Andy Warhol–Bob Colacello relationship

Andy Warhol and Bob Colacello’s relationship shifted from a long-running professional partnership into a tense separation after Colacello quit Interview without notice. Money and recognition formed part of the dispute, but Warhol regarded the resignation as the culmination of a deeper change in Colacello. Although he felt abandoned and criticized the manner of the departure, he remained open to renewed contact and work. Their encounters over the following months show neither a clean break nor an immediate reconciliation, but a gradual return to civility.

The resignation and its accumulated tensions

On January 6, 1983, Vincent Fremont handed Warhol a letter in which Bob Colacello resigned. Within the office, only Gael, Robert Hayes, and Fred Hughes knew at first, although Warhol noted that people outside the office already seemed to have heard. Fred Hughes spoke with Colacello, but the conversation did not change the decision. Warhol was glad for him, or said he was, yet objected strongly to being left without notice: Colacello should have stayed until a replacement could be found. The tension in Warhol’s response came from holding both reactions at once—wishing Colacello well while treating the abrupt departure as a professional wrong.

Warhol understood the resignation as the end point of a conflict that had been building. Before the holidays, he had offered Colacello any painting he wanted for Christmas. Colacello chose a Hammer & Sickle, of which Warhol had only two, and Warhol refused that particular choice. He suspected the painting itself was less important than the larger dispute: Colacello had become accustomed to the homes and lifestyles of wealthy people and, in Warhol’s view, had begun to expect a comparable share for himself. Warhol also thought Thomas Ammann might have encouraged him, and wondered whether a new job was involved, though he doubted that Colacello and Jann Wenner would get along.

Their disagreement over Interview’s finances was specific but unresolved in Warhol’s account. Colacello had earned commissions on portraits and received half of a photography portfolio associated with Bruno; Warhol understood that he also wanted a share of Interview, perhaps 50 percent, though he could not tell whether Colacello had said 50 or 15. Warhol had offered him a percentage of profits once the magazine made money, while insisting that it had not yet become profitable. Colacello, he recorded, disagreed. The diary therefore preserves both the scale of the argument and the limits of Warhol’s knowledge: even the figure at its center remains uncertain.

A break that Warhol did not treat as final

Despite the accusation of unprofessionalism, Warhol did not describe the relationship as permanently over. He considered whether Colacello could take on someone to handle Interview’s routine work and supervise the magazine on a freelance basis. He thought Fred Hughes might make that proposal and ended the discussion with the expectation that Colacello might return. That possibility mattered: Warhol objected to the way Colacello left, but could still imagine a working arrangement after the resignation.

The office’s response also made the separation practical as well as personal. The news circulated in the press and continued to occupy the staff the next day. When Jane Holzer remarked on Warhol’s composure, he pointed to the savings in payroll. Fred Hughes did not want to rush into hiring another editor; Robert Hayes had been helpful, so they would see how he managed. Warhol’s account thus registers a change in the office’s structure without presenting it as an immediate collapse. Colacello’s absence left a vacancy, but the work could temporarily be redistributed.

The January encounter and the limits of repair

On January 28, Warhol spotted Colacello walking along Madison Avenue while out with Benjamin Liu. His first impulse was to change direction. Instead, he followed Colacello into a bank and approached him, making a deliberate effort to get past the awkwardness. Warhol tried to reopen friendly contact by mentioning that he had been with Diana Ross and that Frank Sinatra might agree to an interview—an opportunity relevant to Colacello’s former work at the magazine.

The overture failed. Colacello was sour, and said that his agent would not permit him to conduct the interview. Warhol left feeling moody; the encounter did not restore their earlier ease. Still, the attempt shows that he was not simply waiting for Colacello to make the first move. He brought a possible work opportunity into the conversation as a way of returning to familiar ground, while Colacello’s response kept both the personal and professional distance in place.

A more cordial meeting

By April 28, the atmosphere had changed. At the Perry Ellis fashion show, Warhol and Colacello ran into each other, and Colacello was pleasant. Warhol emphasized the change in tone and said it was nice. He also recorded that Colacello had found a job with Parade, the Sunday newspaper supplement. The meeting does not establish that they had resumed working together or settled their earlier disagreements. It does, however, mark a contrast with the sour exchange at the bank: the relationship could again accommodate an uncomplicated, courteous encounter.

Across these entries, Warhol’s view remains mixed rather than neatly reconciled. He resented the abrupt resignation, questioned Colacello’s expectations, and believed the financial dispute had been developing for some time. At the same time, he wished him well, considered ways he might continue contributing to Interview, and later sought him out with a potential interview opportunity. The April meeting supplies a modest endpoint: not a return to partnership, but a visible easing of the rupture and a renewed capacity for friendliness.