing stillness to movies was a radical idea. No one had to see Sleep to be provoked by the very concept of such a movie. The fact that Warhol’s early films are still talked about more than they are seen can be interpreted as their strength, demonstrating the power of the idea, or as their defect, suggesting they do not transcend the idea. However, anyone who has actually sat through the films knows how words fail to convey the experience. Consequently it would be wrong to say that Warhol’s films are so conceptual that they can be adequately described or experienced in words.

‘After the outraged reception of Sleep, Warhol deliberately set about filming movies of exaggerated length. In most movies, time is compressed so that lengthy activities appear of much shorter duration; but in a Warhol movie, inconsequential activities are prolonged so that the minutes seem to drag like days. To begin, with, the duration of the filmed action was totally artificial. Who in his right mind spends forty-five minutes eating a mushroom? Warhol instructed his performers to remain as motionless as possible, and to prolong their actions as long as possible. To stretch out the time even further, Warhol frequently films the scene at sound speed (twenty-four frames per second), then projected it at silent speed (sixteen frames per second), so that whatever movement the image might be capable of was shown in protracted slow motion. “When nothing happens, you have a chance to think about everything,” Warhol explained.

‘The second phase of Warhol’s vision began in 1963, when he started experimenting with sound, color, camera movement, action, narrative and editing. In this phase, the performers became interesting as personalities. Warhol presented a highly selective gallery of gorgeously gaunt, stylishly garbed and imaginatively barbered young men and women who languorously display themselves, but seem reluctant to put their often appealing bodies to any constructive or even self-satisfying use; they spout tedious monologues, as if unwinding from some pent-up paranoia that can be dispelled, or maintained, only through the recital of all their problems, past and present. These sometimes droll, sometimes pathetic monologists seem quagmired in unsatisfactory roles or situations, and apparently the only way they can sustain their gossamer fantasies is by trying to convince us of their veracity. But their self-image is askew and, like some manic individual striving to keep a grip on reality, they maintain an obsessive stranglehold on their only audience – the camera. Their whole world threatens to slide into oblivion at any moment, and even the riveting gaze of the camera cannot seem to secure it.

‘The manufactured chitchat and confessional soliloquies seem endless. During the screening of Sleep, members of the audience sometimes ran up to the screen and yelled in the slumbering man’s ear: “Wake Up!” The interminable chatter in the later movies makes people want to scream: “Shut up!” But suddenly, the interminable story trails out in mid-sentence, just a few words before the possible punch line, as the over exposed and lank end of the reel passes through the projector. We are left wanting to know the conclusion of the monologue we could not bring ourselves to listen to. We are made to feel the regrettable transience of what had seemed an excruciating boring scene. Those ridiculous people with their tiresome sagas emerge in retrospect as poignant creatures who deserved more of our sympathy and attention.

‘The feeling of impermanence is one of the strongest impressions left by Warhol’s films. No matter how static the image, no matter how lengthy the monologue, no matter how tedious and unendurable the movies seem while we watch them, we are left with a sense of their brevity.

‘Even the physical record of Warhol’s cinematic achievement is beginning to look impermanent. From 1964 through 1967, Warhol’s film production was prodigious. Scores of movies were shot, but entire reels and projects were abandoned, and only what was felt to be successful was publicly shown. No authoritative record was ever kept of titles, dates, number of reels, cast and collaborators. Reconstructing the data now is largely a matter of guesswork, although a few attempts have been made to catalogue the oeuvre. The studio film library presently consists of miscellaneous cans of prints randomly stacked in steel cabinets at the rear of the Factory. (Warhol has put the original films in storage, where they are probably in even greater disorder.) Nevertheless, many of the films have been damaged, or have totally vanished; even the original print of Sleep is missing. In other cases, such as the twenty-five-hour-long **** (Four Stars), cans of films are present, but nobody has any idea in what sequence they were originally shown. The casual attitude toward shooting the movies carried over into their projection. Even in regular screenings at commercial theaters, the reels were inexplicably jumbled, or one reel was deleted from one showing but not the next, leading to such wholesale variations that some reviewers began citing the date and hour of the performance they had attended. It is unlikely that very many of the films will ever be accurately reconstructed as they were originally screened – which is symptomatic of the “benign neglect” with which Warhol treats all of his work.

