1. How do you feel Eric matches up with the psychopathy checklist as described for juveniles on page 243? Which of Eric's behaviors exemplify the list Dr. Fuselier checks off on page 239? Given what you've read in the chapter 'psychopath' do you think Eric's parents played a role in his behavior - or was he 'born bad'?
2. The ultimate question that 'Psychopath' leads to is: Do you think Eric Harris was a psychopath? Why or why not? Do you think the label is useful or simply stigmatizing?
3. The students of Columbine were repulsed by the use of their school name as a proper noun to describe school shootings or school violence. Does Cullen's book help or harm their cause?
4. Analyze the rhetoric in the sympathy letters from the Harrises and Klebolds?
5. Eric and Dylan settled on a time and a place a year before the attack. Did this seem like rather long term planning for these two, given what we've seen of their failed plans? Are you surprised that they were able to carry this off without slipping up and letting someone else know about it in advance? Both boys wrote about NBK (as they called it) in their yearbooks. Dylan even goes so far at to mention revenge in the commons. Why do you think no one picked up on this? Do you think they were toying with people by providing as much information as they did ahead of time?
6. Again, you may have noticed many news stories lately covering cyber bullying and other types of bullying. How far should a school go to protect bullying victims? If someone is being tormented on Facebook, YouTube, etc. by classmates, is it the school's responsibility to step in?
7. Analyze the rhetoric of Wayne Harris' bullet point lecture for Eric. Does it surprise you that Eric was under this much scrutiny and yet was able to do what he did?
8. 'Who Owns The The Tragedy' is a chapter in which Eric and Dylan don't appear. Do you think that focusing on someone other than them provides a relief to the reader? Do you think Dave intentionally gave the reader breathing space here?
9. In 'Who Owns,' Cullen writes further about the recovery of Patrick Ireland. What do you feel we can learn about human resiliance from his story? Do you feel that the forgiveness that he espoused is necessary for complete healing? Why do you think it was more difficult for Patrick's mother to forgive the killers than Patrick?
10. In 'Who Owns,' Cullen details the struggle between the school and the media upon its reopening. Does the media seem unnecessarily insensitive to you or are they just trying to do their job? Where do your sympathies lie here - with the parents, the media, or is it mixed?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1. How do you feel Eric matches up with the psychopathy checklist as described for juveniles on page 243? Which of Eric's behaviors exemplify the list Dr. Fuselier checks off on page 239? Given what you've read in the chapter 'psychopath' do you think Eric's parents played a role in his behavior - or was he 'born bad'?
ReplyDeleteCullen lists the traits that Eric possesses on the psychopathy checklist. However, I realized that it’s possible that he only listed those traits, and not the ones that Eric doesn’t possess, so I looked up the list. There was the Psychopath Type 1- the aggressive narcissistic, and Eric fit every single trait. The second type- socially deviant- had only one trait that he didn’t quite match: poor behavior control. But when I analyzed it further, I decided that he did indeed have poor behavior control. It’s deceptive because he seemed to be so in control of his false emotions, but his impulsivity, rage, reaction to Brooks, all of these speak of poor behavioral control. Other than that one gray area, he fit all of the type 2 traits perfectly. Eric seems to be the textbook perfect example of a psychopath: manipulative, thrill-seeking, compulsively lying, and narcissistic. I don’t really think there was very much his parents could do for him. Research shows that psychopaths from abusive upbringings are more vicious, and that abusive upbringings can lead to psychosis, but that many psychopaths comes from perfectly normal families. Maybe Eric’s psychosis implies an abusive childhood that no one knew about, but I feel like his journals would hint at that, or at least some sort of stronger hatred for his father. We definitely can’t know if the Harrises were perfect parents, but it doesn’t seem like there was very much they could have done differently, except maybe providing a stable home in his early years.
2. The ultimate question that 'Psychopath' leads to is: Do you think Eric Harris was a psychopath? Why or why not? Do you think the label is useful or simply stigmatizing?
