Post Cinematic Affect Final:Layout 1 7/21/2010 8:57 PM Page 18 Post-Cinematic Affect and her voice the dividual elements of her persona are – – themselves, already, electricity, light (or darkness) and sound, digital matrix and intense vibration. Nick Hooker does not manipulate Jones’ image, so much as he modulates, and actively recomposes, the electronic signals that she already is, and whose interplay defines the field of her becoming.17 In other words, the electronic image is one more iteration and – a particularly visceral one, at that of Jones” as a celebrity – “Grace icon. I say iteration, rather than version, or copy, because there is no original, or Platonic ideal, of a celebrity: all instances are generated through the same processes of composition and modulation, and therefore any instance is as valid (or as any other. “authentic”) Cannibal” is only the most recent in a long string of “Corporate Jones’ reinventions of herself. Over the course of her career, she has continually rearranged her body, her appearance, and her overall persona. Now, there may well be a gap between Grace Jones the private person, and Jones” the iconic celebrity. “Grace Indeed, Jean-Paul Goude, Jones’ partner and artistic collaborator in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and the father of her son, says that their personal relationship fell apart when Jones I had started “felt to love the character we had created more than I loved her” (McDowell 2005). But the very point of this anecdote is that “Grace Jones,” the character or persona, exists actually in the world, just as much as Jones the private person does and precisely because – these two do not coincide. Jones the private person is not the model, or the privileged source, of Jones the icon. If anything, the problem for Goude, and perhaps for us as well, has to do with whether it is even possible for Jones the human person to have as full an existence as her image does: to live up to the demands, and the promises, of Jones the celebrity figure.18 In any case, the iconic Jones” is just as an object, or a presence, as any “Grace ‘real’ other even if its mode of being involves, not just the medium of the – flesh, but many other media as well. We encounter Jones” “Grace 18
Post Cinematic Affect Final:Layout 1 7/21/2010 8:57 PM Page 18 Post-Cinematic Affect and her voice – the dividual elements of her persona – are themselves, already, electricity, light (or darkness) and sound, digital matrix and intense vibration. Nick Hooker does not manipulate Jones’ image, so much as he modulates, and actively recomposes, the electronic signals that she already is, and whose interplay defines the field of her becoming.17 In other words, the electronic image is one more iteration – and a particularly visceral one, at that – of “Grace Jones” as a celebrity icon. I say iteration, rather than version, or copy, because there is no original, or Platonic ideal, of a celebrity: all instances are generated through the same processes of composition and modulation, and therefore any instance is as valid (or “authentic”) as any other. “Corporate Cannibal” is only the most recent in a long string of Jones’ reinventions of herself. Over the course of her career, she has continually rearranged her body, her appearance, and her overall persona. Now, there may well be a gap between Grace Jones the private person, and “Grace Jones” the iconic celebrity. Indeed, Jean-Paul Goude, Jones’ partner and artistic collaborator in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and the father of her son, says that their personal relationship fell apart when Jones “felt I had started to love the character we had created more than I loved her” (McDowell 2005). But the very point of this anecdote is that “Grace Jones,” the character or persona, exists actually in the world, just as much as Jones the private person does – and precisely because these two do not coincide. Jones the private person is not the model, or the privileged source, of Jones the icon. If anything, the problem for Goude, and perhaps for us as well, has to do with whether it is even possible for Jones the human person to have as full an existence as her image does: to live up to the demands, and the promises, of Jones the celebrity figure.18 In any case, the iconic “Grace Jones” is just as ‘real’ an object, or a presence, as any other – even if its mode of being involves, not just the medium of the flesh, but many other media as well. We encounter “Grace Jones” 18
mod.docx