Negative Positive
Title: Irresponsible/intermittant camp value
Review: The author has falsified a life for Andrew Cunanan--a life mostly unsubstantiated by any facts. The bombastic writing seems intended to shock--but is there anyone who's going to read this who is as shocked (and unknowledgeable) about gays as Wensley Clarkson? His ham-fistedness is amusing at times in its over-the-top, 1950s style moralism and it's pathetic efforts to shock. To wit, here's Clarkson on "San Francisco's gay population": "The city overflowed with nightlife in the early 1990s. But it was a labyrinthine in the extreme, with a very serious sadomasochistic community, a body piercing epidemic, and a lot more besides." Also, his assumption that Cunanan was HIV-positive has been proven false by the twice-leaked autopsy report. (The rumor was begun by an unscupulous San Diego AIDS counselor. Fie on him.)
Is the review positive or negative? 