bradyhindley1.jpg

Without these two photographs it is generally agreed that the ‘legend’ of the moors murders as we understand it or as it has come down to us might not and indeed probably would not exist. They are remarkable photo’s , but what exactly makes them so….Like most public photographs they do not flatter their subjects in any way….and it is the public nature of these images that we have to examine first.

Most public photographs ( passport/drivers permit/newspaper ) are intended for a large, and for the most part disinterested audience. Their purpose is to record a reality without commenting on it. They are , if you will , documents without editorial. Their purpose is functional and utilitarian. They do not try to tell us anything about the subject , indeed they ideally should do just the opposite recording the outward image and that alone. They do not require or want us to think about who or what these people are. They are , ‘for the record’ and for nothing else. They have no social function beyond keeping record. They neither elicit or require an emotional response. They are , above all else , neutral……

This at least is the theory , and for the most part that theory holds true but in one respect it starts to fall down….and that is when we come to consider the mug shot. The mug shot is a public (official/bureaucratic) photo intended in large measure for a private audience (police) . The fact that it sometimes has a second social function when published in the press is problematic to say the least. Why are mug shots published?. Most would agree that their publication is quite unnecessary. They are , in almost all instances , even less flattering than the general run of public photos. And our reaction to them is, almost without exception , emotional.

It’s not my purpose here to argue the rights or wrongs of these kind of public/private photos but to understand the power of the Brady/Hindley shots we must reflect on how these images came to us. And the first thing that strikes us is that they are images created under duress. This is no less true in the case of Brady and Hindley than it is of others.

Myra’s image has as they say been done to death. Myra as ‘hard bitch’ and ‘the most evil woman in Britain’. But strangely few , if any, have remarked on what must be it’s most interesting feature , it’s total lack of sexuality. It is after all an image of a young and not unattractive woman. Let me put it this way. It’s not uncommon for a man to seek out the image of a ’strong’ and even ‘cruel’ woman as an aid to sexual stimulation and yet no one would use this image of Myra for such a purpose. Whatever else it conveys , whatever overt or subliminal subtext we may look for in it it is peculiarly lacking in anything that pertains to eroticism , even in the most vivid imagination. The image of Brady is however quite sexual. The pouting lip….the sullen stare ….the hint of arrogance all make for what is , whether we are conscious of it or not , a sexual image. Almost everyone who writes of Brady remarks on his uncanny resemblance to Elvis Presley. Indeed the young Elvis might well pass for Brady’s son.

elvisyoungboy-2.jpg

Brady’s photograph does not jump out at us in quite the same dramatic fashion as Hindley’s but the image is nonetheless far more powerful than Hindley’s….and more disturbing. There is little by way of shock or immediate dramatic impact when we first see it. If anything it is rather unimpressive and quite forgettable. If we were asked to recall this image in our minds after one cursory glance we would be hard pressed to do so. We would remember little were it not for those pouting lips….and it’s the lips that we remember. There is , if we are honest , totally honest , something erotic about the image of Brady. Even as a heterosexual man I am conscious of an almost animal sexuality lurking behind this images. I cannot imagine how a woman might respond to it but I can guess. And my guess is that most women are in large degree disturbed not so much by the images of Brady but by their reaction to it or rather their reaction to the sexuality inherent in the image.

Brady’s photograph has a truth that we don’t find with that of Hindley. There is no evidence to suggest that anyone thought of Myra as a
‘hard bitch’ prior to her arrest and the children she picked up for Brady must have seen her as no more and no less than a ‘nice lady’. The image we have of her then by way of her mug shot is demonstrable a false one. Brady on the other hand , prior to his arrest (and afterwards) is refereed to almost exclusively in terms of his good looks…..he is likened to Presley with all that that implies. Both photographs were as I stated earlier taken under duress and in Brady’s this translate itself into a ’smoldering’ aspect which heightens the sexual element whereas with Hindely it does no more that exaggerate the sense we have of an animal caught in the headlights. All factors in these photos seem to have the effect of dehumanising Hindley so much so that after all these years we are left with image devoid of any substance. With Brady his mug shot has the obviously unintentional effect of paradoxically humanising him. The more we examine it the more we are aware that this is indeed a flesh and blood person. The image staring back at us is all too real , and disturbing.

