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.

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
Alexander said…
You are right. I totally agree with you.

Popular posts from this blog

CLIVE WILMER'S THOM GUNN SELECTED POEMS IS A MUST-READ

THAT HANDSOME MAN  A PERSONAL BRIEF REVIEW BY TODD SWIFT I could lie and claim Larkin, Yeats , or Dylan Thomas most excited me as a young poet, or even Pound or FT Prince - but the truth be told, it was Thom Gunn I first and most loved when I was young. Precisely, I fell in love with his first two collections, written under a formalist, Elizabethan ( Fulke Greville mainly), Yvor Winters triad of influences - uniquely fused with an interest in homerotica, pop culture ( Brando, Elvis , motorcycles). His best poem 'On The Move' is oddly presented here without the quote that began it usually - Man, you gotta go - which I loved. Gunn was - and remains - so thrilling, to me at least, because so odd. His elegance, poise, and intelligence is all about display, about surface - but the surface of a panther, who ripples with strength beneath the skin. With Gunn, you dressed to have sex. Or so I thought.  Because I was queer (I maintain the right to lay claim to that

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.  What do I mean by smart?

"I have crossed oceans of time to find you..."

In terms of great films about, and of, love, we have Vertigo, In The Mood for Love , and Casablanca , Doctor Zhivago , An Officer and a Gentleman , at the apex; as well as odder, more troubling versions, such as Sophie's Choice and  Silence of the Lambs .  I think my favourite remains Bram Stoker's Dracula , with the great immortal line "I have crossed oceans of time to find you...".