He was, as the newspapers always put it, born Jimmy Slattery of Massepequa, Long Island, before going to New York City and becoming Candy Darling, a transvestite star of Andy Warhol’s famous Factory.
He earned a small fame in the long decade of the sixties: one of the subjects of Lou Reed’s “Walk On the Wild Side” (it is not a flattering reference) and the subject of Reed’s song “Candy Says,” mentioned by the Rolling Stones in one of their songs, the star of two of Warhol’s better known movies, chosen by Tennessee Williams to act in one of his plays, the center of a famous party attended by people like George Plimpton and the clothes designer Halston, and now 36 years after his death the subject of an apparently worshipful documentary called Beautiful Darling.
Slattery died in 1974 at 29 of lymphoma—caused, according to a writer in the Village Voice, by the hormones he’d been taking. A photo for which he posed on his hospital bed the day before he died became a minor sixties icon.
According to the New York Press reviewer, Beautiful Darling ends with a quote from his diaries: “You must always be yourself no matter what the price. It is the highest form of morality.” Many of us will find it easy to scoff at a man in a dress proclaiming the need to live honestly as a moral imperative. “Of course he’d say that,” we think. “He’s wearing lipstick.”
It’s the great credo of the libertine life, “Be yourself.” But the young James Slattery was right. Aristotle and St. Thomas would have understood him. You must be who you are and suffer for it if you have to. That is, after all, one of the lessons of Good Friday. A lot of people hanging around Jerusalem that day hated the one man in history who was perfectly who he was, hated him for precisely that reason, and few of us would have liked him any better.
Slattery was only partly right, though. He did not see that we do not know ourselves, and the self we think we know is really only the self we want to have, for many reasons, a few of them our fault but many given to us. (Slattery surely did not choose to like dressing like a woman—and for all we know his desire to do so was more powerful than our desires for the more socially acceptable vices we succumb to without feeling bad about it.)
This gives us a good working definition of the Fall of Man: You do not know who you are, and you don’t really want to know, and even if you did, you wouldn’t know how to find out. Slattery seems to have thought that we know who we are, because he thought he knew he was really a woman, and that he knew how to become who he was through clothes and hormones. He was wrong, I think, on both counts.
We are all, if I may put it this way, and this is a line I may some day regret having written, transvestites. We all put on a vesture, a life, that we insist expresses who we really are. We’re all wearing the wrong clothes. Like Slattery, we find people to applaud the performance, who like us much better in the wrong clothes than they would were we wearing the right ones. No matter how clever he was, a Jimmy Slattery with a girlfriend would never have seen the inside of the Factory.
You can think of the obvious examples, when the space between the person and the persona grows too wide, or the rationalizations become too obvious, like the imperious man who lets his fears show or the selfish brute who discovers Nietzsche. People more spiritually or psychologically astute than I could describe the subtler cases.
Flannery O’Connor, for example, whose short stories often turn on a moment of sudden and usually painful self-knowledge. Or C. S. Lewis, whose expert devil Screwtape specialized in making sure his “patients” misunderstand themselves completely. Or even P. G. Wodehouse, whose comedy often depends on his characters living utterly without self-knowledge.
Or you could look in the mirror. While you must always be yourself, whatever the price, you really haven’t a clue who that is. You might not recognize the true you if you met him on the street.
Many of us suffer the haunting feeling that we are not exactly who we think we are, that we are wearing the wrong clothes, that we’re faking, though most of us probably feel this only intermittently. It only bothers me from time to time, though for what it’s worth I find that preparing for confession is usually one of those times, because I always worry that I’m going to get a very shrewd old priest. It bothers me more often in others, I’m afraid.
I’m not sure I can say this without sounding annoyingly pious, but there is an answer to this haunting feeling, and it’s an answer Christians were blessed to celebrate with pomp and circumstance this past weekend. If Good Friday expressed the problem, Easter solves it. In Jesus we see the man who is entirely and wholly and simply who he is, and in the Resurrection not only the divine imprimatur on his life but the promise that he will make us what he is.
“Behold the Man,” Pilate famously declared, not knowing what he said. As the Second Vatican Council’s Gaudium et spes put it, “[O]nly in the mystery of the incarnate Word does the mystery of man take on light. . . . Christ, the final Adam, by the revelation of the mystery of the Father and His love, fully reveals man to man himself and makes his supreme calling clear.”
