Slog
News & ArtsFriday, December 11, 2009
Mailbag Letter to the Editor: Charles Mudede's "Nasty Imagination"
Posted by Christopher Frizzelle on Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 3:01 PM
From the mailbag:
Dear Editor:I've been thoroughly enjoying your paper since I moved to Seattle eighteen years ago. Until today. Today I had the less than satisfactory experience of reading Charles Mudede's "If She Did It." I am used to sarcasm and facetiousness in your paper—if fact I quite enjoy that tone, but if Mudede's intent was to illustrate the absurdity of the prosecution's case against Amanda Knox, then he fell far short of the mark. If this wasn't his intent, then I must assume that this article, or, work of fiction, was just a little ego piece, and not representative of the fine insight into complicated matters that I look forward to in your paper.
Now, I am not a prude, nor do I object to pornography—it has its place, but it's place is not on the 49 bus while reading my weekly paper. This story crossed a boundary from speculation of what might have occurred in a tragic and painful incident, to a titillating, voyeuristic piece of minor and bad porn. Did we really need to be subjected to the details of Mudede's vivid imagination of catty girl-fight taunts gone bad? Did your paper really find it necessary to print, "Guede inserts his hand…"? Isn't it better to set the scene of a tense situation gone bad and let the reader fill in the tawdry details as they see fit? Did you have to spell it out for us? Is it appropriate even for a progressive, cutting edge paper? I don't think so.
While I have enjoyed Mudede's writing in the past and especially appreciate his insight into the weirdness of life in his police reports reporting, I will be hesitant to read a full length article in by him in the future. I don't need his nasty imagination in my head. Also, the number one rule of writing was violated—his story would have been stronger without the lurid imagined details. Editing = removing.
Sincerely,
Patricia Auburn
Even though we don't get many old-fashioned letters to the editor anymore—now that readers can comment on all stories online—we've been getting a lot of letters like this about Mudede's piece of Knox fiction this week. A lot of the commenters agree with this letter, calling the story "irresponsible and cruel," "so exploitative," "crap," "some of the worst junk i have ever read," "disgusting and absurd," "shit reporting," and so on. One commenters asks, "Why did the Stranger print this?"
First off, the story is not "shit reporting"—it's not reporting at all, it's fiction, which means it's made up. Why did The Stranger print this blood-soaked, nearly pornographic piece of fiction if it had no "journalistic" value? Because there is a limit to what journalism can do, and this murder trial exposed that limit. The reportable facts alone have yet to reveal what happened that night. Last week on Slog we all read the prosecution's time line of events on the day Meredith Kercher was killed—who was seen where when, who shut off their cell phones when, etc.—and even though the court ended up buying that time line, it has lots of gaps in it, a lot of unexplained stuff, and obviously no information about what these people were saying to each other. That's pretty crucial information to not have. Moreover, the prosecution admitted that they had no motive for the crime, telling the court, "We live in an age of violence with no motive. We don’t know what sparks these things.”
The point of "If She Did It" isn't to gross you out (the actual description of the killing goes fairly quickly and is taken from the prosecution's version of events—and the reason Guede slides his hand into Kercher's pants is because Guede's DNA was found inside Kercher's body). The point of the experiment is to try to imagine a sequence of human interactions that's plausible, using the prosecution's time line as a framework. What might have Knox said to Kercher before and during the crime? What might have Kercher said back? How did things escalate? A lot of unexplained things in the prosecution's time line—like why Knox and Sollecito were seen standing outside the cottage looking suspicious before the crime—are explained by circumstances that Mudede invented that nevertheless don't contradict the prosecution's time line. Of course, that time line could be wrong; the dialogue and invented interactions are almost certainly wrong, as they are made up. Whether Mudede succeeded or not in creating a believable narrative is up for debate. But to say the "story would have been stronger without the lurid imagined details" misses the whole point of the experiment.
2
The last line sums it up. It was an experiment. It failed. I see what you were going for but this isn't interesting mostly because of it's pornographic nature. Perhaps a fictional time line would have worked better without the details that the prosecutor did not directly assert. I honestly don't know what would have made this better but I do know this story was no good.
