The responsibilities of the photographer in a celebrity/magazine relationship is always a bit tricky. David LaChapelle makes these fascinating observations in Nowness, on the occasion of his upcoming Shafrazi show:
What was the process like? Were you on set krumping or moonwalking?
You know, I’m really not going to talk about the Michael Jackson pictures, or what went into them. I shot him in 1999 for the millennium cover of Rolling Stone and that was the start of an acknowledgment that I was a supporter. But I’d rather people look at the photos and decide for themselves. We persecuted him. Every person who ever bought a tabloid or watched the news, we all contributed to his death by taking in that form of gossip.
It is definitely true that celebrities are our modern day gods and goddesses, and we build them up and tear them down.
Madonna has been torn down. Michael Jordan has been torn down. Michael Jackson was destroyed. Like no other person in our times. You have to remember that Michael Jackson was innocent. He was proved innocent in our courts. If you read the transcripts of the trial it is insanity, it should never have gone to court. We spent tens of millions of dollars to prosecute him when we don’t have money for schools in California.
Why is that?
Not because he was a celebrity but because he looked different. He was obsessive about privacy and it made him “other,” it made him different, and he went from being the most famous, most beloved singer to the most reviled, joked about—he couldn’t open a newspaper without reading horror stories about himself.
As an occasional photographer of celebrity, I often wonder what my part is, and where my responsibilities are. Is it to the person being photographed, to the magazine who hired me, to the viewers, or to myself to make what I think is a great picture. These are often in conflict, and I don’t think there is an easy answer.
