The Man in the Attic
Cidu Bill on Jun 30th 2009
Newsweek might have gone through a format change, but the editing still seems to be non-existent: not just the grammatical errors, but also the bits of writing that just don’t make any sense.
In the current issue, a writer mentions Michael Jackson’s extensive plastic surgery and then adds “No one — least of all Jackson himself — would have wanted to see the Dorian Gray portrait in his attic.”
Um… Wouldn’t the portrait in the attic show a good-looking black guy? It was the real-life version that became increasingly bizarre-looking over the years.
Filed in Bill Bickel, Dorian Gray, Michael Jackson, Newsweek | 16 responses so far
Frosted Donut Jun 30th 2009 at 01:16 pm 1
Perhaps the writer thought that Jackson was having the surgeries to look young? (”Isn’t that why everybody does it? Surely no one does it to change how they look!”)
It’s still a vague, confusing reference that seems designed to say “Look! I’m literate!” And who knows how Jackson felt about all this?
Judge Mental Jun 30th 2009 at 01:42 pm 2
I think the writer might have been half-right in that Jackson would not have wanted to see it. We have no idea if the portrait would portray a “good looking black guy”, (some people age better than others) but we can safely assume that a normally aged Michael Jackson would look better (to most of us) then the surgically enhanced monstrosity that he had become. Jackson on the other hand, seemed to have a pronounced fear of aging and desire to stay perpetually young. You would like to think that in hindsight Jackson realized what terrible choices he made, but to him, it is possible that the thought of looking “old” would be a fate worse then what the excessive surgery had done to him.
Elyrest Jun 30th 2009 at 02:40 pm 3
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the writer got the Dorian Gray reference backwards. Lots of people know vaguely what topics refer to, but when pushed really can’t explain them. Jackson might have feared looking old, but the most bizarre part is that all the plastic surgery made him look like a frail ghost of himself. He looked as if he had already died long before he really did. Seeing videos of him 25 years ago made me realize that he was perhaps already a little strange, but he looked almost normal.
Nobody wants to see my picture in the attic - it looks exactly the same.
CIDU Bill Jun 30th 2009 at 02:50 pm 4
Which is precisely why, Elyrest, Newsweek needs an editor. Clearly, nobody reads these articles between the time they’re written and the time they’re published.
Kate C Jun 30th 2009 at 03:14 pm 5
There’s also the possiblity that “if this is what MJ looked like in ‘our’ world, imagine what his portrait would look like!” Although I suspect it was someone understanding the basic idea of a Dorian Gray reference but not quite getting it.
Keera Jun 30th 2009 at 03:30 pm 6
Er, what? It’s Dorian Gray himself who stays unchanged through the years, while his portrait ages and reveals his sins, which is why he hides it in the attic. The Newsweek writer got the reference right.
padraig Jun 30th 2009 at 03:39 pm 7
Keera, Dorian stayed young and GOOD looking. His nose did not fall off as far as I recall. Although I haven’t re-read the original in a while…
Judge Mental Jun 30th 2009 at 03:56 pm 8
There is actually are multiple ways to look at this:
- The writer got it backwards. In Dorian Gray, the real person stayed young (and attractive), and only the picture aged (and became unattractive). If you assume the portrait does the opposite of the real person, then in Jackson’s case, theoretically the portrait would remain young and attractive.
- The writer got it correct. If the portrait is an aged (uglier) version of the living person, then in Jackson’s case that would be one hideous looking portrait
- The writer muddled the reference. (IMHO, I think this is really what is at play here. ) In order for the reference to really be applicable, all of Jackson’s surgeries would have kept him youthful and attractive. The writer just didn’t think through his analogy.
The Ploughman Jun 30th 2009 at 05:24 pm 9
Though there has been plenty of eulogizing, there’s also a peculiar sense of inevitability surrounding the whole thing. Put it this way: which would be stranger - the sudden, somewhat mysterious death of Michael Jackson that has occurred or a world where Michael Jackson grows older and is still alive thirty years from now?
CIDU BIll Jun 30th 2009 at 05:45 pm 10
Agreed, Ploughman. My over/under for Jackson was always 50, so I guess I pretty much nailed this one.
Pinny Jun 30th 2009 at 05:48 pm 11
If I remember the end of “The Portrait of Dorian Gray” correctly, when Dorian finally died, the “magic” ended: His body changed to what it would have looked like while the portrait reverted back to his handsome younger self.
Therefore in this case, the picture would look pretty good, now that MJ has died.
Charlene Jun 30th 2009 at 08:55 pm 12
I agree that it’s muddled, but I suspect age had little to do with it. Dorian Grey’s painting turned ugly not because of aging but because of Dorian’s wicked, immoral, disgusting acts. This may have been an attempt to point out that the real problem many have with Jackson is not his music or his plastic surgery but his reputation as a child molester who only avoided conviction because the judge and/or jury were starstruck.
Powers Jul 1st 2009 at 06:47 am 13
Why would Michael Jackson have a portrait of Dorian Gray anyway?
Pinocchio, sure, but Dorian Gray? I didn’t know he was a fan.
Seth Finkelstein Jul 1st 2009 at 01:19 pm 14
No, the writer used it correctly, it’s clearer in the full context of the paragraph:
“In middle age, he consciously took on the role of Peter Pan, with his Neverland Ranch and its amusement-park rides, with his lost-boy “friends” and with what he seemed to believe was an ageless, androgynous physical appearance—let’s hope he believed it—thanks to straightened hair and plastic surgery. (No one—least of all Jackson himself—would have wanted to see the Dorian Gray portrait in his attic.)”
That is, he used plastic surgery to appear young (even if bizarre), while his real appearance was a ravaged countenance from the combination of aging, illness, injury, stress, and side-effects of all the surgery.
Jess Jul 1st 2009 at 02:11 pm 15
Charlene got it right - the protrait wasn’t simply an aged Dorian - it was Dorian with his horrible, horrible sins revealed in his face. He was hideous because his life was spent doing immoral acts.
Based on the excerpt from Seth, the Newsweek writer still got it wrong because he only referenced age and physical appearance, not his moral/immoral actions.
Seth Finkelstein Jul 1st 2009 at 03:52 pm 16
I’d say it’s close enough for the allusion - arguably the part about “his Neverland Ranch and its amusement-park rides, with his lost-boy “friends” ” could be about the “moral/immoral actions” aspect. Even if it was just about age/appearance, that should be sufficient, since that’s a large part of what the portrait symbolizes. I don’t think the writer is wrong to make a reference for one aspect even if other aspects are unmentioned (and not contradictory).