4
bullshit. that's what YOU say the point is.
obviously your own readers are onto it better, and they have sussed out that the point is as it always is with this writer, which is to enjoy a lurid near pornographic scummy creepy exploitation of Amanda.
He NEVER went thru the fax. he ALWAYS showed her face, her looks, her body. He NOW says he thinks she dind't do it, but for years it's been obvious he thought she did it and he used her to push his own alt hip creds.
It's pretty sad when he misses basic facts and history and misunderstands marxism in his pseudo intellectual b.s. way. When it's about his obsession with wymen, it's just creepy and dishonest.
That's all.
Creep.
obviously your own readers are onto it better, and they have sussed out that the point is as it always is with this writer, which is to enjoy a lurid near pornographic scummy creepy exploitation of Amanda.
He NEVER went thru the fax. he ALWAYS showed her face, her looks, her body. He NOW says he thinks she dind't do it, but for years it's been obvious he thought she did it and he used her to push his own alt hip creds.
It's pretty sad when he misses basic facts and history and misunderstands marxism in his pseudo intellectual b.s. way. When it's about his obsession with wymen, it's just creepy and dishonest.
That's all.
Creep.
5
If you want me to "try to imagine a sequence of human interactions that's plausible" have someone qualified write it. I'd respect plausible scenarios. I don't respect Mudede's jackoff material. Especially when it involved the death of a real person. Why is he so obsessed with this? Could it be because two young college girls are falling all over themselves for some kinky sex with an old African guy? Hmmm...
6
This makes me glad I never read the original piece. (I do read most of Mudede's stuff, but his Amanda fixation has gone way beyond where I want to follow.)
7
bullshit. that's what YOU say the point is.
obviously your own readers are onto it better, and they have sussed out that the point is as it always is with this writer, which is to enjoy a lurid near pornographic scummy creepy exploitation of Amanda.
He NEVER went thru the fax. he ALWAYS showed her face, her looks, her body. He NOW says he thinks she dind't do it, but for years it's been obvious he thought she did it and he used her to push his own alt hip creds.
It's pretty sad when he misses basic facts and history and misunderstands marxism in his pseudo intellectual b.s. way. When it's about his obsession with wymen, it's just creepy and dishonest.
That's all.
Creep.
obviously your own readers are onto it better, and they have sussed out that the point is as it always is with this writer, which is to enjoy a lurid near pornographic scummy creepy exploitation of Amanda.
He NEVER went thru the fax. he ALWAYS showed her face, her looks, her body. He NOW says he thinks she dind't do it, but for years it's been obvious he thought she did it and he used her to push his own alt hip creds.
It's pretty sad when he misses basic facts and history and misunderstands marxism in his pseudo intellectual b.s. way. When it's about his obsession with wymen, it's just creepy and dishonest.
That's all.
Creep.
8
It should run with a disclaimer that Mudede is a misogynist who made up his mind about guilt before getting any facts. The justification is a bigger pile of shit than the story. You ran it because it was sensational and you're greedy. Be honest for once.
9
Well, that's five minutes of my life back - I've been waiting to see what the verdict was before actually reading it for myself. Just the cover was making me cringe.
God, I miss Jonah...
God, I miss Jonah...
10
If there were no facts to report, it didn't belong in a newspaper (alt or not).
If you want to publish something else with made up shit in it, open an alt version of Reader's Digest and put Charles in charge of that. When "Alt-er's Digest" fails, you'll see that nobody wants to read that crap unless it comes from a store with no windows in a brown paper bag.
If you want to publish something else with made up shit in it, open an alt version of Reader's Digest and put Charles in charge of that. When "Alt-er's Digest" fails, you'll see that nobody wants to read that crap unless it comes from a store with no windows in a brown paper bag.
12
So... if there aren't reportable facts, reporters should just make them up? This isn't the time for fanfic, guys.
13
To Mudede's credit, he did slightly redeem himself with the graffiti picture he posted this morning: http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
Come on. That is pretty cool no? Am I right or am I right?
Come on. That is pretty cool no? Am I right or am I right?