Christ reveals man to himself, not just generically but particularly. He reveals you to yourself. If you truly want to know who you are, look at Jesus, and imitate him as best you can. Any small effort to do what he did makes you a tiny bit more ourselves and removes a little piece of whatever vesture you’ve put on. Taking up your cross, following him, losing your life for his sake: all modes of self-knowledge.
But the imitation of Christ doesn’t get us far enough. Even carrying our crosses, we remain very imperfectly ourselves. We’re still wearing the wrong clothes. We need to know more. We need a handbook.
Look at Christ, the priests and pastors say, and of course they should. Yet, oddly enough, it’s the easy thing to say. We don’t know enough about Jesus to feel too upset by calls to live like him, and the calls we treat as metaphors anyway. (We don't see any real crosses to take up.) To become like Christ, we need to look also at the rest of Scripture and to the Church’s developed tradition, which offer a wisdom that spells out in greater detail what Jesus wants from and of us.
No one objects to being told to live like Jesus. But to live the way St. Paul says to live, or the way the Catechism of the Catholic Church says to live, that we dislike. Being chaste, or giving alms, or stifling our desire for profit, or going to confession, or watching our language, or suffering a fool gladly, that rankles, especially if we have to do it. But through obedience to the accumulated and refined wisdom of the Church, we become who we really are. It's worth it.
James Slattery does not seem to have been able to become who he really was, despite living the moral life he promoted. Trying to be who he was on his own terms didn't work out well for him.
In a letter written on his deathbed to Warhol and his circle, he wrote that "Unfortunately before my death I had no desire left for life. . . . I am just so bored by everything. You might say bored to death. (D)id you know I couldn't last. I always knew it. I wish I could meet you all again." To have lived such a life and still have been bored to death, that is haunting.
David Mills is Executive Editor of First Things. His previous “On the Square” articles can be found here.
RESOURCES
Nick Curley’s New York Press review, The Color of Candy.
The Wikipedia entry On “Candy Darling”, which includes the famous deathbed photograph.
The Second Vatican Council’s Gaudium et spes
John Paul II’s Redemptor hominis, which develops the idea of Christ revealing man to himself.
Comments:
May I say that I find the boredom of James Slattery reassuring. Had Mr. Slattery been helped in those final days by someone who had made himself available to God as an instrument of his truth, it is possible that James Slattery might have died in peace.
Thank God that such a life led to boredom. Mr. Slattery was unable to see(and had no one to help him to see) his ennui as a sacred opportunity to actually understand his existential emptiness, not as a final verdict but as an entry, a beginning of something truly new.
"A man who respects himself in all honesty does not respect his self. Who am I, that I, with my pride, my absurdity, my tired failures, could still respect myself?" I have asked myself this question many, many times.
But the writer goes on, "And yet I discover that there is a point in me at which I touch the absolute ... I am worthy of reverence precisely for what I am not and what nevertheless is part of my own existence. ..."
.
In fact , in bl.Emmerich's book , in the temptation scenes , the enemy tries to often appear to our Lord , in many difft guises !
He barely pays them any attention , other than a 'begone' look or word !
May many be blessed , to call upon His power , to help us to cast away all such enemy influenced areas - in these upcomimg days , when we continue to celebrate His victory over evil ,esp. in the celebration of His mercy towards us culminating in The Feast of Mercy on Sunday ; it promises graces enough to wipe out all sins and punishment for sins , if we place such trust in His mercy , to help us to live lives true to our idenity and greatness as children of God !
Would not that punishmnt involve our many afflictions , from claims the enemy hold over us - may be in greed for false pleasures , spending too much time , focused on enemy influenced works , instead of calling on His powerful Name , on behalf of many !
Our Lord reveals the abundance of His graces through The Icon of Mercy -
http://www.faustina-message.com/- the large size of this graced image has such a 'draw ' - to help us to take in how compassionate and merciful our Lord is ..how Fatherly ..
Almost wish that every church, scool and home would have one !
