London's National Portrait Gallery explores how The Face magazine redefined youth culture
Picture the giant image of model Nick Kamen in a white shirt and wrap leather skirt styled by Ray Petri: a symbol of so-called Buffalo Style towering over the entrance of the National Portrait Gallery in London.
Inside find a myriad of icons including Kurt Cobain the front man of Nirvana wearing a floral dress shot by David Sims; Kylie Minogue transformed from girl next door into a 70s siren in mirror aviators by Norbert Schoerner and The Spice Girls posing by a wire fence in an urban park by Andreas Bleckmann.
These portraits are amongst 200 images by 80 photographers that feature in The National Portrait Gallery's latest exhibition The Face Magazine: Culture Shift which is devoted to the groundbreaking style magazine that changed the way a generation danced, dressed and talked.
Back in 1980 when publisher Nick Logan launched the pioneering style title, no one could foresee the social media and digital revolution that would deliver news to phones in our pockets. Back then magazines were oracles and Logan, former editor of NME and behind teen pop music mag Smash Hits, was to create his own revolution. The Face not only reflected the music and fashion scene, but invented it through radically innovative image making, journalism and graphic artistry.
Logan dug into his own personal savings to launch The Face and employ a super talented editorial team. The investment paid off, The Face which ran from 1980 to 2004 became the holy grail of style for a generation, with emerging stars and celebrities fighting to be on the cover. Successive generations of photographers and editors (including myself) clamoured to work for the title which was based in a converted industrial offices in EC1. While legacy titles such as Vogue and GQ, were tuned into society and a classical interpretation of glamour, The Face like i-D magazine was a trailblazer for youth.
'This is the first major museum exhibition on The Face's iconic portraiture. It reveals how groundbreaking the imagery was and how it still resonates today. Logan brought together music, style and fashion with art and politics to create a different type of magazine that had a profound impact on clubs, on fashion and also promoted the idea of the stylist as a key influence on fashion shoots and launched the career of many models too,' says Sabina Jaskot-Gill, the NPG's Curator of Photographs.
A sense of raw energy, rebellion and invention rips through the exhibition that is curated by Jaskot-Gill alongside art director Lee Swillingham and photographer Norbert Schoerner, both veterans of The Face who first proposed the exhibition idea to the gallery more than five years ago.
The recently opened new entrance and galleries designed by Annabelle Selldorf Architects creates a voluminous space for the show. Culture Shift also charts the stylistic shifts in photography and fashion over the two decades from bold to dirty realism to dark, gothic and through to hyper real. The sheer array of imagery is accumulative and immersive.
Culture Shift is cleverly composed of salons decorated with wallpapered imagery, video, framed stills and original copies of the magazine that was first conceived by art director, Neville Brody. 'There was a design boom in the UK in the early 80s and Brody spearheaded it in magazine format – subsequent art directors took on that baton. The question was always how the hell do we make this look new!,' says Swillingham who pioneered technicolour futurism using first generation image manipulation tools.
'A theme that runs throughout is how The Face takes well known faces and depicts them in a new way exemplified by Robbie Williams styled by Judy Blame and David Beckham like a war hero with blood on his torso by Vincent Peters ( in fact, it was soya sauce!) … the result was always unexpected,' says Jaskot-Gill. While many style titles scratch the surface of pop culture, The Face imploded it revealing the artistry and energy behind it.
'The Face cut through suburbia like a knife and opened the whole world up to me, one that was both relevant, and new, and exciting,' says contributing photographer John Akehurst. It was deeply immersed in club and dance culture championing the subterranean heroes of rap, acid house, rave, rock, electropop and Brit pop from Jazzie B to Oasis, Pulp, Robbie Williams and Daft Punk.
'I grew up reading The Face and more than anything else it was the place that translated, reflected and offered insight into contemporary culture and into the things that connected culture together,' says curator and critic Ekow Eshun who started freelancing for the title in 1986 and later worked as assistant editor. 'We were all trying to create an ideal version of a style magazine and each month we tried again,' he smiles.
The Face's take on fashion was equally disruptive. The magazine was a launch pad for stylists including Ray Petri, Melanie Ward, who coined those memorable images of Kate Moss in a feather headdress for the Summer of Love issue by the late Corine Day; Karl Templer (who now works with a legion of super brands) and Katie Grand (now editor of The Perfect magazine).
'There was a great element of storytelling and back then fashion and clothing was used as a prop. Later priorities shifted as brands became more powerful and demanded coverage in return for advertising,' says Schoerner who contributed numerous stories including a cover image of a geisha figure blowing bubble gum. 'The Face was the reason I moved to the UK from Munich and it supported by decision to pursue photography,' says Schoerner. The high levels of creativity, the transgressive fashion and DIY invention now makes The Face an object of fascination for the Gen Z generation.