ReplyDeleteI think Eric was a psychopath and that label fit him well because he had all the characteristics of one. It definitely helped the investigators (and the readers) understand Erics frame of mind.
6. Again, you may have noticed many news stories lately covering cyber bullying and other types of bullying. How far should a school go to protect bullying victims? If someone is being tormented on Facebook, YouTube, etc. by classmates, is it the school's responsibility to step in?
ReplyDeleteI think the school should protect bullying victims as far as providing some sort of (other than counselors because some students don't go to them) outlet for them to vent about whats going on. I think that it is somewhat of the schools responsibilty to step in and control the situation, but the school can only go so far. I definitley believe that if students are being bullied and their parents know about it then notify the school, they then have the responsibilty to take care of the situation and not ignore it.
6. Again, you may have noticed many news stories lately covering cyber bullying and other types of bullying. How far should a school go to protect bullying victims? If someone is being tormented on Facebook, YouTube, etc. by classmates, is it the school's responsibility to step in?
ReplyDeleteI think I would be furious if Wheeler High School tried to monitor my facebook usage. There’s no way that that would be okay with me, but I’ve got an anecdote about this. Last year a teacher at wheeler (who I won’t name) was facebook friends with a student and the student claimed that she had said something cruel about the student’s quality of work in the class. This was a big deal because that’s clearly not okay, but the teacher said that she did not say anything like that, and there was no way of proving it. So that brought up the question of whether the teacher should have been friends with the student at all, or if it was unprofessional of her to have a personal friendship with a student. But onto the question: In my opinion the school should just offer someone to go to if you’re experiencing cyber bullying and that person should contact parents. I don’t think it’s the school’s responsibility to get involved in events that take place away from school activities.
5. Eric and Dylan settled on a time and a place a year before the attack. Did this seem like rather long term planning for these two, given what we've seen of their failed plans? Are you surprised that they were able to carry this off without slipping up and letting someone else know about it in advance? Both boys wrote about NBK (as they called it) in their yearbooks. Dylan even goes so far at to mention revenge in the commons. Why do you think no one picked up on this? Do you think they were toying with people by providing as much information as they did ahead of time?
ReplyDeleteIt definitely seemed like long term planning and it's crazy how they didn't end up spilling anything to anybody. What Dylan and Eric did do was give people little hints about their plans because they thought it was funny and they knew that the "stupid inferiors" weren't going to pick up on it. I think that people didn't realized this because they probably thought they were just kidding around and of course they were wrong.
7. Analyze the rhetoric of Wayne Harris' bullet point lecture for Eric. Does it surprise you that Eric was under this much scrutiny and yet was able to do what he did?
ReplyDeleteThe lecture is short, to the point, and precise. It is interesting in that it is very thorough. Wayne Harris sees the issue, and he sees how to correct the issue. The problem is that this is as far as he goes. He makes sure to follow through and correct the behavior, but he doesn’t stop to ask why it happened in the first place. He just blames everything Eric does on teenage angst and rebellion, or just plain bad choices. He doesn’t care why Eric commits crimes as long as the behavior is fixed. And if his solutions get the results he wants, he doesn’t bother to go a single step further. Problem solved? Great. In a normal kid, this would be a good thing- no grudges, no parents bringing up every mistake you’ve made in the past 5 years, etc. Unfortunately, in this case it was a disaster. Wayne didn’t bother to try to understand his son. He viewed the best way of prevention as punishment and behavior modification. If he had worked harder to understand why all of this was happening, he may have been able to prevent the tragedy. As it is, though, Wayne made it easy for Eric- as long as he could keep up the act, Wayne never suspected a thing.
9. In 'Who Owns,' Cullen writes further about the recovery of Patrick Ireland. What do you feel we can learn about human resiliance from his story? Do you feel that the forgiveness that he espoused is necessary for complete healing? Why do you think it was more difficult for Patrick's mother to forgive the killers than Patrick?