‘From the beginning, Warhol was a shrewd and canny photographer who knowingly got the effects he wanted. He expended considerable thought and effort on the proper lighting, angle and setup. In the early movies, he favored strong sidelighting with harsh shadows, and most often concentrated on the frontal image (the most informative and iconic angle), which he centered and tightly framed. Once he had a satisfactory setup, he could turn on the camera’s motor and walk away. Later he experimented with zooms and pans. “His zooms are perhaps the first anti-zooms in film history,” according to to Andrew Sarris, for whom “Warhol’s zooms swoop on inessential details with unerring inaccuracy.” They seldom correspond to any ostensible narrative or presumed story-line, and seem deliberately inattentive to the on-screen action, often missing significant moments. During the shooting of one scene of Lonesome Cowboys in Old Tucson, Viva was nearly urinated upon by her antagonist’s horse and then, losing her footing in the mud and falling against the hind legs of her own horse, nearly trampled upon. Warhol missed both events because he was zooming in on a storefront sign across the street.

‘The sound in Warhol movies, though steadily improving, is still below professional standards. Warhol claims that the bad sound was at first done deliberately, because clear sound was too expensive. More likely, good sound was never really considered a desirable virtue. When Sleep was first shown, the accompanying sound was provided by two transistor radios on stage, tuned to different rock stations. When Warhol was invited to show four films at the 1964 New York Film Festival, he commissioned La Monte Young to compose a taped soundtrack that could be used for all four – the droning sound of a bow being played over a brass mortar. Now that Warhol turns the camera off and on during a sequence, he does it without regard for what the performers are saying, so that dialogue is arbitrarily punctuated and blipped without concern for content.

‘At first, Warhol refused to do any editing. Entire reels might be deleted, but there were no internal cuts within a reel. All the reels were spliced together, end-to-end, including the blank film leader, so that the image was interrupted every three minutes or so by over-exposed reel ends, and then flashes of clear light, which became a kind of dynamic interlude between sections of the static image, giving a sense of structural rhythm to the film. Later, he began turning the camera off and on during a sequence to make the film look cut and also, he says, “to give it texture.” Purists, who admire the unedited reality of early Warhol, are distressed that he now stops the camera. “Since everyone says I never stop the camera,” Warhol said, “I stop it now, start and stop, and that makes it look cut.” To make certain it looks cut, he does not splice out the frames of blank film between scenes that a professional filmmaker would delete. Consequently, when the movie is shown, there are intermittent white flashes, accompanied by a screech on the soundtrack. The strobelike effect has been dubbed the Warhol “strobecut,” although technically it is not a cut at all. Like the zooms, the strobecuts do not necessarily relate to anything at all on-screen, but they often make us suspect something has been deliberately eliminated or censored. For the past few years, real editing has been performed on Warhol films in a attempt to make the movies faster-paced and more entertaining.

‘Over the years, scores of people have contributed their ideas and services to Warhol’s movies. In addition to being unusually receptive to other people’s suggestions and talents, Warhol has always demonstrated an unstinting willingness to let others collaborate with him. The most enduring and therefore most important collaborator is Paul Morrissey, an independent filmmaker until he joined forces with Warhol in 1965. Morrissey served as executive producer, scriptwriter, editor, one-man crew and business manager, and in 1968 began making his own movies under the aegis of Andy Warhol Films, Inc. Morrissey’s influence on Warhol productions has been stabilizing and conventionalizing. Under his guidance, there has been a greater emphasis upon narrative (erotic stories with “redeeming social value”), technically competent camera work and sound, better-paced editing – and more routine ambitions. Morrissey’s own films, Flesh and Trash, are slick, formularized versions of Warhol’s films – but more professional, and more entertaining. Both Flesh and Trash have achieved commercial success.

‘”My influence was that I was a movie person, not an art person,” says Morrissey. “An art person would have encouraged Andy to stay with the fixed camera and the rigid structure. Andy’s form was extremely stylized, and people though the content was very frivolous. My notion was that the content is what is said by the people and how they look. The emphasis now is less or very minimally on the form and all on the content. And of course modern art is completely concerned with form and the elimination of content. In that sense, Andy is completely against the grain of modern art, and more in the tradition of reactionary folk art. You can only be a child so long and be revolutionary, and Andy served his apprenticeship as a revolutionary in the art world and in the movie world. But it’s pathetic to see a person not develop and not grow.”

‘Although schematic plot outlines are usually decided upon in advance, Warhol’s performers are expected to improvise their own dialogue. “Professional actors and actresses are all wrong for my movies,” says Warhol. “They have something in mind.” According to Morrissey, it is television that has eliminated the necessity of speaking written lines in front of the camera. He marvels that movie actors are able to speak freely on television talk shows, yet freeze before a movie camera because they are unaccustomed to working without a script. There is complete unanimity in the Warhol company that performers should be capable of making up their own lines. “How can people read other people’s words?” Warhol asks. “It sounds so phony.” Morrissey, who is more doctrinaire, declares, “If an actor can’t make up his own lines, he’s no good.” Viva, a supreme monologist who describes herself as “the last dying gasp of verbosity,” reminds listeners that “Mae West also wrote her own lines.” As Viva puts it: “Men seem to have trouble doing these non-script things. It’s a natural thing for women and fags – they ramble on. But straight men are much more self-conscious about it.”