14
@10 - fiction and opinion very much belong in the Stranger. It's the fucking Stranger. People need to pull the sticks out of their asses and remember that this isn't pulitzer prize winning stuff. It's a rag that's entertaining at times, awful most of the time, and occasionally has good news snippets.
15
I started reading it and realized that The Stranger had jumped the proverbial shark on this one. Or pooped the bed. Or pooped the bed while jumping the shark.
Yeah, it stank. I always enjoy Mudede's posts too, so I'm not inclined to just throw the stinkeye at him. I imagined him slipping this in when the paper was out the door to the printer. He intercepted the package and deviously slipped his obsession into the midst of the final proof with a wry smile, deploying the madness of his obsession to weekly readers everywhere. Or something like that.
Yeah, it stank. I always enjoy Mudede's posts too, so I'm not inclined to just throw the stinkeye at him. I imagined him slipping this in when the paper was out the door to the printer. He intercepted the package and deviously slipped his obsession into the midst of the final proof with a wry smile, deploying the madness of his obsession to weekly readers everywhere. Or something like that.
16
I appreciate you wanting to try something experimental, but I have to agree with others, that this was a colossal failure. And a surprising failure of editorial judgement. I especially dislike your petulant response. I think that is indicative of why so many hate The Stranger so much.
I am interested in hearing from other commenters who actually like Charles's piece. Maybe I'm missing something. But as I read it, it is lurid and pornographic.
I think there is a time to shock your audience. Rwanda. The Balkans. Sudan. But Amanda Knox? The case is already so titillating, I think discretion is the better part of valor here...
I am interested in hearing from other commenters who actually like Charles's piece. Maybe I'm missing something. But as I read it, it is lurid and pornographic.
I think there is a time to shock your audience. Rwanda. The Balkans. Sudan. But Amanda Knox? The case is already so titillating, I think discretion is the better part of valor here...
17
The letter writer claims she's "not a prude", but the simple description of a hand entering a woman's pants sends her over the edge. Right - no prude that one!
All prudes claim they "are not a prude' before they say something really uptight and prudish. Surprising she's not flipped out about the personals, too.
All prudes claim they "are not a prude' before they say something really uptight and prudish. Surprising she's not flipped out about the personals, too.
19
Did I read this right? There are lots of "unexplained stuff" in the prosecution's timeline, so we'll just have Charles make it up, call it "speculative narrative", an "experiment"? Experiment in what? What did you children learn? Good God, what a load of self-serving shite. Folks, read this rag for escapism, entertainment, a laugh or two. But if you want facts or analysis, fuck this shit.
20
Since this is what the pervs in the UK and Italy thought she was doing/did, how can anyone object if Charles fills in the blanks?
There's this thing called your hand - use it and turn the page if you don't want to read something.
You know, like all the pervy ads at the end of this rag.
There's this thing called your hand - use it and turn the page if you don't want to read something.
You know, like all the pervy ads at the end of this rag.
21
Hmmm.
I have not read the article, because, well, frankly I couldn't possibly give a shit about this whole case, and am not remotely interested in reading anything more about it.
That said, I'm sorta tempted, only because I love reading Mudede, even when I don't understand what the fuck he's talking about.
Nevertheless, with the qualification that I have not read it, I think it is pretty tasteless to do a fictitious or speculative experimental, whatever, piece about it. Too soon, for anyone that cares, is my guess.
I have not read the article, because, well, frankly I couldn't possibly give a shit about this whole case, and am not remotely interested in reading anything more about it.
That said, I'm sorta tempted, only because I love reading Mudede, even when I don't understand what the fuck he's talking about.
Nevertheless, with the qualification that I have not read it, I think it is pretty tasteless to do a fictitious or speculative experimental, whatever, piece about it. Too soon, for anyone that cares, is my guess.
22
My Letter to the Editor:
You are always behaving like a little saint. Now we will show you. Now we will make you have sex!
--Cocobot
You are always behaving like a little saint. Now we will show you. Now we will make you have sex!
--Cocobot
23
@19 Say it dude. Fiction is bullshit!! Lets have some facts and analysis, some real number-crunching, objective libertarian jour!nal!ism!, and no marxism up in this bitch!