ReplyDeleteI think that Patricks healing was a blessing. It was amazing to me how he made a great recovery after losing the use of half of his body. Forgiving was very necessary in Patricks case because it let him move on with his life and focus on his future and not on what happened. Human resiliance can work magic in my opinion and Patrick is the prime example. I think it was harder for Patrick's mom to forgive because her baby was hurt and the things that he wanted to do was harder to accomplish because of his condition. She had to watch him struggle day in and day out and im guessing thats reallllyyyy hard for a mother to watch.
9. In 'Who Owns,' Cullen writes further about the recovery of Patrick Ireland. What do you feel we can learn about human resiliance from his story? Do you feel that the forgiveness that he espoused is necessary for complete healing? Why do you think it was more difficult for Patrick's mother to forgive the killers than Patrick?
ReplyDeleteI noticed that Cullen dedicated the book to the thirteen victims and to “Patrick, for giving me hope.” At first, I didn’t understand. After reading about his journey and struggle for recovery I think I understand a little bit. What can we learn about human resilience from his story? What can we learn about human resilience from the Holocaust? What can we learn about human resilience from the survivors of Darfur? This is one of those examples of how a person can be stronger than anything I had ever imagined. How someone can be so weighed down by tragedy and challenge, and yet overcome all of it. Patrick’s story is the story of a regular old Joe who went into the ring against Fate and the World and beat them both back into the corner. When I read his sections I feel like I can’t possibly complain about my work load. It makes me emotional, I’ll even admit. He’s just got one of those stories that you’re amazed is real and not a fairy tale.
I feel that forgiveness may not be 100% necessary, but it certainly helps the healing process. Anger and hatred are like drugs; they feel good in the short term. They’re passion and fire and make you feel alive and better about yourself. They’re hard to let go of, but all they do is weigh you down. You could spend time being angry and hateful, but Patrick was too busy for that. He had so many better things to spend his time on, and if he had let himself be consumed by the anger and hatred would just keep him from his dreams. I feel like this is why it was easier for Patrick to forgive the killers than his mother. He was so caught up in just relearning how to live that he couldn’t possibly waste time on useless emotions like anger and hatred. His mother was different. All she could do was spend all of her days watching her son struggle seemingly fruitlessly and know that it was all because of Eric and Dylan. The only thing she could occupy herself with was anger and hatred, the addictive powerful emotions.
10. In 'Who Owns,' Cullen details the struggle between the school and the media upon its reopening. Does the media seem unnecessarily insensitive to you or are they just trying to do their job? Where do your sympathies lie here - with the parents, the media, or is it mixed?
ReplyDeleteAs I first read this section I sympathized with the parents and kids to the exclusion of any sympathies to the media. That is the way that it appears to be written. The media are the big bad guys that spread the awful rumors and cause poor old Columbine to be overwhelmed by bad press and stigmas they don’t want. It’s very easy to blame the media because they’re and easy target. And let’s face it, they aren’t exactly coming out smelling like roses. However, my epiphany came from my realization that Cullen himself was a reporter- a member of the media. This entire expose of the tragedy, the entire airing of the truth is coming from a member of the cut-throat, twisted, evil media. So I wondered why he would portray the media as evil, because I truly think that that is what the media appears to be in this book at first glance. I figured that either he was trying to keep the narration as genuine as possible, and relate things from Columbine’s point of view, or he felt sorry for his spreading of misinformation during the crisis. I feel that it is the second, because he could easily present a non-biased portrayal of both the media and Littleton if he had chosen to. I believe that Cullen, along with many other members of the media, were just trying to get the truth, and were caught up in the same stereotypes and mistakes that the rest of us were. We didn’t know what a mistake the media made until we read about it in this book. How would they have known any differently. Sure, I bet there were some reporters that were just in it for the story, who wanted to use the media circus to get a pay check and the largest one possible at that. But those people are everywhere in every occupation. I feel like the media was in fact unnecessarily insensitive, and I sympathize with the parents and kids, but I also think that we can hardly blame the media for doing their jobs.
10. In 'Who Owns,' Cullen details the struggle between the school and the media upon its reopening. Does the media seem unnecessarily insensitive to you or are they just trying to do their job? Where do your sympathies lie here - with the parents, the media, or is it mixed?
