Mary-Kate Olsen The Misanthrope of Tribeca New York City
May 16, 2009 | Filed Under TV Star
Mary-Kate Olsen and her sister Ashley Olsen hate being photographed in public. They will go to great lengths to cover their faces or hide behind their security to “protect” their private life from being consumed by the mass public in popular entertainment magazines. And yet…in Mary-Kate’s case, she is dating artist Nate Lowman who has no problem appropriating imagery that subsequently gets incorporated into his artwork for public sale that sustains his livelihood. He has gone on record saying:
“A lot of the images I use are already out there in the public or in the news. I just steal them or photograph them or repaint them, so they’ve already been talked about, already been consumed. I’m just reopening them to get at their second, third, or fourth meanings. It really comes down to language. I feel like the biggest failure of humans is miscommunication.”
So if Nate Lowman has no problem “using,” “stealing” or “photographing” other people’s images, why should he (or his girlfriend) have a problem with others who create those images, even if he happens to be the subject of them? If Nate can appropriate the “smiley face” for his artwork, then, uh, why can’t I appropriate him or Mary-Kate for my expedient purposes.
Here’s a weird thought: Is Nate’s attraction to Mary-Kate Olsen an extension of his artistic fascination with images “already out there in the public” and whether he realizes it or not his relationship with her is really a metaphor for recycling her image in order to recontextualize her so he (we) can get at the “second, third or fourth meanings” of Mary-Kate Olsen…where’s Mr. Freud when you need a good opinion!
But forget that. I’m more fascinated by the Olsen Twins’ obsession with hiding in public. They are public figures. They are famous. Recognition is one of the essential elements that allows them to monetize their past success in all forms of ancillary revenue channels like lunch boxes, perfume, clothing, etc. Yet if they spot a camera, they immediately dive for cover behind their security, turn their heads, or block their faces with whatever objects may be at hand, including a hand (as seen here).
This turning away is odd for the simple reason that it denies the emotional attachment people have to stars that BEGINS with their work and naturally extends into their personal life. If you like the person on the big or small screen, then it’s only human nature to take an interest in the person in general. You admire your heroes and look to them to play a mentoring role in your own life.
Mary-Kate should understand this better than most, because she and her sister wrote a book called “Influence” that examines this primordial need in their own lives. Taking on the mantle of mentor is not for the shy and reclusive though. It requires being a role model in public AND private life. Call it what you like — ying/yang, ego/superego — the duality of the internal versus the external demands honesty and integrity…and openness.
Think about the list of people you interviewed in your book:
Peter Beard
Alexandre de Betak
Bob Colacello
David Collins
George Condo
Francisco Costa
Diane von Furstenberg
John Galliano
Lauren Hutton
Karl Lagerfeld
Peter Lindbergh
Christian Louboutin
Jack McCollough & Lazaro Hernandez
Margherita Missoni
Robert Lee Morris
Jack Pierson
Richard Prince
Terry Richardson
Giambattista Valli
Evan Yurman
Now imagine merely relating to their work without ever seeing the personality behind the work. I mean, honestly, isn’t it more fun knowing the personality behind the work. People who form attachments to objects alone are lacking in emotional development. If you’re left alone as a child, guess what, you start to treat the objects around you as friends and invest your emotional energy into them as substitutes for the missing parents.
One explanation for why the rich spend so much at auction houses is because they covet objects that cannot be taken from them, unlike the whimsical presence of their absent parents. Those who covet end up living in William Randoph Hearst mansions (be careful Oprah, that Montecito property is pretty big for one person!) surrounded by endless rooms of objects.
“I totally went internal,” she says. “I want to be behind the scenes and I don’t want people to know anything about my personal life. I don’t blog. I don’t read any of that.” — Ashley Olsen
Hiding as a metaphor does not bode well for the true nature of a person’s identity. A nifty schizophrenia of pay attention to me here, but not there, makes for an inconsistent form of nurturing that, as any rhesus monkey will tell you, has fateful consequences in the proper growth and development of empathy.
If Nate’s right, and the biggest “failure of human beings is miscommunication,” then Mary-Kate, what exactly are you communicating then by using your hand to protect your face? What are you protecting in the end? The Row and Elizabeth and James clothing lines are worthy brand name ventures, but in the end, is it really just about the clothes?
Not for me…