24
I didn't read the article until I read this post. Didn't make much of an impression either way. I guess I would say that it was an interesting concept that was not especially well-executed, and I couldn't imagine them having anyone other than Charles write it. Also, no one is forcing any of us to read the Stranger cover to cover each week. All the people getting indignant and acting like they were somehow mind-raped by the story need to simmer down.
For the record, I don't think that Charles has a prurient interest in Amanda Knox or her case. I think he's obsessed by it because it carries a significance to him that we don't really get, and honestly, he has always been that way, whether it's bestiality in Enumclaw, arrogant works of architecture, the police beat, or Marxist philosophy. I think there's a tendency to assume perversion on his part because this is a story about a pretty young white girl and he's an odd, middle-aged black man.
For the record, I don't think that Charles has a prurient interest in Amanda Knox or her case. I think he's obsessed by it because it carries a significance to him that we don't really get, and honestly, he has always been that way, whether it's bestiality in Enumclaw, arrogant works of architecture, the police beat, or Marxist philosophy. I think there's a tendency to assume perversion on his part because this is a story about a pretty young white girl and he's an odd, middle-aged black man.
25
@19 Say it dude. Fiction is bullshit!! Lets have some facts and analysis, some real number-crunching, objective libertarian jour! nal! ism!, and no marxism up in this bitch!
26
I like fiction. I think a) none of knows what happened, and b) none of us has a prayer of affecting what might happen in court. A piece of fiction on what we've fabricated as "having happened" is a mighty interesting take on what exactly happens (in our dreams) to young affluent people who have the world at their feet and still manage to eff it up.
Or, you could just be a libertarian and get your underpants in a bunch about the federal gov't arts funding, along with Ron Paul. There are a lot of blogs out there that cater to that. the Stranger is a mighty fine blog for something totally else.
Or, you could just be a libertarian and get your underpants in a bunch about the federal gov't arts funding, along with Ron Paul. There are a lot of blogs out there that cater to that. the Stranger is a mighty fine blog for something totally else.
27
Good writing. To hell with the puritans. Keep fucking with them Charles, they love to hate you, but they cant stop reading your pieces.
She is guilty, get over it.
She is guilty, get over it.
28
Maybe if it was written well, things would be different... Maybe if the piece alluded to it's (and the media's) own ignorance of the case within itself (as apposed to a somehow both patronizing and mind numbingly blunt headline). Maybe if the speculation was less close minded, petty, sex-driven, and written without a hard on.
Maybe then this piece would be defend-able. But this piece fails miserably on every front. It's time that The Stranger took a step back and realized where "letting a good old friend keep his job, for old times sake" turns into "letting a creepy old man fall into dementia and take our beloved rag with it, for old times sake".
Maybe then this piece would be defend-able. But this piece fails miserably on every front. It's time that The Stranger took a step back and realized where "letting a good old friend keep his job, for old times sake" turns into "letting a creepy old man fall into dementia and take our beloved rag with it, for old times sake".
29
Mudede should be disallowed from ever using a keyboard, typewriter, pen and paper, sharp stick, or any other utensil that could possibly be used to write in any way. I don't care if his piece was pornographic or not (I didn't read it). That's not the point. The point is that Mudede is a terrible hack who can't stop vomiting crap on the web or in print.
Please, somebody fire him already.
Please, somebody fire him already.
30
To Golem -]
I am the letter writer and the hand slipping into the the pants was not what I was objecting to - I had to spell it out to Mr. Frizelle in our email exchange and now I'll spell it out for eeveryone else - the line I was objecting to was: "Guede inserts his hand into her vagina."
Not slipping into pants, but inserting into body parts without the consent of the other party. Not only is it porn, if you did it to someone yourself you could go to jail for it. No, I am not a prude, and the mistake was Mr. Frizelle's.
Patricia Auburn
I am the letter writer and the hand slipping into the the pants was not what I was objecting to - I had to spell it out to Mr. Frizelle in our email exchange and now I'll spell it out for eeveryone else - the line I was objecting to was: "Guede inserts his hand into her vagina."