Photographer Sean Ellis worked with the eccentric Isabella Blow. One of their standout shoots was the cinematic battle shoot The Dark Night Returns featuring Alexander McQueen and a troupe of models in full chainmail and armour. It captured McQueen's warrior spirit and was a huge production. 'When you think about culture today it is splintered on so many platforms but The Face was the bible. If you got in there it meant you had something to stay. There was absolute freedom. I would have an idea and take it to Lee Swillingham, and he would go 'yes, sounds cool, show me the pictures!' and if he did not like, it would not run. You never knew how many pages you had or who else was in the issue and that fostered a friendly competition,' says Ellis.
Often The Face team worked through the night to hit production schedules. 'I once forgot to include the cover in the package for the printers. I had to drive all the way to Wales at night to deliver it,' says editor Sheryl Garratt who grew up in Birmingham and began writing for the NME aged 17 before being appointed editor.
To assemble the show, the curatorial team reached out to a global diaspora of talent including Stephane Sednaoui, David Sims, Juergen Teller, Ellen von Unwerth, Vincent Peters with many flying in for the opening. It was a joyous reunion. The Face shaped style culture as we know it today and also changed the course of many lives and careers. Hats off Logan!
is at Britain's National Portrait Gallery until 18 May
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
a day ago
- Miami Herald
Trump's new attack on DEI: Erasing history or a needed shakeup?
Editor's note: Welcome to Double Take, a regular conversation from opinion writers Melinda Henneberger and David Mastio tackling news with differing perspectives and respectful debate. MELINDA: I'm calling the weekend I just spent at my Notre Dame class reunion a Mary-thon, because I got to catch up with so many Marys — Mary Virginia, Mary Ann, Mary Meg and Mary Pat, plus that outlier Kathleen Marie. But while we were closing down the dance floor, Donald Trump did not take a minute off from trying to close down free expression, distort history and put the arts in a headlock. Oh wait, did I say that wrong? A news story I read about his possibly illegal Friday firing of the director of the Smithsonian's National Portrait Gallery said he was 'continuing his aggressive moves to reshape the federal government's cultural institutions.' You say 'reshape,' I say 'deform.' Art that is told what to be and do isn't art anymore. DAVID: I spent some time recently in Omaha's fabulous art museum, the Joslyn. Like the Smithsonian museums, it is free and a place of beauty and inspiration. At the same time, if you spend any of your visit reading the descriptions of the works, the monotony of the standard-issue Marxism from the artists is tedious. I've felt the same from the National Portrait Gallery and other Smithsonian art museums. It wouldn't hurt them to have some fresh blood from outside the usual suspects. MELINDA: Fresh blood? Trump said Kim Sajet is out as director of the Portrait Gallery because she's a 'highly partisan person, and a strong supporter of DEI, which is totally inappropriate for her position.' An inappropriately partisan person is just someone who doesn't agree with him. I mean, would he ever throw out one of his own supporters on that basis? On the contrary, he makes no secret of filling positions based not on expertise but on loyalty to him and on the way they look on television. And isn't DEI just fairness by another name? This president has got things so upside down that any job not held by a white man is now assumed to be held by a know-nothing 'DEI hire,' instead of by someone who had to work even harder to get where he or she is. DAVID: No, DEI is not the same as fairness or equality. It is right there in the name 'diversity, equity and inclusion.' Equity is the idea that people shouldn't be treated equally because they are not equal. It is the very opposite of the imperfectly achieved American creed that so many fought to finally make a reality in the 1950s, '60s and '70s. Today, more than 90% of Americans agree on 'equal opportunity.' DEI tears down that hard-won consensus and replaces it with a raw racial spoils system and identity politics. Equity will never enjoy that kind of support. MELINDA: Look, the college friends I was just with and love so much are mostly white Catholic girls who are grandmas now. But we are keenly aware not only of all we were so lucky to have had, but of what a lack of diversity in our classrooms cost not just those who weren't there but us, too. Sajet is out because she once told The New York Times that the portraits in the gallery mostly represent 'the wealthy, the pale and the male.' I would not have put it that way, but no one can say it isn't true. Why not include more portraits of those who should have been there all along but were overlooked? And do you really agree with Trump that museums are hotbeds of anti-American propaganda? A confident country is not afraid to tell its whole story. Knowing more will not make us fall apart, and concealing unpretty parts of the past is what authoritarians do. Though if he succeeds, this current moment will certainly wind up as a blank page. The reason people flock to the Smithsonian's National Museum of African American History and Culture is that a lot of us know that what we learned about that history in school was subpar, to put it generously, and we are eager to change that. Unless this administration really is driven by racial animus, what's the problem? DAVID: The DEI-mania in the years since the murder of George Floyd may have sometimes brought needed attention to the darker parts of our history, but more often than not it has turned into fact-free America hatred. The bits of The 1619 Project that turn up in the Smithsonian's generally wonderful Museum of African-American History are particularly