‘It is sometimes assumed that Warhol simply pushes people in front of the camera and “lets them be themselves.” This impression is seemingly corroborated by his statement quoted by Gene Youngblood: “I leave the camera running until it runs out of film because that way I can catch people being themselves. It’s better to act naturally than to set up a scene and act like someone else. You get a better picture of people being themselves instead of trying to act like they’re themselves.”

‘But very few people manage to be “themselves” in front of a camera. Warhol lets his performers be “themselves” in roles that correspond to their own characters. He selects people whose looks and personalities almost – but not quite – coincide with the characters he wishes to create. Most often, it is the discrepancies in the the behavior of a person trying to impersonate someone similar to himself that register most vividly. Warhol has a ringmaster’s ability to make his egocentric superstars expose their private selves. But his most diabolical ploy comes into effect when he deliberately goes one step too far, by asking the performer to do something that the performer thinks is degrading or contrary to his nature – for instance, getting slapped around, or fondling someone of the opposite sex.

‘”People always think that the people we use in our films are less than something,” says Morrissey. “Actually everybody we use has to be a thousand times extra to stand up to our kind of filmmaking. Our people are more than actors..”

‘Perhaps the only viable generalization that can be made about Warhol’s people is that they do not represent a broad cross-section of Middle America. The range of personality types is surprisingly narrow, and apparently conforms to certain Factory stereotypes. The male roles generally fall into three groups: (1) handsome brutes with splendidly faceted face planes and good muscular definition (Joe Dallesandro, Louis Waldon, Tom Hompertz); (2) raunchy but comical homosexuals who talk as if they had ravenous appetites for sex and drugs but look physically incapable of obtaining either (Taylor Mead, Ondine); and (3) transvestites (Mario Montez, Candy Darling, Holly Woodlawn). The female roles are only slightly more typical: (1) idealized, immaculate beauties who do not have much to say (Nico, Edie Sedgwick); (2) bawdy beauties who talk too much (Viva, Jane Forth); and (3) overweight and overstimulated grotesques (Brigid Polk, Lil Picard, Tally Brown). Most of the characters depicted in Warhol’s movies exist on the fringe of society, being societal dropouts or rejects who go on having middle-class values and aspirations. They are not even good at what little they can do. The best-looking men tend to be impotent, and the best-looking women had trouble bedding any man at all. And the transvestites are tacky, with make-do hairdos, runs in their stockings and no falsies.

‘Often condemned for advocating nudity and homosexuality in his movies, Warhol now finds himself scorned by a younger generation which demands even more sexual liberation. He has managed to antagonize both the Women’s Lib and Gay Liberation movements, which lump him among their many reactionary foes. According to Morrissey, “Andy is despised by Gay Liberation and the Women’s Revolt, whatever it is, because Andy just presents it and doesn’t take a position. An artist’s obligation is not to take a position ever, just to present. Andy’s basic position on every subject, if he has any, is comical. The absence of a position necessitates a comical attitude to make it bearable. And the most serious position a person can take is the frivolous position.”

‘Warhol recently completed a film on the subject of Women’s Lib that will not endear him to that movement, because the cast is comprised almost entirely of transvestites, at least one of which impersonates a lesbian. Around the Factory, this role reversal is considered quite amusing. “It’s hard for Andy or any of the female impersonators to put down the movement,” says Morrissey, “because it’s a subject that neither Andy nor any of the female impersonators have the vaguest notion about. I don’t know anything about it either. I hear a little bit about it on the talk shows – equal pay, etcetera, blah blah. But the logical extension of what they obviously want is to be a man, so why not have men represent them?”

‘Warhol’s interest in film appears to be fading: he is less productive and his few film projects are less ambitious. It is difficult to determine whether his present lethargy is a temporary rest period, or a lasting consequence of the monstrous murder attempt of 1968. He exhibits almost none of the creative drives and ambitions that motivated him before he was gunned down. Despite his camerawork on Blue Movie and the unreleased Women’s Lib movie (the last films he has photographed himself), he increasingly presents himself as an executive producer, a remote movie mogul whose chief interest is the supervision of an efficient and profitable production company. (Jed Johnson, an intensely quiet young man from California, who has worked at the Factory for three years, now edits and photographs some of the new films.) But when Warhol is not gloating over his supposed retirement from active movie-making, he makes vague murmurs about wanting to do something experimental again.