The most important element in these photographs is however not to be found in the photographs themselves but in what we , the viewer bring to them , our fears and prejudices and our cultural conditioning. And the ‘popularity’ of these mug shots , the iconic status they have achieved is down to what we bring to the image. They are both (Hindley’s in particular) classical images. They conform to the same rules as do the images we might see of the ancient Greeks or classic architecture. They have a symmetry and aspect that we recognise even it we don’t understand it. This is , in part , intentional….the photographer seeks for a ‘good shot’ and in this instance he/they outdid themselves. These images are historic , ie they refer to something in the past and the fact that they were taken in the first place implies a story that preceded them. Like history we see them in retrospect. Our view is necessarily distorted.

We are told that the camera never lies and here indeed is the proof. Both Brady and Hindley are outsiders but not in the way that many still choose to believe. It’s not their crimes that define their outsider status. They were outsiders first and their crimes were no more than an expression of this reality. Brady has always insisted that these crimes were a philosophical exercise , he freely admits to a sexual element , but insists that philosophy not lust was the motivation. And Brady is doing no more than stating what is obvious to any informed student of these crimes. To this day many feel the need to reject this fact , they feel that to credit him with such a motive is somehow to give him a significance , a credibility he does not deserve. There is also an element of snobbery in this , “What would a Glasgow street thug know of philosophy”. The fact that Brady’s interests are for the most part of an intellectual nature is something they feel compelled to deny , in spite of the evidence to the contrary. Neither Hindley nor Brady killed for sexual gratification. If that was their motive they would have in large degree been forgotten by now. They killed to realise , to give flesh so to speak to their philosophy, to their sense of being outsiders…”and the word became flesh” Their crimes had an inevitability about them. Brady never stalked children , he did not act under some compulsion. He had no unnatural interest in children. He did of course pick child victims and photographed at least one in pornographic poses but this was almost incidental to the acts themselves , the object of the exercise was not the children , he was if anything indifferent to his victims……this very indifference is what marks him and Hindley out from the crowd.

The real power of these photographs is that they capture this reality. We are faced with two people who look out at us from their world. They have little if any interest in what we might think of them. Brady set out, like Raskolnikov , to become Napoleon and he succeeded. In spite of what many choose to believe , Brady won. Protesting otherwise is futile. He has our attention. He has made his point and in his terms made it well. We are , regardless of how we try to square the circle , an audience that he created. We seek out his image. We are drawn to it…These images of Hindley and Brady are their ultimate validation….life , their life, has literally become art.

Image making is fundamental to us as human beings. The first humans to exist on this planet turned to image making to define their world and in the process of course defined themselves as human. They also used images as a form of control over a wild and frightening space in which they found themselves. Image making as magic. Image making as religion. And be it Hitler or Christ it’s the image that often speaks the loudest and has the last word.

To view other post relating to the Moors Murders follow this link and scroll down.

Moors Murderer Ian Brady who has been on hunger strike since 1999 is to sue author Duncan Staff for using private photographs of him in his book , “The Lost Boy”. He is also suing his former psychiatrist Professor Malcolm McCulloch for breach of doctor-patient confidentiality. Brady’s claims that the photographs of which there are five are private property as they were not part of any evidence in his court case. Brady wants to put an injunction on Professor McCulloch , Duncan Staff and Ashworth Hospital and is seeking legal aid.
It will be interesting to see how all this works out. I think Brady has quite a good case but that’s not to say he will get justice this time around. You can read the full story such as it is on the Daily Express Site.
Read my review of The Lost Boy.