rancid. No, modern policing was not borne of the need to recapture escaped slaves. Policing has a history that goes back thousands of years across many cultures. No, American capitalism is not rooted in slavery. The most economically advanced parts of America rejected slavery first. No, the Revolutionary War was not fought to keep British abolitionists at bay. MELINDA: I'd hardly call it a mania, and there have been more police shootings every year since Floyd's murder. You'd rather fact-check the 1619 Project than talk about Trump's determination to stoke white grievance — white genocide, really? You are right about those 1619 errors, which did a lot of damage. Only Trump isn't trying to correct, but to obliterate. Just like DOGE preferred counterproductive mass firings to the more targeted trims that everyone could have supported. And fact-free American hatred, huh-uh. I love this country, which is why a year ago right now I was in Normandy for the 80th anniversary of D-Day, as proud of all of those veterans who saved the world from the Nazis, and especially of our local recipient of the French Legion of Honor Medal — France's highest honor, civil or military — as I could have been without having my heart burst out of my chest. I also love our people who come from everywhere, and who look and think differently from me, too. Unlike the president, who on every holiday posts pretty much the identical festive message about what scum half of all Americans are. I just want us to tell our whole story, like you'd want for the health of your family. To airbrush is to propagandize, and what does that get us? What's so scary about a museum director trying to make the portraits hanging in our national portrait gallery better represent the whole American story? I can't wait to see what kind of 'improper ideology' JD Vance will uncover at the National Zoo, as he's supposed to be doing across all of the Smithsonian. Maybe he will find that the new pandas or some other immigrant animals are up to no good. DAVID: I love the National Zoo, but it is not the place to go if you want to learn the nuances of environmental policy. You don't get delicate shades of green — you get hit with a moss sledgehammer. We might agree that Trump is not going to add subtlety, but the place is in need of a shakeup. The Smithsonian doesn't do nuance well, but nuance is what we need to showcase our common humanity and common problems. You are right that there have been more police shootings since Floyd's death, but it might be wise to dwell on the fact that every year police kill more unarmed white people than Black people. The police killings are best addressed in ways that bring us together as equality already does. The DEI approach of only looking at Black killings leaves us divided. MELINDA: I took my kids to that zoo all the time and noticed very little environmental policy, nuanced or otherwise, but then I was just trying to keep my son from jumping in with the cheetahs. You'd expect police shootings to kill more white than Black people since the latter make up only about 15% of the population. Trump's DOJ is not even going to look at police misconduct, which is a good way to get more of what you have decided not to see. But it isn't only the abuse of Black people that he wants to ignore. He also mothballed a federal database tracking all misconduct by federal law enforcement officers. How turning a blind eye to wrongdoing might bring us together I don't know. That's never been his goal. And this Portrait Gallery director's firing is only one example of this administration's non-stop efforts to disappear all but MAGA-approved history. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth just ordered the Navy to review the names of vessels honoring civil rights icons, starting with assassinated San Francisco Supervisor Harvey Milk, a Navy vet himself, and one of the country's first openly gay elected officials. Happy Pride Month! Others on the list include Thurgood Marshall, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Harriet Tubman, Medgar Evers, Cesar Chavez and Dolores Huerta. You can call all of this anti-DEI, or you can hear Trump raving about 'dead white farmers' in South Africa and realize that the man's racial views, and our willingness to accept them, are exactly what 1619 was talking about. When only the pale and the male and the straight are acceptable, then that's in-your-face white supremacy. When Trump replaced those who ran the Smithsonian's Kennedy Center, which he sometimes mistakenly calls the Lincoln Center — I sense a cognitive cover-up in the making here — they were replaced by folks who were not at all partisan. You know, because the new KenCen board he put in place had the nonpartisan good taste to immediately elect Trump as chairman. After installing himself to run this cultural gem, he according to The New York Times told his new team that as a kid, he could pick out notes on a piano and impressed someone his father had hired to assess his potential strengths with his inate musicality. 'I have a high aptitude for music. Can you believe that?' Yes! White House communications director Steven Cheung answered a question about this revelation by calling his boss a 'virtuoso' whose musical choices 'represent a brilliant palette of vibrant colors when others often paint in pale pastels.' Sadly, the president said, he was never encouraged to develop his talent. But I say it's never too late to pursue a gift like that on a full-time basis. C'mon, Juilliard, help us out here. DAVID: If you keep talking Trump, all we're going to do is agree. Let me just say this: As offensive as the blatherings of the sycophants around Trump obviously are, so is the uniform liberalism of the Smithsonian. It paints America through red-colored glasses when there are so many other colors to see. A few years of Trumpy chaos might just inject some needed diversity of thinking to the place. That's part of DEI, too, right?