ReplyDeleteI think that the Columbine victims and the rest of the community felt like the media was pesky and alwayyyyyssss around. I felt sorry for them because all they wanted was shelter from the chaos and the rumors, but the media seemed like they kept throwing it right back in their faces. At the same time though I think that that is what the media is paid to do. They're doing their job and sadley it involves spreading around half baked rumors and then finially getting to the truth (slowly, but surely).
1. How do you feel Eric matches up with the psychopathy checklist as described for juveniles on page 243? Which of Eric's behaviors exemplify the list Dr. Fuselier checks off on page 239? Given what you've read in the chapter 'psychopath' do you think Eric's parents played a role in his behavior - or was he 'born bad'?
ReplyDeleteEric matches up very well with the psychopathy checklist. He was popular in school but had no sense of empathy for other people. As we can see from his journals, he did feel anger and strong hate, and he had the “staggering ego and sense of superiority” (243) that eventually led him to kill. Furthermore, Eric had no feelings of love, grief, or hope for his own future, but he was able to fake these “emotions” effectively without overdoing it because he was so manipulative. Kathy and Wayne did not abuse or neglect Eric, unless you consider the punishments Wayne inflicted on Eric (taking away his computer, for example) to be abuse, so I think Eric was a psychopath who was “born to be bad” (241). I don’t think Eric’s childhood could have been one of the “violent upbringings” that cause psychopaths to become worse, so, except for the possibility that Wayne’s military background caused Eric’s thoughts to turn violent, Eric’s upbringing seems to have played a relatively minor role in his behavior.
Jason, you said
ReplyDelete"Cullen lists the traits that Eric possesses on the psychopathy checklist. However, I realized that it’s possible that he only listed those traits, and not the ones that Eric doesn’t possess, so I looked up the list. There was the Psychopath Type 1- the aggressive narcissistic, and Eric fit every single trait. The second type- socially deviant- had only one trait that he didn’t quite match: poor behavior control. But when I analyzed it further, I decided that he did indeed have poor behavior control. It’s deceptive because he seemed to be so in control of his false emotions, but his impulsivity, rage, reaction to Brooks, all of these speak of poor behavioral control. Other than that one gray area, he fit all of the type 2 traits perfectly. Eric seems to be the textbook perfect example of a psychopath: manipulative, thrill-seeking, compulsively lying, and narcissistic. I don’t really think there was very much his parents could do for him. Research shows that psychopaths from abusive upbringings are more vicious, and that abusive upbringings can lead to psychosis, but that many psychopaths comes from perfectly normal families. Maybe Eric’s psychosis implies an abusive childhood that no one knew about, but I feel like his journals would hint at that, or at least some sort of stronger hatred for his father. We definitely can’t know if the Harrises were perfect parents, but it doesn’t seem like there was very much they could have done differently, except maybe providing a stable home in his early years."
I like the fact that you did extra research on psychopathy to come to your conclusion. Honestly, I just used the book and didn't even think about searching online for the list. I also didn't know that there are 2 kinds of psychopaths. My initial impression of Eric's huge ego (before reading this chapter) was that it had nothing to do with his being a psychopath. It seems a bit paradoxical that Eric felt such strong anger and frustration but virtually none of most emotions.
5. Eric and Dylan settled on a time and a place a year before the attack. Did this seem like rather long term planning for these two, given what we've seen of their failed plans? Are you surprised that they were able to carry this off without slipping up and letting someone else know about it in advance? Both boys wrote about NBK (as they called it) in their yearbooks. Dylan even goes so far as to mention revenge in the commons. Why do you think no one picked up on this? Do you think they were toying with people by providing as much information as they did ahead of time?
ReplyDeleteIn today’s world, if a student gave even remotely similar signs that he was planning some sort of mass murder, somebody would notice and notify the police, who would take the report seriously and attempt to thwart the student’s plans. A year in advance seems like very long-term planning for Dylan, but, given Eric’s strong desire for revenge, it doesn’t seem all that strange for Eric. In fact, Eric’s meticulous planning leads me to believe that the failure of the bombs was a divine miracle, since it prevented many times more deaths. Eric and Dylan believed that everybody else was stupid, so they gave a bunch of people little hints “to show us how stupid we all are” (258).
