‘Screening” the Sexuality of Jean-Michel Basquiat
83
perfect son, the film tries to show that he still cares for his mother, and even his
father, who attends one of his son’s openings. His Puerto Rican-Haitian roots are
respected through the ties he maintains with his parents. Schnabel also presents
Basquiat as a proper “race man” by showing that he respects and is respected by
the larger black community and as such cannot tolerate racism. Basquiat is
admired in one scene by an authentic, working-class black, who happens to be
Bruno Bischofberger’s limo driver. In another scene, several of Basquiafs
friends “from the street” visit the artist at his work space in Annina Nosei’s
basement to check out his art. Not only does their admiration of his work
validate it racially, but their reference to him as “nigger” shows that he is one of
them. Basquiat also calls racism when he sees it. His friendship with Benny
disintegrates shortly after his friend refers to him as “uppity.” In a scene set in
an expensive restaurant, Basquiat secretly pays for the lunch of a group of
wealthy white male patrons who he thinks are making racist comments, perhaps
believing such a gesture will fix their ignorance. Like Downtown 81, Basquiat
argues for the artist’s heterosexuality in the same breath that it argues for his
respectability and authenticity.
Yet, the triumph of the heterosexual Basquiat over the so-called
sexually “ambiguous” and “conflicted” one in Schnabel and Bertoglio’s films
and elsewhere also must be understood in terms of the artist’s own approach to
his sexuality and public knowledge of it at the time. Basquiat kept the sexual
relations he had with men fairly private. While some who were close to the artist
knew about his relationships with David Bowes, Klaus Nomi, and others,
Basquiafs highly publicized relationships with Jennifer Goode, Suzanne
Mallouck, Kelle Inman, Madonna, and others made him, in the eyes of the larger
public, a very successful heterosexual. Given the private nature of Basquiafs
homosexual activities and the public nature of his heterosexual ones, certain
questions may arise regarding the treatment or lack thereof of both in Basquiat
and Downtown 81. First and foremost, why would a scene which references or
displays Basquiafs queer activities be included in either film? Although
O’Brien and Schnabel, both friends of the artist, probably knew or had heard
about his sexual activities with men, can’t their decision to focus on his
heterosexuality be interpreted as attempts on their part to simply create
characterizations of Basquiat that reflected who he was and who people thought
he was? This paper is not primarily critical of both films on the grounds that
they do not include scenes depicting Basquiat engaged in some type of queer
sexual activity; more problematic and, as such, the main concern here is how
Basquiat and Downtown 81 constmct dialogues, characterizations, and so on
that give the impression that Basquiat did not or could not have participated in
non-heterosexual practices when he, in fact, did.
Bowling Green State University
Christopher F. Johnston
Works Cited
Adams, Brooks. '"Basquiat: Movie Review.” Art in America Sept. 1996. Find Articles.