‘For a few years in the mid-sixties, Warhol displayed such incredible energy, produced so many paintings, sculptures and movies, that it seems almost unreasonable to expect more from him. From 1964 to 1967, he went through a rapid turnover of cinematic styles – from the stately Giottoesque stability of the early films, to the baroque superimpositions of the middle period, to the episodic sex narratives that culminated in the suppressed Blue Movie. In his early films, Warhol deliberately innovated certain conventions for extending and redefining our notion of reality through his unique treatment of the duration of time. But to my mind, the later works are more vibrant, intellectually more challenging and visually more satisfying. His camerawork reached a creative height in **** (Four Stars) with superb color photography and brilliant in-camera editing that he has not yet surpassed.

‘It is a tribute to his originality that his films have had an overwhelming effect upon an entire generation of younger experimental filmmakers, and that they have also had an influence upon such strongly individualistic filmmakers as Jean-Luc Godard, Agnes Varda, Norman Mailer and Shirley Clarke. But more important than the matter of influences is the fact that from the hundreds of reels that passed through his camera there emerged so many dazzling images and memorable scenes – a fragmentary but nonetheless valuable contribution to cinematic art.’ — David Bourdon

 

____
Stills























































 

____
Further

Andy Warhol @ Senses of Cinema
Andy Warhol Made Hundreds of Movies During His Career. Here Are the 9 That Changed Film History
Andy Warhol, Filmmaker Without Qualities
The man who got Andy Warhol into filmmaking
Andy Warhol @ IMDb
A guide to Andy Warhol’s films, from personal shorts to …
andy warhol as filmmaker
6 Filmmaking Tips from Andy Warhol
Early Exposure: The First Films of Andy Warhol
Book: The Black Hole of the Camera: The Films of Andy Warhol
THE RELEVANT QUEER: Artist, Filmmaker & Producer Andy Warhol
Jonas Mekas: The Making of Andy Warhol’s ‘Empire’
Andy Warhol interviews Alfred Hitchcock!
Andy Warhol Films Go Digital
A Little About Andy Warhol’s Films
Boredom Revisited, or How Andy Warhol Predated Slow Cinema
THE UNBEARABLE DURATION OF ANDY WARHOL’S FILMS

 

_____
Extras


Unproductive Time in Andy Warhol’s Films


The Life of Andy Warhol


Vous avez vu les films d’Andy Warhol ? – Blow up – ARTE

 

_____
Interview
by Roger Ebert

 

Andy Warhol forgot to come to Chicago again Thursday. “It’s a funny thing,” the pop artist and underground filmmaker said. “It’s like I keep forgetting to come to Chicago.”

Warhol was supposed to spend Thursday through Saturday here promoting the opening of his movie, “Chelsea Girls,” at the Town Underground Theater.

Warhol is the artist who created the Pop Art movement out of paintings of Campbell Soup cans and Brillo boxes.

In the last two years he has moved to underground movies, including “Sleep,” an eight-hour study of a person sleeping; “Empire.” a day-long study of the sun’s shadow moving across the Empire State Building; and “Mario Banana,” in which an actor named Mario Montez eats a banana.

“Chelsea Girls” is a four-hour film using a split screen to show simultaneous action in various rooms of the Chelsea Hotel in New York City.

His agent promised that Warhol would bring along Ingrid Superstar and Nico, two of the leading players in the movie. They were supposed to arrive late Wednesday night or Thursday morning.

“We kept getting these calls saying Andy was coming, Andy was on his way, Andy was rounding everybody up,” said John West, a spokesman for the Town Underground.

“I spent all night at O’Hare, meeting every plane – but, no Andy.”

Warhol’s agent, Lester Pierske, told The Sun-Times Thursday he guessed Andy just didn’t get around to catching a plane.

A call to Warhol reached him at The Factory, which is the name of the New York Studio where he paints and films.

“Oh, yeah,” he said. “Chicago, I guess I just forgot. I have all of these things to do, see. I’m making this full-length feature called ‘Since.’ which is going to be 25 hours long. So you can see there’s a lot of work involved in it, and I really wanted to get it finished this weekend.”

Warhol was reminded that he also failed to show up in Chicago last September for the opening of his”Exploding Plastic Inevitable.”

“Yeah, I guess I did at that,” he said. “We had just come back from California and everything was…”

His voice drifted off.

What about Nico, the blond actress who has been romantically linked with him?

“Oh, Nico would love to come to Chicago,” Warhol said.

