A Media History Blog from NYU


Jesus's Response to Downtown 81

March 20, 2018, by Jesús

I wasn’t sure what to expect from Downtown 81. I went into it thinking that it was strictly a documentary, and while it was a documentary of sorts that captured the downtown art scene of New York in the 80s, it was crafted more as a film with a narrative (if one could call it that). In the forward of The Downtown Book: The New York Art Scene 1974-1984, Lynn Gumpert claims that in the mid-seventies, narrative in art was making a comeback, triggering “a major shift in the history of avant-garde filmmaking” (11). I see Downtown 81’s ambition to tell a story, however thin it might be, as evidence of narrative’s resurgence.

Immediately, a narrator in voiceover admits that the following story isn’t true but not entirely false either, claiming that “Any resemblance between the characters depicted here and reality is purely magical” (0:01:16). This opening scene prepares us for a crumbling of the borders separating art and reality. This revelation posits a series of questions: what role does authenticity and identity play in art? Is the nature of identity purely performative? What is “real” and what is “fake” and is there ever truly a separation between the two?

These are all questions that postmodernism constantly grapples with. So, as viewing the film as a work of postmodern aesthetics, one should not fault Downtown 81 for its flimsy storyline and little to no emotional heft. I do not think that is the point of the film. I see a lot of influence from French New Wave filmmakers with the film’s weird and irrelevant interlocutions (scenes that seem to serve no purpose to advance the narrative) and its use of irony and subjective/objective realism.

The whole point of French New Wave filmmaking was to create a film with untraditional narrative, rejecting traditional Hollywood tropes. There wasn’t necessarily a purpose but the films dealt with issues like existentialism which was showcased in Downtown 81 through Jean-Michel Basquiat’s uncertainty. He wandered around from location to location, from friend to friend, looking for his equipment, or a girl, or money, or a place to stay.

While there was some grounding in reality for the majority of the film, the greatest moment of absurdity occurred when Debbie Harry appeared initially as a homeless woman claiming to be a fairy princess under a curse. After a kiss from Basquiat, she reverted to the princess she was. Ridiculous? Yes. But not entirely unexpected at this point. All throughout the film we see how unstable reality is, threatening to completely collapse into absurdity and fantasy. From the very beginning, we see a hospital with nurses and doctors that just seem slightly off for some reason. I think Lady Gaga might have been referencing the Downtown 81 hospital scene in her video for “Marry the Night,” a song and music video about New York in which she states, “It’s sort of like my past is an unfinished painting and as the artist of that painting I must fill in all the ugly holes, and make it beautiful again. It’s not that I have been dishonest; it’s just that I loathe reality.” She continues to admit that while the following video is based in reality, she has taken artistic liberties with the portrayal of her memories, giving the nurses at the hospital next season Calvin Klein and custom Giuseppe Zanotti shoes.

I think the greater point in the film is the revelation that reality is absurd, how unstable the “truth” is and our eventual acceptance of it all.

Pages

Posts