Not slipping into pants, but inserting into body parts without the consent of the other party. Not only is it porn, if you did it to someone yourself you could go to jail for it. No, I am not a prude, and the mistake was Mr. Frizelle's.
Patricia Auburn
32
An interesting take on responsible journalism from several of the commenters here: Anyone who complains about what they read in the newspaper needs to shut up, because they chose to read it.
33
@24: i agree its not prurient. i think charles is interested because of "the african". & he knows seattle girls well enough to know the plausibility of his scenario is weak weak weak. and cruel to the 3 victims.
34
Patricia, @30, I'm sorry, but did it ever occur to you that maybe you are just not a reader fit to be reading any descriptions of sex crimes in the first place?
You say: the line I was objecting to was: "Guede inserts his hand into her vagina."
I think you may be confused here. Did you think this was something that Charles made up to make the story titillating?
In fact, Charles has already explained in the comments that this was part of prosecutor Mignini's time line, presented in court on Nov 21: "23:40 - Meredith is on her knees, threatened by Amanda with the knife while Rudy holds her with one hand and with the other hand carries out an assault on her vagina.
Do you think that it didn't happen? (Both side in the trial agree that Guede's DNA was found inside Meredith's vagina.) Or, do you think that even if it did happen it's not fit to be mentioned in stories and articles related to this sexual assault and murder trial?
You go on to say, Not slipping into pants, but inserting into body parts without the consent of the other party. Not only is it porn, if you did it to someone yourself you could go to jail for it.
Well, that's what this whole thing is about, isn't it?!
People are indeed in jail right now, charged with this very sexual assault and murder case. Were you honestly not aware of that?
You say: the line I was objecting to was: "Guede inserts his hand into her vagina."
I think you may be confused here. Did you think this was something that Charles made up to make the story titillating?
In fact, Charles has already explained in the comments that this was part of prosecutor Mignini's time line, presented in court on Nov 21: "23:40 - Meredith is on her knees, threatened by Amanda with the knife while Rudy holds her with one hand and with the other hand carries out an assault on her vagina.
Do you think that it didn't happen? (Both side in the trial agree that Guede's DNA was found inside Meredith's vagina.) Or, do you think that even if it did happen it's not fit to be mentioned in stories and articles related to this sexual assault and murder trial?
You go on to say, Not slipping into pants, but inserting into body parts without the consent of the other party. Not only is it porn, if you did it to someone yourself you could go to jail for it.
Well, that's what this whole thing is about, isn't it?!
People are indeed in jail right now, charged with this very sexual assault and murder case. Were you honestly not aware of that?
36
As a general rule, I steer clear of Mudede's "writing," because I think he has the intellect of a gnat and the pretension of Sarah Palin, so I haven't bothered reading the piece.
Given his inadequacies, though, I do have to wonder at the editorial decision to trust him with such a delicate experiment as this seems to have been. I agree with those who wonder why he's still employed.
Given his inadequacies, though, I do have to wonder at the editorial decision to trust him with such a delicate experiment as this seems to have been. I agree with those who wonder why he's still employed.
37
I remember picking up the Stranger's very first issue and being impressed and entertained by its confrontational attitude, alternative perspective and above all, a level of literacy that was vastly superior to every other freebie publication that I used to compulsively pick up and scan.
That was quite a long time ago now and I've been a regular reader. In all that time they have never had a writer who was less worth reading than Charles Mudede.
Oh, Everett True came close a couple of times, but he was at least entertaining and didn't take himself seriously for the most part.
But I *don't* read Mudede anymore, at least as soon as I realize it's him writing. And his pompous, egotistical and self-indulgent garbage style inevitably reveals the author behind it after a couple of paragraphs, even when I make a mistake and forget to check the byline.
Generally I consider it the Stranger's sad misfortune that Mudede is apparently as good as they think they can do for a regular writer, but this creepy, pathetic obsession with Amanda Knox, which I have been able to pick up on even with the effort I make to avoid Mudede in general, is pretty far beyond the pale.