THE LOST BOY by Duncan Staff Bantham Press.

moors.jpg

There have been many books written about the moors murders and this one is no different from the rest. Apart that is from the fact that there is some new material from Myra Hindley’s diaries , letters and brief extracts from her unpublished autobiography. Mr Staff would , like so many journalists before him wish to have us believe that he wrote this book for some suitably grand motive. In his case to help in some way to find the body of Keith Bennet , the only victim of Ian Brady and Myra Hindley who’s remains has not been recovered from Saddleworth Moor. But this of course is a lie. This like all the others was written for money and Duncan Staff stands to make a lot of money out of this book. The fact that he feels the need to justify himself in this way tells us a lot about him and those like him.
Quite early on in the book on page 3 and referring to Hindley he say’s ” I would have to get very close to her to extract the story. Not only would this be distressing but…..” This is another way of depersonalising Hindley in much the same way as most writers refer to her and Brady as monsters and evil. He has hardly started the book but want’s us to know that these people are not like you or me. The problem is that Ian Brady and Myra Hindley are just like you and I and indeed that is why they have the hold over us that they have. And while Staff spends the rest of the book trying to understand Hindley he is doomed to fail from the very start.
Much of the book is a retelling of Hindley’s life story as told by her and at various points he insists on quoting for us the opinion of Professor Malcolm MacCulloch Bradys psychiatrist. This is done no doubt in part to impress us but it soon becomes quite clear that Staff actually rates this man highly. The professor is trotted out at what are obviously felt to be pivotal points of Hindley’s narative but if the purpose is to give weight to certain events then it soon has the opposite affect. I doubt if any psychiatrist has ever been so wrong about so many things as MacCulloch. Indeed he’s so far off the mark and generally inept at explaining human behaviour that at times the whole thing has an air of Vaudaville about it. We can almost see the professor in our minds eye but we come to see him as something out of a Carry On film. To give just one example of how wrong this man can be…..
In the course of telling her life story Myra mentions death quite a lot. The professor considers this ’significant’ and ‘unusual’. He makes a point of stating how ‘unusual’ it is for anyone to have so many memories of death in their childhood. But we have already learnt from Myra that her grandmother with whom she lived would from time to time prepare the corpse of a deceased neighbour for burial and on a least one occasion kept one in the house overnight. In the fifties this was not unusual. Life was hard and extended families meant that old and young lived side by side in the same house and often the same room. Death was a normal part of day to day life. People , including children died from diseases and illnesses that are virtually unknown today. A child growing up at that time would see more death by the age of twelve than most people today would experience in a life time. If we further consider that Myra wrote this account of her life as a direct result of the death(murder) of several young children and that her normal life ceased when she was in her twenties then it would be very strange indeed if death was missing from her story. And yet the professor feels that this is all a bit odd. This is as I have said just one example of the professors insight and we have a great deal more of it inflicted on us throughout the rest of the book.
Another problem we find when reading this book is that most of the information comes from Myra Hindley herself. And while much of it has a ring of truth about it she does not attempt at any point to explain in any credible way why she helped Brady to murder and murder again. And of course she had been lying for years about her part in the murders to anyone who would listen. There is of course nothing in the book about Brady’s life story or no extracts from his letters as he does not make these available particularly to journalists. This is the one real problem that all authors who choose to write on the moors murders have in common.
The book is fairly readable overall and you will probably get through it at one sitting. But it cannot be regarded as a particularly good book and is full of the usual prejudices about Brady and Hindley. I will be writing more about the moors murders soon and will have no doubt more to say in relation to Staff’s book but for review purposes there is not a lot more to say of it here. A readable but ultimatly disappointing book.

If you are not familiar with the story of the moors murder then you may wish to read my previous post on Ian Brady Moors Murders.
See also this post.

Video Footage: For video report on new evidence presented by Duncan Staff go to this page and click on video link at top right of page.