6. Again, you may have noticed many news stories lately covering cyber bullying and other types of bullying. How far should a school go to protect bullying victims? If someone is being tormented on Facebook, YouTube, etc. by classmates, is it the school's responsibility to step in?
ReplyDeleteThough I do believe that cyber bullying is a problem, it isn’t the school’s responsibility to protect bullying victims unless the bully is using a school computer to torment the victim. If the student is using a school computer, then the school is best equipped to end the bullying by taking computer privileges away from the perpetrator and calling the bully’s parents, who would punish the bully in one of several ways, possibly by restricting Internet use. It is highly unlikely that someone would try to cyber-bully another student using school computers, since cyber bullying would be discovered on about the second or third post (there’s no privacy on school computers). If the bullying occurs on a home computer, the victim will probably tell their parents, who would then call the parents of the bully. There is also the chance that the person being bullied would contact the bully’s parents directly. The school has no right to intrude on anything that happens on home computers unless those involved and their parents cannot solve the issue on their own. If the problem persists or gets worse despite efforts from parents, or if the parents don’t even care, then the school can and should get involved, even if the bullying takes place on home computers.
Jazmine, you said
ReplyDelete"It definitely seemed like long term planning and it's crazy how they didn't end up spilling anything to anybody. What Dylan and Eric did do was give people little hints about their plans because they thought it was funny and they knew that the "stupid inferiors" weren't going to pick up on it. I think that people didn't realized this because they probably thought they were just kidding around and of course they were wrong."
People probably assumed, like you said, that Eric and Dylan weren't serious. That's why any such threats made nowadays will instantly draw attention and be taken seriously. The hints were rather obscure at the time, and the only reason we think we should have known is because we know the final outcome.
7. Analyze the rhetoric of Wayne Harris' bullet point lecture for Eric. Does it surprise you that Eric was under this much scrutiny and yet was able to do what he did?
ReplyDeleteWayne Harris’ parallelism in the first three bullets serves to group those points together as problems that must be solved. The asyndeton in bullet 4 “TV, phone, computer, lights out, job, social” emphasizes that Wayne had many ideas for punishment to try to fix Eric’s habits. Honestly, I’m shocked that Eric could possibly have gotten away with getting the guns and making the bombs when Wayne was keeping such a close eye on him. This just shows that Wayne tried to fight Eric’s psychopathy rather than contributing to it.
Jazmine, you said
ReplyDelete"I think the school should protect bullying victims as far as providing some sort of (other than counselors because some students don't go to them) outlet for them to vent about whats going on. I think that it is somewhat of the schools responsibilty to step in and control the situation, but the school can only go so far. I definitley believe that if students are being bullied and their parents know about it then notify the school, they then have the responsibilty to take care of the situation and not ignore it."
I agree that the school should try to control cyber bullying, but the parents should play the main role. The school has enough discipline issues to deal with, so the victims or their parents should contact the bully's parents and tell them about the situation. If this solves the problem, there's no need for the school to get involved. The school does have the responsibility, though, if the parents do not do anything to end the bullying, or if the problem just gets worse.
1. How do you feel Eric matches up with the psychopathy checklist as described for juveniles on page 243? Which of Eric's behaviors exemplify the list Dr. Fuselier checks off on page 239? Given what you've read in the chapter 'psychopath' do you think Eric's parents played a role in his behavior - or was he 'born bad'?
ReplyDeleteI feel Eric matches up to the psychopath checklist perfectly. He lies to manipulate people and he doesn't feel any emotions at all. In my opinion I don't necessarily think that his parents played a role in his behavior. Even though they punished him, he still went back and did things.He didn't learn his lesson at all and still wanted to kill.
2. The ultimate question that 'Psychopath' leads to is: Do you think Eric Harris was a psychopath? Why or why not? Do you think the label is useful or simply stigmatizing?
