Oscar Pistorius is on the cover of TIME next week. This time, it’s not because he’s the wildly successful South African Olympian known as ‘blade runner’ for the carbon fibre blades that he has in place of his amputated lower legs. It’s because he is charged with the murder of his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp.
On February 14, 2013, Pistorius shot and killed Steenkamp. That much isn’t up for dispute, but his motives are. According to Pistorius, he awoke in the middle of the night and thought he heard an intruder in the bathroom. He grabbed his pistol and shot blindly into the bathroom multiple times, fatally wounding Steenkamp. Some have disputed his claims, stating that everything from the angle of the shot to shouting heard earlier that night paint a wholly different picture, one where Pistorius is not an overzealous defender spooked by what he thought were intruders but a man who shot and killed his girlfriend on purpose.
Further complicating the case is the fact that this is not Pistorius’s first brush with domestic violence. In 2009, he spent the night in jail after assaulting a 19-year-old girl, and there are claims that he’s threatened earlier girlfriends. There are also reports that Steenkamp made multiple calls to the police throughout the course of their relationship alleging physical violence by Pistorius.
Then, of course, there is the setting. While apartheid in South Africa ended in the 1990s, racial tensions remain high and the rich often live in isolation, behind barbed wire and surrounded by security, which lends weight to Pistorius’s story. However, South Africa also has shockingly horrifying satistics when it comes to domestic abuse and rape; a mind blowing 40 percent of South African men admit to having hit their partners and 25 percent have raped a woman. [via International Business Times]
While I do agree with TIME that the case deserves attention and the article itself goes into detail about both South Africa’s racial tensions and its culture of rape and abuse, I struggle with their decision to put Pistorius on the cover. While the cover text states, “Man, Superman, Gunman. Oscar Pistorius and South Africa’s Culture of Violence,” the photo they chose is an old one from his Olympic days that displays the athlete’s toned torso and the legs that have brought him his fame. Does this photo, in some way, glorify a killer? When you think back to the horrifying crimes that have made the news during your lifetime, who is it you remember? Is it the perpetrators or the victims? I fear that Steenkamp will be yet another name that we forget about, while her killer’s name lives on.
What do you think about this case, Lovelies? Do you think TIME has handled this correctly?
guest
I took the photo and caption as a way to say, “Even our modern gods have a bad side.” They should have put Zeus in the corner somewhere….
Olympians, super athletes, are adored and admired for the sacrifices they make, looked up to and worshiped every other year. That cover just kind of grabs you and says, “And you thought he was a nice guy.”
Plus the dark lighting on his face, slightly turned stance and his expression are all engineered to make your mind say, “BAD GUY!”
guest
I thought the point of magazines like Time was to depict the events that were happening during the time that it was published, not sunshine and kittens. I like that they used this image. It kind of makes a statement about domestic violence and that is they don’t all look like monsters, or pathetic broken men. Why should they portray him as less than glorious looking to make domestic violence easier to swallow? This image got your attention. This image made you feel something. This image did the job perfectly.
Portraying him as a broken man would have been sunshine and kittens.
sunflower / 255 posts
I have a feeling this will be something to bring up in Chad’s class, my j-school Lovely!
guest
Why have you repeated hearsay? The case against him was continued partly at least because he intended to sue her for defamation (now a moot point and so was settled out of court). There were witness that said she was drunk, making a nuisance of herself, was asked to leave and when the door was shut behind her she kicked it so violently that she caused an upper panel to fall out of the door and onto her foot. Who is the violent person really?
There were no reports that can be found where Reeva Steenkamp made complaints of domestic violence against Oscar. Why would she stay with someone she had only known a few months who was treating her badly having been in a violent relationship previously and wanting to educate women about domestic violence? His girlfriends – previous and Reeva – did describe him as intense but only Samantha Taylor said “He was not quite as people thought him to be”. That could mean anything, even that she was angry he had left her. It was with her next (or according to some accounts concurrent) boyfriend that Oscar apparently made the threat to break his legs. The man involved has made no statement and there seems to be no exact motive given. Was it jealousy or was he telling him to stay away from his girlfriend? Would that not be within the bounds of normality? Her mother made a comment somewhere to the effect that she was glad her daughter was no longer involved with him but anyone would say that even if his story is true. Reeva is no less dead and that is not what any mother would want!
orchid / 199 posts
@TheBottomandBack@xanga - I see what you mean and I do see what TIME is doing here, I just sometimes feel uncomfortable with the level of infamy that perpetrators of crimes receive, while the victims are always forgotten.
@Erika_Steele@xanga - I definitely don’t think it’s TIME’s job to portray sunshine and kittens, but like I said above I struggle with killers going down in history and getting a level of fame they don’t deserve. It’s a dilemma, to be sure, and I definitely don’t have an answer.
@sarahkucharski - Oh I definitely will, the cover reminded me of the discussion we had last class where it was made clear that while we all remember killers none of us remember the victims.
@topsypopsy@twitter - I’m referring to the IB Times piece which says that there were reportedly calls made by Steenkamp. Women stay in violent and abusive situations all the time, unfortunately logic doesn’t always enter the picture there. And whatever went on the night of February 14, there is NO excuse to shoot someone, through a door no less when Steenkamp was nowhere near Pistorius. As far as “hearsay” goes, I cited the TIME and the IB Times articles. I personally wouldn’t call either publication hearsay, but of course I will be keeping up with the case and will change my opinions as other evidence comes to light.
guest
@Katya - Unfortunately, people thrive off sensationalism. The perpetrator is usually more intriguing than the victim.
orchid / 199 posts
@Erika_Steele@xanga - I definitely think that’s a huge part of it. I guess it’s just a little… discomforting for me to see so much attention given to the bad guys. And obviously my post isn’t helping! It’s a hard balance, for sure, and one I think about a lot as I write more and more.
guest
@Katya - It’s sad to see it sensationalized, but if I think there is value in talking about it. Just not in the way it is currently discussed.
orchid / 199 posts
@Erika_Steele@xanga - I definitely agree that discussion is essential! The TIME article definitely took this case and used it to talk about violence against women and racial tensions in South Africa, which I think we can all agree need more attention.
daffodil / 1615 posts
He’s South African, not South American. It’s on the image that you used.
orchid / 199 posts
@ask_ashleyyy@xanga - I thought I referred to him as South African? I definitely meant to! Any South American references are accidental.
guest
This isn’t the first instance that TIME has put a questionable person on their cover. They’ve put up people like Hitler and Stalin. I know they say that the point of it is to put up someone that has done the most to influence the past year. But I dunno. I don’t really care for showcasing murderers or would-be murderers.
orchid / 199 posts
@firetyger@xanga - Yeah, sometimes I wonder if it’s really necessary to put a picture of Hitler on the front of a magazine. But then again, a friend asked me the other day who Stalin was, so maybe it is necessary?
guest
@Katya - Oh man… Seriously? *facepalm* How can they not know who Stalin is?! I think my faith in humanity just died a little bit more
orchid / 199 posts
@firetyger@xanga - I think my faith in humanity is lowered with everyday I spend on this earth. Admitedly, my school barely even touched on him – yay Canadian high school curriculum! – but still, even “that Russian dictator” would have satisfied me.