Skip to main content

Hard Knox

Excuse me for thinking we are in a different century - one where witches are burnt.  The Italian retrial of Amanda Knox (who may or may not be guilty of a sex murder with a partner or two, or alone) has been facing eyebrow-raising praise and blame the last few days, on the basis of her looks.  Simple as that.  The prosecutor in the case has claimed that she is "diabolical" and that her fresh-faced innocence masks someone dedicated to drugs, drink and "lust", a modern female Dorian Gray.  Meanwhile, the defence claims she is like "Jessica Rabbit" - "not bad, just drawn that way".

Medieval, or simply Berlusconian, this may be - but also, in the age of Facebook, it speaks to a disturbing and eternal truth of the human condition: good-looking people are thought of differently.  Unfortunately, sexism comes with this.  Knox's eyebrows, heart-shaped face and full mouth, her clean-cut beauty, speak to certain fantasies surrounding all-American prettiness and decency, but, yes, in the age of Britney Spears, also the subversion of those values of seeming normalcy.  Indeed, it would be dishonest to deny that there is a tendency, in Japanese anime and American TV (Glee, Heroes) to play on the "cheerleader" image.  Nabokov explored this dichotomy well, how a certain sort of European perversion views American youth in a transgressive light; Freud harboured fantasies for American women; Ted Hughes remarked on Plath's "American legs"; and in Daisy Miller, we see the tragic downfall of another American ingenue in Italy, enmeshed in European passions.

All well and good - but should we really have to discuss how a defendant looks, in the 21st-century?  Anyone who thinks that a normal, even pleasant-looking person cannot be evil, has no familiarity with the history of serial killers; and the character Quasimodo of course shows us the reverse - the tender-hearted may be all-too-ugly on the surface.  The Knox trial needs to look deeper - to forensic and other evidence; motive; and opportunity.  The possibility that a young man or woman abroad might use drugs and engage in sex games is plausible.  So too, confusingly, is the possibility of innocence. Square one.
Labels:

Comments

Poetry Pleases! said…
Dear Todd

Somehow it always seems more of a waste when someone attractive is banged up. I confess that I fancy Amanda Knox. I also believe that she's guilty.

Best wishes from Simon
Thu Sept 29, 10:54:00 am 2011
Alexander said…
You are right. I totally agree with you.
Thu Sept 29, 06:21:00 pm 2011
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A  poem for my mother, July 15 When she was dying And I was in a different country I dreamt I was there with her Flying over the ocean very quickly, And arriving in the room like a dream And I was a dream, but the meaning was more Than a dream has – it was a moving over time And land, over water, to get love across Fast enough, to be there, before she died, To lean over the small, huddled figure, In the dark, and without bothering her Even with apologies, and be a kiss in the air, A dream of a kiss, or even less, the thought of one, And when I woke, none of this had happened, She was still far distant, and we had not spoken.
Post a Comment
Read more

Poetry vs. Literature

Poetry is, of course, a part of literature. But, increasingly, over the 20th century, it has become marginalised - and, famously, has less of an audience than "before". I think that, when one considers the sort of criticism levelled against Seamus Heaney and "mainstream poetry", by poet-critics like Jeffrey Side , one ought to see the wider context for poetry in the "Anglo-Saxon" world. This phrase was used by one of the UK's leading literary cultural figures, in a private conversation recently, when they spoke eloquently about the supremacy of "Anglo-Saxon novels" and their impressive command of narrative. My heart sank as I listened, for what became clear to me, in a flash, is that nothing has changed since Victorian England (for some in the literary establishment). Britain (now allied to America) and the English language with its marvellous fiction machine, still rule the waves. I personally find this an uncomfortable position - but when ...
15 comments
Read more

IQ AND THE POETS - ARE YOU SMART?

When you open your mouth to speak, are you smart?  A funny question from a great song, but also, a good one, when it comes to poets, and poetry. We tend to have a very ambiguous view of intelligence in poetry, one that I'd say is dysfunctional.  Basically, it goes like this: once you are safely dead, it no longer matters how smart you were.  For instance, Auden was smarter than Yeats , but most would still say Yeats is the finer poet; Eliot is clearly highly intelligent, but how much of Larkin 's work required a high IQ?  Meanwhile, poets while alive tend to be celebrated if they are deemed intelligent: Anne Carson, Geoffrey Hill , and Jorie Graham , are all, clearly, very intelligent people, aside from their work as poets.  But who reads Marianne Moore now, or Robert Lowell , smart poets? Or, Pound ?  How smart could Pound be with his madcap views? Less intelligent poets are often more popular.  John Betjeman was not a very smart poet, per se....
3 comments
Read more