On the reverse , are there negtaive influences in our homes , through works of persons under such false powers - through artworks , media and the flood of clothing from China with satanic emblems - is there an agenda here !
May the grace of the sacraments , esp. confession help us to take in more of the powerand mercy in His Name - to be able to hold every thought captive to Him , for our sake , for the sake of the many in our lives , trusting that His Name is far greater !
Thus , we undo the woks of the liar who destroyed the trust of our first parents in The Father ...thus making us fearful and turning us to greed in many forms , for security !
Yeshua , I trust in Thee !
a nicely written article. You raise a question for me: how do we live in solidarity even with people like James Slattery (who became a twisted and empty form of "I," the "I" who had nothing to do with the dialogue with God. His life was a constant looking in the mirror; there was no I-Thou, rather I-I) and still affirm the Truth and distinguish from a privation of morality and morality itself?
If I am not mistaken, Saint Augustine said this (sorry if I am misquoting): Hate the sin, but love the sinner. A tough thing to do indeed. But still we are called to do it.
Mike's concern seems to be with language that seems to be favorable to the idea of 'self-knowledge', as if such were opposed to the Gospel. And I can see the point that a preoccupation with 'self-knowledge' could be narcissistic. And yet, as John Paul II was wont to say (quoting from the Second Vatican Council), "Jesus Christ fully reveals man to himself." Only in Christ do we come to fully know ourselves and understand what it means to be human. And James Slattery missed that, for all his own concern with integrity and self-knowledge (and even to say that rubs me up against the risky business of seeming to read another man's soul, which only God can know truly).
I don't read Mills AT ALL as holding Slattery up as any kind of positive example, but rather as a tragic one. Hence, I suppose, his question as to whether you actually read the article. . .
Or, to put it another way, "Be Yourself; Come on, baby, take a walk on the wild side..."
When I say that these people are tough “to work with,” I thinking of friends that continue to make themselves unhappy but are impossible to advise because any advice would be seen as preaching, merely dogmatic, and repressive. These friends are the type would find a hero in Slattery and would find the life story of Augustine somehow irrelevant. The “way” of Jesus is not nearly as enticing as “my way.”
That said, Mills’ article rankles. I like the metaphor he draws in asking each of us to consider the way in which we too are “transvestites,” and I would have enjoyed a much fuller exploration of how he sees such transvestism in himself or in contemporary Christianity. He nods in this direction, but he’s far more interested in the sensationalistic aspects of Slattery’s story—his youth, his celebration in the art world, his tragic last letter. All in all, I ended the article feeling good that I wasn’t Slattery rather than seeing myself in Slattery or seeing Slattery as me.
Candy Darling: “You must always be yourself no matter what the price. It is the highest form of morality.”
That statement, and others very much like it, is a mystifyingly vague cliché. It embodies the contemporary obsession with self, as if being one's self is somehow what life is all about. Maybe life is really about not being oneself; maybe life is about giving up concern for one's self. Maybe the highest form of morality is not being selfish; maybe the authentic self and the highest form of morality lies in Charity, Caritas.
1. Be yourself, indeed, but...
2. "You do not know who you are, and you don’t really want to know, and even if you did, you wouldn’t know how to find out."
3. "We're all wearing the wrong clothes...You might not recognize the true you if you met him on the street."
4. "I always worry that I'm going to get a very shrewd old priest."
5. "No one objects to being told to live like Jesus. But to live the way St. Paul says to live, or the way the Catechism of the Catholic Church says to live, that we dislike. "
This is quite a mini-*Confessions*! (I.e., per St. Augustine.)
mask of who he perceives himself to be, yet this sounds like walking on the "safe" side within one's comfort zone or area of what he thinks he is. I believe walking on the
"wild side " would simply mean walking in faith detached from one's self image...
That's such a nice quote. It really depicts eloquently the fact that we should all stand up in the face of what we feel is right and not back down to peer pressure.



find out"
I agree with this. At the speed of thought, one may convince himself he is something
or someone. No one really takes a written record of what or who they make themselves to be, so we are left with grey areas, lot of grey areas and therefore doubts. God has mapped out who He wants us to be and maybe that is the more definitive way to "self-discovery". We just need to sit down and figure out his role for each of us. Maybe there will be less confusion in the world..