“Do you think I should send her? She’s out in Monterey at the folk-rock festival. I was just talking to her.”

And what about Ingrid Superstar?

“She’s right here,” Warhol replied. “Say hello, Ingrid.”

 

____________
20 of Andy Warhol’s 104 films

________
Eat (1963)
Eat (1963) is a film created by Andy Warhol and featuring painter Robert Indiana, filmed on Sunday, February 2, 1963 in Indiana’s studio. It is filmed in black-and-white film, has no soundtrack, and depicts fellow pop artist Indiana engaged in the process of eating for the entire length of the film. The comestible being consumed is apparently a mushroom. Finally, there is a brief appearance by a cat.’ — Cody Carvel


the entirety

 

____________
Blowjob (1964)
Blow Job is a silent film, directed by Andy Warhol, that was filmed in January 1964. The film depicts the face of an uncredited DeVeren Bookwalter as he apparently receives fellatio from an unseen partner. While shot at 24 frame/s, Warhol specified that it should be projected at 16 frame/s, slowing it down by a third.’ — dm


the entirety

 

__________
Sleep (1964)
‘“The first real movie I made was, I put a camera on somebody sleeping, and that’s how it all started…. It just seemed so easy to do.” That was how Andy Warhol remembered the genesis of his film called Sleep. On several nighttime visits in the summer of 1963, Warhol trained his new Bolex camera on his lover John Giorno, a gorgeous young poet who happened also to be the world’s deepest sleeper. Warhol edited his series of three-minute takes—as much film as the camera would hold—into a movie that lasted more than five hours, meant to be screened in (slightly) slow motion.’ — The Brooklyn Rail


Trailer

 

_______________
Soap Opera (1964)
‘…Soap Opera, filmed over P.J. Clarke’s, the Third Avenue pub. It was subtitled ‘The Lester Persky Story’ in tribute to Lester, who eventually became a movie producer. Lester introduced the hour-long commercial on television in the fifties that had Virginia Graham showing you all the different ways you could use Melmac, or Rock Hudson doing vacuum-cleaning demonstrations. Lester let us use footage from his old TV commercials, so we spliced sales-pitch demonstrations of rotisserie broilers and dishware in between the segments of Soap Opera.” The TV ads have loud volume and the Warhol filmed sections are silent.’ — Djangobelize


the entirety

 

________________
Screen Tests (1964 – 1966)
‘Warhol’s Screen Tests are revealing portraits of hundreds of different individuals, filmed between 1963 and 1966. In these short films, Warhol created his own cache of Superstars. Superstars are actors interesting enough to carry a film on their own—not by playing a particular role but simply by being themselves. His subjects included both famous and anonymous visitors to the studio, including poet Allen Ginsberg, actor Dennis Hopper, and artist Salvador Dalí. When asked to pose, subjects were lit and Warhol filmed them with his stationary 16mm Bolex camera on silent, black-and-white, 100-foot rolls of film. Each Screen Test took exactly three minutes to create, lasting as long as the roll of film took to spool through the camera. The standard formula of subject and camera remaining almost motionless for the duration of the film results in a “living portrait.” When Warhol showed the films, he slowed them down slightly, extending their run time to about four minutes each, imparting a dreamy, slow-motion effect to the finished works.’ — Warhol Foundation

 

___________
Empire (1964)
Empire is a 1964 black-and-white silent art film by Andy Warhol. When projected according to Warhol’s specifications, it consists of eight hours and five minutes of slow motion footage of an unchanging view of the Empire State Building. The film does not have conventional narrative or characters, and largely reduces the experience of cinema to the passing of time. Warhol stated that the purpose of the film was “to see time go by.”One week after the film was shot, experimental filmmaker Jonas Mekas (who was cinematographer for Empire) speculated in the Village Voice that Warhol’s movie would have a profound influence on avant-garde cinema. In 2004, Empire was included in the annual selection of 25 motion pictures added to the National Film Registry of the Library of Congress being deemed “culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant” and recommended for preservation.’ — collaged


Excerpt


Excerpt

 

__________
Couch (1964)
‘The couch at Andy Warhol’s Factory was as famous in its own right as any of his Superstars. In Couch, visitors to the Factory were invited to “perform” on camera, seated on the old couch. Their many acts-both lascivious and mundane-are documented in a film that has come to be regarded as one of the most notorious of Warhol’s early works. Across the course of the film we encounter such figures as poets Allen Ginsberg and Gregory Corso, the writer Jack Kerouac, and perennial New York figure Taylor Mead.’ — letterboxd


the entirety

 

