It is nearly impossible to do justice to a person's life, a persons death is easier.
People get sick and they get better; they are not TRAGIC FIGURES per se, but matter in time and space having other matter in time and space react on THEM.
We are stuck with the image of Amy as somebody who let her demons get the better of her but that isn't quite true. Amy went on a bender, took some bad ecstasy and when mixed with the other chemicals she'd ingested, she died.
If she hadn't been a drug addicted that wouldn't have happened but if she hadn't been slipped bad ecstasy it wouldn't have happened either.
This is a truth we have very little interest in pursuing because if we view Amy as the victim of a disease we can't see her peering back at us.
Look at it this way: I read about a child who died of Salmonella. In 2001, food poisoning caused 481 million illnesses. Now, we are addicted to food (if we don't eat we die). . And eating caused the child's death. But that doesn't mean she died because she was addicted to food.
The analogy is almost exactly the same for Amy Winehouse.
It was a bad drug that killed, no, she wouldn't HAVE TAKEN a bad drug if she wasn't an addict, but that is not the same as saying being an addict killed her or else all addicts would be dead by 27 years old.
Remember that old movie "Kids"? In it a virgin has sex for the first time and gets AIDS. The same thing: unprotected sex can lead to AIDS but it doesn't HAVE TO LEAD TO AIDS. In the movie, one time sex AND SHE IS A GONER. Meanwhile, her promiscuous friend is a germ free adolescent. No, IT IS NOT FAIR. But if everybody who had unprotected sex got AIDS we would have never made it out of the 1980s.
We look for reasons, for morals, for the tragic aspect in complete random misadventure.
There is no moral, no lesson, NOTHING in Amy Winehouse death. There is just the random crapshoot of existence or not and in the end we all reach the not.