From the film I saw Capote interviewed without taking notes on hand. I thought this was strange since we were told that he had something like 8,000 pages of notes. Then he made a few comments about having a 94% recall, which was funny but also pretty amazing. Capote obviously was a very intelligent person which explains a lot of his abilities. I was a little confused on the order in which he wrote the book. He obviously couldn't write the ending until Perry told him what happened, but the movie didn't show them discussing what happened before or after the killings. So I didn't understand if the movie just left that part out of the interviews or did he write what he knew then went back to add what Perry and Dick did. I would also say that the priorities of his writing would be the correct portrayal of the characters. Everything about the characters, feelings, attitudes...etc.
Obviously Capote was very close to Perry, although it wasn't directly stated in ICB it was definitely shown in the movie. After watching the movie and realizing that Capote not only didn't agree with the way Perry and Dick were convicted but he actually helped them by getting them new lawyers so they could appeal the courts decision. Although Perry and Dick were not represented correctly they still did the crime, I would think that Capote could separate himself from them with this reality. I understand that he was holding on to the hope that Perry was innocent, thinking that it was Dick who did all of the killing, but he was wrong. All I can think about after watching the movie is what if Capote actually did get these two out of jail, or out of death row? What if they were set free because of Capote's actions? Would he have been able to live with that decision?
I think Capote at times does misrepresent himself. I think he did care for Perry thinking that he was just not the killer that everybody was saying he was. But it astonishes me that he allowed himself to care as much as he did about Perry. That fact right there is pretty damn creepy. I can understand a writer becoming close to their subject of interest, but number one, not when there's any possibility that he can be a killer, and number two, not when you're trying to stay objective about the story. The part that I think was misrepresenting himself was when he told Perry that if he didn't tell what happened at the Clutter house that night that he was done interviewing him. I think this is misrepresentation because it was out of character and he really didn't want to stop seeing Perry. I think his concern for Perry is also innappropiate. I think he crossed the line from writer to having a relationship with him. Although after reading ICB I did feel a connection between the two of them, I didn't see this line crossed when reading it. To me this made the book consistent and an amazing work of creative nonfiction.
2 comments:
I also agree that in my mind that Capote misrepresented himself. He acted as if he cared for Perry. In the end, we come to find out that he wanted to get the story. Especially in the part when Perry says how has the story been going and if he can see it and he says he isn't finish and he lies. Even though Perry is going to die does not give Capote the right to use him to get an ending of his story. I do feel that Capote did become attached and it would be hard not to but still we are all human beings and it was wrong how Capote acted in the end with Perry.
Yeah, it was really interesting and amazing how Capote became every character in the book. But it seems like he knew the Clutter Family real well. But the only way he could have known them was through the research and interviews he had with the people (characters) in his story.
It seems that the Clutters were a nice family but I feel that there was more to them on a personal family matter. But who will ever know except the Clutter family.
Post a Comment