_______________
Batman Dracula (1964)
‘Starring Warhol’s fellow experimental filmmaker Jack Smith in both title roles, Batman Dracula pits the Caped Crusader of comic-book fame against the vampiric Transylvanian count of legend, the millionaire vigilante who seems to fear nothing but bats against the immortal recluse who spends much of his time in the form of a bat. Smith may bear a faint resemblance to Christian Bale, Nolan’s Batman, but there all aesthetic resemblance to the “real” Batman movies ends. Shot in black and white on various rooftops around New York and Long Island as well as in Warhol’s “Factory,” Warhol’s unauthorized approach to the material seems to get as abstract and spontaneous as most of the cinema put together by his coterie — or at least the surviving footage makes it look that way. Though Warhol did complete Batman Dracula, he only showed it at a few of his art shows before DC Comics called and demanded an immediate end to its screenings.’ — Open Culture


the entirety

 

__________
Vinyl (1965)
‘“Vinyl is such a loose adaptation of the source novel that even people who have seen it should be forgiven for not realising that it is built on Burgess’s literary scaffold,” says the web site of the International Anthony Burgess Foundation. “The film is presented as a series of images of brutality, beatings, torture and masochism all performed by a group of men under the gaze of a glamorous woman. In its preoccupations with pornography and violence, it bears many of the oblique hallmarks of Warhol’s work, along with a familiar cast of Factory regulars such as Gerard Malanga, Edie Sedgwick and Ondine. The finished film is disturbing, contains unsimulated violent acts and is not very audience-friendly.” Either a strong disrecommendation or a strong recommendation, depending on your proclivities. And if none of that draws you, maybe the soundtrack including Martha and the Vandellas, The Kinks, The Rolling Stones, and the The Isley Brothers will. Did Warhol pay to license their songs? Given that he certainly didn’t look into obtaining the rights even to A Clockwork Orange, something inside me doubts it.’ — Open Culture


the entirety

 

______________
Poor Little Rich Girl (1965)
‘A young, jobless woman stays in bed, reads, talks on the phone, smokes cigarettes, makes fresh coffee, and tries on some clothes from a large wardrobe.’ — letterboxd


Excerpt


Excerpt

 

______________
Beauty #2 (1965)
‘The movie has a fixed point of view showing a bed with two characters on it, Sedgwick and Piserchio. Chuck Wein is heard speaking but is just out of view. Sedgwick is wearing a lace bra and panties, and Piserchio, wearing only jockey shorts, engage in flirting and light kissing. Wein asks Sedgwick questions seemingly designed to harass and annoy her. Piserchio is more or less a bystander not interacting with Wein. The dialogue seems created adlib and no conclusions are reached in the film. The only conceivable climax is when Sedgwick finally becomes so mad, she throws a glass ashtray at Wein, breaking it.’ — ANNA TELEVISION


the entirety

 

_______________
Taylor Mead’s Ass (1965)
Taylor Mead’s Ass is a film by Andy Warhol featuring Taylor Mead, consisting entirely of a shot of Mead’s buttocks, and filmed at The Factory in 1964. According to Watson’s Factory Made: Warhol and the Sixties, Taylor Mead had achieved a degree of fame that “inspired a backlash.” One example was a letter to the editors at The Village Voice in August 1964 which complained about “films focusing on Taylor Mead’s ass for two hours.” Mead replied in a letter to the publication that no such film was found in the archives, but “we are rectifying this undersight.” Two days later, Warhol shot the “sixty-minute opus that consisted entirely of Taylor Mead’s Ass,” during which Mead first exhibits a variety of movement, then appears to “shove a variety of objects up his ass.” The film was Mead’s last for Warhol “for more than three years”, at the end of 1964, “Mead felt betrayed by Warhol for not showing the film.”‘ — Wiki


Excerpt

 

______________
The Velvet Underground and Nico (1966)
‘The film depicts a rehearsal of The Velvet Underground and Nico, and is essentially one long loose improvisation. Lou Reed and Sterling Morrison play their electric guitars (Gretsch Country Gentleman and Vox Phantom respectively), Maureen Tucker plays her 3-piece drum kit consisting of a rack tom, snare drum, bass drum and single cymbal, John Cale plays his electric viola and Nico bashes a single maraca against a tambourine. Cale subsequently switches to bass and at some stage, he creates feedback on a wooden frame from a piano while Nico plays on Cale’s Fender Precision Bass. Cale soon switches back to his viola and near the end of the film, the rehearsal is disrupted by the arrival of the New York police, supposedly in response to a noise complaint. The film was intended to be shown at live Velvet Underground shows during setup and tuning.’ — Wiki


the entirety

 