If you wish to read some abridged extracts from Duncan Staff’s book go to this page.

bradyhindley.jpg

                                  Ian Brady the moors murderer has been locked up now for 40 years. He is currently in Ashworth High Security Hospital and it seems he will die there. He is a man that I have come to admire over the years. They say that he is a monster and the most evil man in Britain. But who are they?
              Brady was born in the Glasgow in may 1938. He was sentenced to life imprisonment in 1966 for the murder of three children. He committed two more murders which he has admitted but not yet been charged with. He spent 19 years in various prisons before being sent to Ashworth Mental Hospital in 1985. In 2001 he published a book ,”The Gates of Janus” which is about serial killers. He has expressed a wish to be let die and has been on hunger strike now for several years. He will never be released. He holds a special place in the mythology of evil , is universally hated and  is probably the most famous murderer of all time. The word ‘monster’ is commonly attached to his name in the tabloid press.
              But Brady like all of us is human. By definition he is part of humanity. He is just like us whether we wish to believe it or not. And yet in those 40 years I have never hear him being refered to in this regard. He is, if we are to believe the press a one dimensional man. A man of pure evil. Albert Speer who was complicit in the murder of six million jews was released from Spandau Prison on the ground of compassion but Brady is beyond our compassion. As Brady himself remarked , if he had come form a different background and gone into politics and killed thousands he might have been honoured and awarded a pension. As Dennis Nielson once said , “The only house of Horrors I know of is 10 Downing Street.”It’s the old story. Few rich men go to prison and none stay there very long.
           There are many myths surrounding him but they are just that.  One of these being that his crimes are inexplicable. But they can in fact be explained. If Brady had been born twenty years later these crimes would never have happened. He is very much a product of his time. He was born into a time of great social and cultural change. He was a self educated young working class man with a history of petty crime who read the wrong books and crossed the line from fantasy into reality. It could quite literally have happened to any of us. The intellectual climate of the time was that anything goes and morality was relative. The books he read reinforced this concept of morality. Many rebelled in a harmless way imitating their heroes of the big screen while his were more potent heroes. But we must not forget that many of the former walked out of the cinema and killed in imitation of there heroes. The ‘flick’ knife was common as was it’s use.
              Another myth is that he has never apologised. But he has apologised and unlike others has neither asked for nor expected anything in return. He has however never apologised to the press who as he remarked are always ready to make money out of murder and the bloodier the better. Nor has he apologised to his better’s who keep him behind bars and make political capital out of his crimes , the same people who pleaded for years the case of Speer. Brady is not a stupid man and refuses to be judged by such people and is right.
      None of this is intended to excuse his crimes. I am not a liberal much less a bleeding liberal. When Brady was sentenced to life in prison justice was done and he himself has acknowledged this but much of what has happened to him since has nothing to do with any kind of justice. We say that a society may best be judged by how it treat’s it’s prisoners.  When we deny Brady his humanity we deny our own humanity. There is no profit to society in any of this.
        He has been interviewed relatively few times and is selective in who he speaks to. Be it the quality press or BBC playwrights ( he’s had a couple of plays written about him and Hindley) they all go to him looking for something. They report him as being a highly manipulative man , the implication being of course that they are not taken in but that perhaps less educated people ( working class people like Brady himself) might be. There is a class prejudice at work here that reminds us of the trial of the Kray Brothers.
      He is certified as insane but there seems no reason to believe that he is actually mad. He is the loneliest man in Britain and might have eased his situation by compromise.  Perhaps there’s madness in that. Many books have been and will continue to be written about him. Authors and publishers have made money out of this tragedy and no doubt there is even more profit to yet be made.  There are countless websites devoted to the exploitation of him and his crimes while his victims are largely forgotten. They of course deserve our humanity and compassion too. Their names are as follow’s
                     
                                                Pauline Reed      age 16
                                                John Kilbride      age 12
                                                Keith Bennett     age 12
                                                Leslie Ann Downey age 10
                                                Edward Evans       age 17

                   There may be others but not children. Myra Hindley claimed that they murdered a hitchhiker but her word is not to be relied on while Brady himself claimed to have killed a member of the  Glasgow underworld but this may not be true. The mother of Keith Bennett still to this day visits Saddleworth Moor in the hope of finding his body. She also deserves our compassion. Brady has offered to go back to Saddleworth Moor ( he was brought there once before but could not find the site of Keith Bennett’s burial).  He claims that he could now point to within twenty yards of where the body is but his offer has been refused. There is no reason to believe he is lying or just  seeking publicity. He has never sought parole and has said he never will.

   Another post on Ian Brady may be found here.