Really, the Stranger needs to send Mudede to a good therapist instead of letting him assault their faithful readers with his creepy obsessions, bizare neuroses and pathetic self indulgent writings.
Whatever happened to Riz Rollins? Now there was a man who could write stuff that was worth reading to the whole world.
Surely if the Stranger scraped the bottom of the literacy barrel just a little bit harder, they could find a superior replacement for Mudede.
Friends don't let friends read Charles Mudede.
That was quite a long time ago now and I've been a regular reader. In all that time they have never had a writer who was less worth reading than Charles Mudede.
Oh, Everett True came close a couple of times, but he was at least entertaining and didn't take himself seriously for the most part.
But I *don't* read Mudede anymore, at least as soon as I realize it's him writing. And his pompous, egotistical and self-indulgent garbage style inevitably reveals the author behind it after a couple of paragraphs, even when I make a mistake and forget to check the byline.
Generally I consider it the Stranger's sad misfortune that Mudede is apparently as good as they think they can do for a regular writer, but this creepy, pathetic obsession with Amanda Knox, which I have been able to pick up on even with the effort I make to avoid Mudede in general, is pretty far beyond the pale.
Really, the Stranger needs to send Mudede to a good therapist instead of letting him assault their faithful readers with his creepy obsessions, bizare neuroses and pathetic self indulgent writings.
Whatever happened to Riz Rollins? Now there was a man who could write stuff that was worth reading to the whole world.
Surely if the Stranger scraped the bottom of the literacy barrel just a little bit harder, they could find a superior replacement for Mudede.
Friends don't let friends read Charles Mudede.
38
@ 34 -
I am beginning to regret writing to the editor and then having the letter be put into a forum where everyone has an opinion about my opinion and I have to defend my position. But I guess that is the way of the world now - you write a letter to an editor and you then have to deal with all opinions.
So - this is my last statement.
JW36 - Yes, I am a fit reader. I am a fit reader for sex crimes. I am a fit reader for psycho-killer novels. I am a fit reader for just about anything. I read widely and deeply. I am fascinated by mental illness and human foibles, and the thin line that is easily crossed from normal to aberrant. I am also a writer. Just because your opinion does not agree with mine, doesn't mean you need to question my fitness to read about sex crimes or anything else.
This is only my opinion and what I objected to was the way it was presented. YES - I KNOW that the guy stuck his hand up her vagina! But to then write a fictional account of it that borders, and IN MY OPINION, crosses the border into pornography, and put it into the NEWSPAPER, was in MY OPINION, crossing the line.
As I also stated, no, I am not a prude. No, I don't object to pornography. I've read it. It has its place. I did not think I'd be reading it in the Stranger while I was on the bus.
My objection remains - because of the way it was presented. Had it been stated as a fact in a news story and not in a piece of "fiction" that read as titillating and voyeuristic, I would not have objected. It's not only what you say, but how you say it.
I've been told I should have stopped reading. Maybe I should have - but no, I read on and I was concerned enough by the presentation of imagined material to write a letter to the editor. I suppose if I wanted to constantly defend myself in a public forum I would have left my comments in the comments section. But my concerns were addressed to the editor. The editor decides what should or should not be print - so I wrote to him. Christ, I even used my real name, while all you out there hide behind screen names and make assumptions about me, someone you don't even know.
Yes. I understand that some of the specifics were facts. Yes, I read the margin notes too. My objection is to the presentation of the facts, in a titillating and voyeuristic piece of fiction. This may be appropriate for a short story collection or some other such media. I did not expect it in the paper.
As I said to the Editor - I have come to expect insightful and clear coverage of complicated issues from the Stranger (which is much more than some others out there seem to expect). This indeed was a very complicated issue, and I am not convinced by the prosecutors or anyone else that justice was served. I do not think Mudede's story did justice to this complicated matter. I understand what he was attempting to do - I just feel he fell short of the mark. And all this commentary from all of us on the way the story was written just proves that the tragedy and complexity of the case is lost in this medium. We are no longer talking about the case, but rather about the writer. In journalism, it's not supposed to be about the writer.
My OPINION only. I'm done defending it to the general public.
More...