Fast Company
a day ago
- Fast Company
Trump ditches the American flag for his stern new portrait
The White House just unveiled a second version of President Trump's official portrait, and it's even more foreboding than the first. The new portrait, which was taken by the chief White House photographer Daniel Torok and revealed on Monday, shows Trump in a dark blue suit and red tie, sitting in a nearly dark room. It appears to be an evolution of Trump's first official portrait, also taken by Torok, which debuted just before his inauguration. Trump's first portrait strayed markedly from the precedent set by past administrations in terms of how the chief executive is presented. But this 2.0 version includes a striking omission that even the first did not: there's no American flag. It's just the most recent development in Trump's monthslong campaign to adopt a darker, sterner personal brand that aligns with his desired image of control. Leaving convention at the door Cara Finnegan is a professor in the Department of Communication at the University of Illinois and author of the book, Photographic Presidents: Making History from Daguerreotype to Digital. According to Finnegan, presidents are 'always deeply invested in their political image.' In an interview with Fast Company back in January, Rhea L. Combs, director of curatorial affairs at Smithsonian's National Portrait Gallery, explained that presidential portraits have historically aimed to balance relatability with strong leadership and American pride. To signal relatability, every president in the last 60 years has been photographed with a wide smile, positioned at a straight-on angle to keep the subject eye-level with the viewer. The lighting is typically soft and even, giving the composition an approachable feel. And, to reinforce the concept of commitment to the country, each president since Gerald Ford has included the American flag in the background of their official portrait. During his first term in 2016, Trump hewed closely to this historical approach. In contrast, for his inaugural portrait this year, he bucked nearly every tradition—including lighting, framing, angle, and facial expression—resulting in an official image that aimed to convey dominance rather than relatability. Still, he kept a sliver of the American flag in the background. For portrait 2.0, though, that final vestige of convention has also been abandoned. 'The mug shot arguably is his presidential portrait' At the time of the first portrait's release, Torok took to his personal X account to confirm that his portrait of Trump was inspired by the President's mug shot, taken after he was found guilty of 34 felony counts in May 2024. Trump used the mug shot as a marketing tool throughout his campaign, repositioning it as a kind of badge of honor by selling pieces of the suit he wore in the photo and featuring it on rally posters. This 2.0 version blurs the line between mug shot and presidential portrait even more. Once again, Trump is pictured making his signature scolding, eyebrow-raised expression from his mug shot that Torok already emulated once before. Compared to the first portrait—which was significantly darker and more harshly lit than the average presidential portrait—version 2.0 has brought the dimmers down even further, obscuring almost half of Trump's face in shadow. And instead of an illuminated background featuring the American flag, this image features what is essentially an ominous black hole surrounding the President. On X, Torok responded to a commenter with a brief explanation of how he chose to capture the image: 'Fairly dark room. One massive overhead soft box. And a streak of sunlight from the sunset over his right shoulder. Cinematic lighting.' That last detail of emulating cinema seems to hint at the broader rationale behind Trump's sterner second term image, from an oil painting in the White House of his bloodied face to the commercialization of his mug shot: It's all about using production to craft a specific narrative. With portrait 2.0, the Trump administration seems to be saying Trump is the star, and the United States is merely the set. 'What's striking to me is that the release of each second-term official portrait has prompted comparisons to the 2023 mug shot,' says Finnegan. 'It's clearly become the image to which every subsequent photographic portrait of Trump is inevitably compared. Yes, Trump himself immediately embraced the mug shot and commercialized it, and now it even hangs outside the oval office, so he's authorized it himself in that way. But if every photographic portrait of Trump is compared to the mug shot, then the mug shot arguably IS his presidential portrait.'
Washington Post
a day ago
- Washington Post
The Smithsonian faces an existential crisis. The world is watching.
When the National Portrait Gallery was created by an act of Congress in 1962, the authorizing legislation defined portraiture as 'painted or sculptured likenesses.' And when it referred to the future directors of that museum, which is part of the Smithsonian Institution, it was with exclusively male pronouns. 'His appointment and salary,' the text read, would be fixed by the Smithsonian's Board of Regents.
