Googling "Vernon Hunter" on Monday night I was stunned by how little the national media, beyond Bunch, Crooks and Liars, the Associated Press and ABC's "Good Morning America," had paid attention to Stack's victim. "GMA" seemed to write about Hunter because the show featured Stack's daughter from his first marriage, Samantha Bell, calling her father a "hero." To her credit, Bell retracted her statement, and labeled Hunter the hero, when she learned about the man her father killed. (Joan Walsh, “Why so little attention to Vernon Hunter?” Salon, 22 Feb. 2010)
Because Vernon Hunter was understood as victim
I think many of us still avoid identifying with the "passive" victim, and take some pleasure in associating with the effective self-exertion of the killer. I think it means a lot of us have known substantial bullying in our lives, 'cause the most frequent reaction of those who've been bullied, when they witness someone else under attack, IS NOT actually to defend them but rather to (in psychological parlance) "identify with the persecutor" -- join the bullying crowd, and thereby avoid a re-encounter with previous shame and fear. Those who reach out to the victim: the better loved, not those who've suffered from bullying themselves. Vernon Hunter was not of course passive, but he is largely UNDERSTOOD as a "victim" -- that is, as fatally vulnerable. And so all the attention veered toward the hunter, rather than Hunter. That's my largest sense of the why.
There are also those who see him as a proxy. He is THEIR man, who just wouldn't shut up and take it. He isn't yours. He isn't mine. But I think we need to take care to note that in different situations, with different individuals, WE TOO might become so focused on the some particular someone who finally expresses OUR OWN discontent, rage, that the humanity of other people is lost to some extent in their becoming "wreckage" of our proxies' noteworthy concussive power. These headlines of yours have me thinking a bit of the "finally, someone speaks out!" excitement/relief, that has drawn many of the right in this instance to lose all contact/interest in Vernon Hunter.
1)The President Obama we voted for
I'll let a smart friend explain why Obama beat the GOP and won back his base, at least for a glorious day
2) Finally, some spine
The president gives (another) great speech. But it will take more than words to get his agenda back on track
and particularly this one:
3) Thank you, Sen. Franken
Senate Dems are saying he stifled Joe Lieberman to keep debate on track. Liberals are happy, whatever the reason
Richard Brody shared a link.Moderator · November 20 at 3:38pm I'm obsessed with Bringing Up Baby, which is on TCM at 6 PM (ET). It's the first film by Howard Hawks that I ever saw, and it opened up several universes to me, cinematic and otherwise. Here's the story. I was seventeen or eighteen; I had never heard of Hawks until I read Godard's enthusiastic mention of him in one of the early critical pieces in "Godard on Godard"—he called Hawks "the greatest American artist," and this piqued my curiosity. So, the next time I was in town (I… I was out of town at college for the most part), I went to see the first Hawks film playing in a revival house, which turned out to be "Bringing Up Baby." I certainly laughed a lot (and, at a few bits, uncontrollably), but that's not all there was to it. I had never read Freud, but I had heard of Freud, and when I saw "Bringing Up Baby," its realm of symbolism made instant sense; it was obviou…
A Polish zoologist and his wife maintain a zoo which is utopia, realized. The people who work there are blissfully satisfied and happy. The caged animals aren't distraught but rather, very satisfied. These animals have been very well attended to, and have developed so healthily for it that they almost seem proud to display what is distinctively excellent about them for viewers to enjoy. But there is a shadow coming--Nazis! The Nazis literally blow apart much of this happy configuration. Many of the animals die. But the zookeeper's wife is a prize any Nazi officer would covet, and the Nazi's chief zoologist is interested in claiming her for his own. So if there can be some pretence that would allow for her and her husband to keep their zoo in piece rather than be destroyed for war supplies, he's willing to concede it.
The zookeeper and his wife want to try and use their zoo to house as many Jews as they can. They approach the stately quarters of Hitler's zoologist …