I am beginning to regret writing to the editor and then having the letter be put into a forum where everyone has an opinion about my opinion and I have to defend my position. But I guess that is the way of the world now - you write a letter to an editor and you then have to deal with all opinions.
So - this is my last statement.
JW36 - Yes, I am a fit reader. I am a fit reader for sex crimes. I am a fit reader for psycho-killer novels. I am a fit reader for just about anything. I read widely and deeply. I am fascinated by mental illness and human foibles, and the thin line that is easily crossed from normal to aberrant. I am also a writer. Just because your opinion does not agree with mine, doesn't mean you need to question my fitness to read about sex crimes or anything else.
This is only my opinion and what I objected to was the way it was presented. YES - I KNOW that the guy stuck his hand up her vagina! But to then write a fictional account of it that borders, and IN MY OPINION, crosses the border into pornography, and put it into the NEWSPAPER, was in MY OPINION, crossing the line.
As I also stated, no, I am not a prude. No, I don't object to pornography. I've read it. It has its place. I did not think I'd be reading it in the Stranger while I was on the bus.
My objection remains - because of the way it was presented. Had it been stated as a fact in a news story and not in a piece of "fiction" that read as titillating and voyeuristic, I would not have objected. It's not only what you say, but how you say it.
I've been told I should have stopped reading. Maybe I should have - but no, I read on and I was concerned enough by the presentation of imagined material to write a letter to the editor. I suppose if I wanted to constantly defend myself in a public forum I would have left my comments in the comments section. But my concerns were addressed to the editor. The editor decides what should or should not be print - so I wrote to him. Christ, I even used my real name, while all you out there hide behind screen names and make assumptions about me, someone you don't even know.
Yes. I understand that some of the specifics were facts. Yes, I read the margin notes too. My objection is to the presentation of the facts, in a titillating and voyeuristic piece of fiction. This may be appropriate for a short story collection or some other such media. I did not expect it in the paper.
As I said to the Editor - I have come to expect insightful and clear coverage of complicated issues from the Stranger (which is much more than some others out there seem to expect). This indeed was a very complicated issue, and I am not convinced by the prosecutors or anyone else that justice was served. I do not think Mudede's story did justice to this complicated matter. I understand what he was attempting to do - I just feel he fell short of the mark. And all this commentary from all of us on the way the story was written just proves that the tragedy and complexity of the case is lost in this medium. We are no longer talking about the case, but rather about the writer. In journalism, it's not supposed to be about the writer.
My OPINION only. I'm done defending it to the general public.
39
Well said Christopher. Its sad that you had to explain this.
Charles tried to do something original here. Its an interesting idea, to integrate narrative and reporting in order to help people understand an issue. The question of "did it work?" is less important to me that the the fact that The Stranger made an effort to creatively engage with the world in a way that the Seattle Times or CNN never will.
Charles tried to do something original here. Its an interesting idea, to integrate narrative and reporting in order to help people understand an issue. The question of "did it work?" is less important to me that the the fact that The Stranger made an effort to creatively engage with the world in a way that the Seattle Times or CNN never will.
41
I think the Editor should listen to the many readers who are disgusted by this piece and realize how much people do not like the writing of Charles Mudede - it' time to go. I'm almost ready to be done with the Stranger at this point, and I have been a faithful reader since 1997. I do not buy the "this was an experiment" bullshit. Please. This was a mistake...own up to it.
42
Provocative. And Hernandez @24 - you are truly one of the most thoughtful, genuinely intelligent commenters on Slog. Thank you.
44
@37.. i was let go because i wasn't a good enough journalist..or had no interest in journalism..or some such thing..it was a long time ago i almost don't remeber.. except i was pretty sad and dissapointed about it. i wokred under s.p and emily white and they were huge avocates of my writing..then it changed and iwas shown the door..there was also some trouble over a movie review i was assigned to write when jamie hook was film editor.. over crocodile dundee 3..i think he got fired over it. and they haven't asked me back..so there i guess..thanks for remembering..
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
NYC Man Ticketed for Not Riding in the Bike Lane by Jonathan Golob
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (44) RSS