_______________
Outer and Inner Space (1966)
‘Shot in August 1965, ‘Outer and Inner Space’ is Andy Warhol’s first double-screen film and an important transitional work, since the double-screen format was very important in his later cinema. First exhibited by Warhol at the Filmmakers Cinematheque in New York City in January 1966, it was screened on only a few other occasions in the 1960s. Outer and Inner Space had not been seen in over 30 years until it was restored by The Museum of Modern Art in New York in 1998 and premiered as an installation at the Whitney Museum of American Art in October 1998.’ — Interalia Magazine


the entirety

 

_____________
The Chelsea Girls (1966)
‘On September 15, 1966, Andy Warhol’s epic double-screen film masterpiece The Chelsea Girls premiered at the Film-makers’ Cinematheque and offered the world a genuine glimpse into Warhol’s New York underground of the 1960s through film tableaux featuring beauty, sex, drugs, and danger. Earlier that year, after shooting several films featuring his Superstars and friends, Warhol got the idea to unify all the pieces of these people’s lives by stringing them together as if they lived in different rooms of The Chelsea Hotel. The twelve reels of the film were chosen and shown with two projectors so that two different reels could be seen side by side on screen at the same time. The Chelsea Girls, one of Warhol’s most ambitious and commercially successful films, is a brilliant example of the artist’s signature technique of assembling complete reels of unedited film in various ways.’ — Warhol Foundation


the entirety

 

_________
Lupe (1966)
Lupe is a 1966 film directed by Andy Warhol. With Edie Sedgwick as the film star Lupe Vélez who killed herself in 1944 and with Billy Name doing Edie’s hair.’ — MowgliX


Excerpt

 

___________
I, a Man (1967)
I, a Man is a 1967 American erotic drama film written, directed and filmed by Andy Warhol. It debuted at the Hudson Theatre in New York City on August 25, 1967. The film depicts the main character, played by Tom Baker, in a series of sexual encounters with eight women. Warhol created the movie as a response to the popular erotic Scandinavian film I, a Woman (1965) which had opened in the United States in October 1966.’ — Wiki


Excerpt


Excerpt

 

_____________
The Nude Restaurant (1967)
‘Andy Warhol shot two versions of The Nude Restaurant on the same day in October 1967 at the Mad Hatter restaurant. The original concept was to edit both versions into one final product. One version contained footage of an all-nude, all-male cast and was never released publicly as an independent film. The other version, with the actors and Viva wearing G-strings, was shown at the Hudson Theater on West 44th Street as one of Warhol’s series of sexploitation films, or nudies as he liked to call them.’ — Andy Harding


the entirety

 

______________
Lonesome Cowboys (1968)
‘This has long been my favorite film of one of my favorite directors. Watching it this time, I was reminded again how ugly and brutal it is: for a movie I often recall as a radical gay Western, it’s surprisingly (and very knowingly) misogynistic, and it always portrays sexuality and the naked body as boring and alienating, never liberating. Which is all the more horrifying because he intentionally casts characters who are unable to articulate the simplest thought — because Warhol cannot conceive of human beings with any interiority. And with all that, it’s still hilarious and goofy. Taylor Mead’s performance here (not acting, really; just drug-induced dandyish lisping) is one of the greatest in the history of the cinema. So much more daring, exhilarating, godawful boring, and terrifying than EASY RIDER or MIDNIGHT COWBOYS. A beautiful piece of shit — and I mean that in the best way.’ — Doug Dibbern


the entirety

 

_______________
San Diego Surf (1968)
‘Shot in May 1968, a few weeks before Valerie Solanas’s failed assassination attempt, San Diego Surf proved to be the last film Warhol would have a direct hand in shooting. The film existed only as a loosely assembled rough-cut until the Andy Warhol Foundation commissioned Paul Morrissey to complete it based on the original editing notes. The result is an important and welcome addition to the legacy of its co-directors and a fitting tribute to the comic talents of its two stars. Viva and Mead’s largely improvised, hilariously inspired performances speak to something elemental about Warhol and Morrissey’s cinema, a shared aesthetic that, in the ensuing years, would culminate in the movies Morrissey would direct on his own. In their films, “plot” is the device through which nominal actors externalize psychic processes and conditions, making the inner self audible and visible before the impassive eye of the movie camera. What makes Warhol and Morrissey’s films so remarkable (and relevant) is that, in their loose, unrehearsed style, fiction becomes documentary, the motif of their cinematic reality/illusion game. In the Warhol canon, San Diego Surf comes closest to anticipating the low-budget camp of early John Waters. Its punkish negation of good taste is balanced by its aesthetic intelligence, one that flagrantly breaches the boundaries between moviemaking and life.’ — Film Comment


