Amanda Knox celebrity status continues to grow with coverage in The Stranger
I'm not trying to make enemies here, but I've never really liked The Stranger, one of Seattle's two "alternative" weekly papers.
I find that they've got too much style and not enough substance in their print publication, all the while maintaining almost militant political and social viewpoints that can't help but leave politically moderate readers taken aback. (Maybe that's their goal...after all, moderates certainly aren't The Stranger's target audience).
That being said, I do prefer them to our other alternative news source - The Seattle Weekly - if for nothing more than The Stranger's ability to maintain a (for the most part) solid blog, one that is constantly updated on developments in the Puget Sound area.
Why am I mentioning all this?
Well, in this week's issue of the paper, Christopher Frizzelle has a review of Amanda Knox's short story "Baby Brother" (which I mentioned in a post yesterday). In his piece, he sheds a humorous light on the most infamous literature of 2007.
Frizzelle's review confirms what many of us following the case have already been thinking: Ernest Hemingway, Amanda Knox is not. Repetition, one-dimensional characters, ridiculous descriptions...all indicate, as the critic so tactfully points out, that "she wasn't a very good short-story writer."
She writes:
She shouldn't be. Look at it objectively: the reason the media jumps on such stories is because "rich, blonde, white girls" are involved in murder cases - whether they're the victim or the suspect - far less often than "poor, non-blonde, non-white girls." When was the last time a case like the Knox spectacle shook Seattle, or any other major American city for that matter?
And then she has the nerve, a little farther down, to criticize the English press?
Come on. If there was ever a blog post on the Amanda Knox saga that didn't need writing, Ms. Barnett's "insightful" commentary certainly takes the cake.
I find that they've got too much style and not enough substance in their print publication, all the while maintaining almost militant political and social viewpoints that can't help but leave politically moderate readers taken aback. (Maybe that's their goal...after all, moderates certainly aren't The Stranger's target audience).
That being said, I do prefer them to our other alternative news source - The Seattle Weekly - if for nothing more than The Stranger's ability to maintain a (for the most part) solid blog, one that is constantly updated on developments in the Puget Sound area.
Why am I mentioning all this?
Well, in this week's issue of the paper, Christopher Frizzelle has a review of Amanda Knox's short story "Baby Brother" (which I mentioned in a post yesterday). In his piece, he sheds a humorous light on the most infamous literature of 2007.
Frizzelle's review confirms what many of us following the case have already been thinking: Ernest Hemingway, Amanda Knox is not. Repetition, one-dimensional characters, ridiculous descriptions...all indicate, as the critic so tactfully points out, that "she wasn't a very good short-story writer."
The story's biggest weakness from a literary standpoint is that none of it is believable. Kyle, the story's rapist, is a cheeseball bad guy who first tells his brother, "A thing you have to know about chicks is that they don't know what they want," and then punches Edgar in the face. Anyone who's ever read a handful of college-level creative-writing assignments knows that date rape is a cliché of the genre, as is someone-punching-someone-else-in-the-face. These are the sorts of conflicts that creative-writing students cook up because they're taught that the first thing they need to do is cook up conflict. [Emphasis once again added by the Seattle Crime Blogger - Ed.]Interesting take on things. Hats off to Frizzelle.
Meanwhile, a far less impressive piece written by Erica C. Barnett on SLOG chimes in on the absurd debate over whether Knox is attractive.
She writes:
The media salivates over stories where pretty white girls go nuts, ergo the media obsessively describes American girls who go nuts as “attractive,” “pretty,” “sexy,” etc. (See also: Coverage of murdered rich, blonde, white girls vs. coverage of murdered poor, non-blonde, non-white girls.)I'm not sure what the author is trying to say here. Does Barnett mean that she is surprised by this?
She shouldn't be. Look at it objectively: the reason the media jumps on such stories is because "rich, blonde, white girls" are involved in murder cases - whether they're the victim or the suspect - far less often than "poor, non-blonde, non-white girls." When was the last time a case like the Knox spectacle shook Seattle, or any other major American city for that matter?
And then she has the nerve, a little farther down, to criticize the English press?
Come on. If there was ever a blog post on the Amanda Knox saga that didn't need writing, Ms. Barnett's "insightful" commentary certainly takes the cake.