Trailer


Behind the scenes

 

 

*

p.s. Hey. ** _Black_Acrylic, Hey, Ben. Cool, that bot, oh, I think I can handle a short trip over there under those circumstances. Yes, new episode! Everyone, If you’re not yet on the sonic gravy train that goes by the name of Play Therapy aka the radio show overseen by the Wizard of Leeds Ben ‘_Black_Acrylic’ Robinson, you have a new opportunity to hop on board as the latest episode jam-packed with ‘Italo, Coldwave, Electro and other assorted miscellany’ is one click away. Well, two since you have do another click after you click your way over to the source. Get thee to the party, yes? Thank you for giving my weekend a much needed outlet, sir. ** David Ehrenstein, Hi. I too have been known to thwart my good taste in sound to give it up for the impeccable piece of garbage that is ‘I’ve never Been To Me’. Everyone, Mr. E still really needs $400 and has glorious stuff galore available in trade. Go to yesterdays’s comments and scroll to the third one down from the top for the details. ** wolf, Wolf! The one who escaped from the zoo of conformity at a tender age and now roams the world doing whatever the f it loves except when it’s broke or during lockdown! (That sentence needed more coffee to work.) Wow, those Cronenberg and Ballard quotes could have easily sprung from my brain albeit with a bunch of ‘ums’ and worse sentence structures. Crazy. I feel smart. Thank you, pal. Huh, about Nauman. Well, you guys are lucky, lucky dogs, and I so wish I could have been it and discovered if I agree. I’m a ginormous fan of Nauman so I suspect I’d find a glorifying angle, but … interesting. Mm, I do always try to consider the possible impact of things in my writing to future people whose tech, etc. have outdistanced my references, yeah. Impossible to foresee accurately, of course. Like I do wonder if ‘The Sluts’ being so wedded to the internet’s makeup of its time of construction will cause it to seem rickety at some point, for instance. So, yeah. But I always write for the distant future, or try to because almost everything I read and loved when I was early on had been written before tech was even tech yet. How are you? I think you guys might be getting a little loosened up soonish like we might be? Love, me. ** Bzzt, Hi. Those million thanks belong to you, sir. And thank you about the film. Yeah, the future is suddenly starting too brighten up. Who’d have thunk? Have a joy, etc. filled weekend. ** brendan, Hey, Bster. I often wish I had a weirder name, for sure. Or that I’d made up a pseudonym before I started publishing my stuff. Or at the very least that my name wasn’t two words with two syllables, each of which have the emphasis on the first syllable. That regularity bugs the fuck out of me. Your name rocks. ** Bill, Hi, Bill. Me too, re: The Glove. I know he used to live in South Africa. And then he was in the UK for a while. And I think the last time I heard from him he was moving back to SA. And that was it. Well, that’s probably because that 2003 hits chart in the post is fake. Or I think it has to be. Don’t know that S.D. Stewart book whatsoever. Huh. Thank you for the bright alert. I will do what it takes to get it under my … belt? What a strange saying. Oh, wait, under my belt = food, I guess. Duh. I hope your weekend bears mucho fruit. ** Steve Erickson, Hi. I love Paul Morley’s writing. The books of his stuff are super fun. Yes, the TikTok impact on the charts is extremely interesting and not sufficiently written about so far as I can tell. I’m awaiting my chance to see the McQueen, of course. Everyone, Here’s Mr. Erickson: ‘Here are my reviews of Steve McQueen’s MANGROVE (and the other films in his SMALL AXE series I’ve been able to watch) and the Romanian documentary COLLECTIVE.’ Maybe eliminating indoor dining will turn the tide, let’s hope. Thanks to the (so far) success of our quarantine, the govt. just said stores might get to reopen in early December. Probably not restaurants, cafes, bars however. ** Sypha, Hey. Oops, my memory should have been functioning more properly. I’m still a bit fogged in the brain pan by this never quite fully manifesting cold or whatever I have. Excellent weekend to you whatever that involves. ** Right. I’m someone who feels so oversaturated with everything Andy Warhol that I could very happily spend the rest of my life never laying eyes on his paintings or a photo of him or even seeing/hearing his name mentioned ever again. That said, I do think he was a great filmmaker, and two of his films (‘Chelsea Girls’ and ‘Lonesome Cowboys’) are high up in my all-time favorite films list. So I decided to make a post focusing only and exclusively on his films. Hence, your weekend around here. See you on Monday.

« Older posts Newer posts »

© 2025 DC's

Theme by Anders NorénUp ↑