ReplyDeleteYes, I think he was a psychopath. I think that he didn't have any emotions at all and he liked to decieve people and that is what psychopaths do. I don't think the label is useful. In some ways I think that it makes it more clear the reason he did that, but I think it is still stigmatizing.
3. The students of Columbine were repulsed by the use of their school name as a proper noun to describe school shootings or school violence. Does Cullen's book help or harm their cause?
ReplyDeleteI think it doesn't help their cause. The book shows a lot of media and a lot of envestigation in regards to Columbine, therefore it makes it seem for tragic, so people use the school as a proper noun because it was so tragic, and I think the book shows that.
6. Again, you may have noticed many news stories lately covering cyber bullying and other types of bullying. How far should a school go to protect bullying victims? If someone is being tormented on Facebook, YouTube, etc. by classmates, is it the school's responsibility to step in?
ReplyDeleteBullying is a growing problem today, especially on the internet. As far as the school goes, I think they should protect bullying as far as in the school. At home, it is at home. I think that if the school interfering isn't the best idea. I think they should do their best to prevent it in school.
8. 'Who Owns The The Tragedy' is a chapter in which Eric and Dylan don't appear. Do you think that focusing on someone other than them provides a relief to the reader? Do you think Dave intentionally gave the reader breathing space here?
ReplyDeleteYes, I think that having a chapter where they don't talk about Dylan or Eric at all is a relief to the reader. In some ways it lightens the mood and makes the reader have somewhat of a breather. The anecdote about how Patrick was improving in his speech makes the reader hopeful and optimistic. I think he did it intentionally to make the story flow better and to have the reader in a more optimistic mood.
Jordanna, you said...
ReplyDeleteI feel Eric matches up to the psychopath checklist perfectly. He lies to manipulate people and he doesn't feel any emotions at all. In my opinion I don't necessarily think that his parents played a role in his behavior. Even though they punished him, he still went back and did things.He didn't learn his lesson at all and still wanted to kill.
I completely agree with you. Eric without a doubt fit the descriptions of a psychopath. I also agree that his parents didn't play a role in his behavior. Eric (and Dylan) was raised in a good home and still wanted to act out violently.
2. The ultimate question that 'Psychopath' leads to is: Do you think Eric Harris was a psychopath? Why or why not? Do you think the label is useful or simply stigmatizing?
ReplyDeleteYes because he fits the checklist and it makes sense. He's uncaring, gruesome, and conniving. some of the key points listed for being a psychopath. and i think the label is useful because it gives people sort of an explanation as to why he was capable of doing this. him being a psychopath may explain to some how a high school student could conceive such a murderous plot
2. The ultimate question that 'Psychopath' leads to is: Do you think Eric Harris was a psychopath? Why or why not? Do you think the label is useful or simply stigmatizing?
ReplyDeleteActually, Ima hafta say no. Eric Harris undoubtedly had issues, but classifying him as a psychopath is going too far. He didn't torture animals. He had some emotion- rage and excitement at least. My take on it is this: his father, Wayne, never made it okay to express emotion. He was a part the ...army?? navy?? something... and led a very strict household. There was no "let's sit down and have a heart-to-heart about our feelings," it was all "do your homework, do your chores, eat meat!" I think that had Eric grown up in a more sensitive environment, he would be more open about his emotions (I think he had them, just didn't know how or didn't know it was okay to express them).
3. The students of Columbine were repulsed by the use of their school name as a proper noun to describe school shootings or school violence. Does Cullen's book help or harm their cause?
ReplyDeleteThe book in a way harms their cause because just the very title is exactly what the students wanted to prevent. If he had possibly titled the book the Columbine Massacre, it would've been different then just titling it Columbine. Also the book does help their cause in how Cullen actually mentions the students disapproval of the way the word is used.
3. The students of Columbine were repulsed by the use of their school name as a proper noun to describe school shootings or school violence. Does Cullen's book help or harm their cause?
ReplyDeleteThe book's title suits it perfectly, but it certainly harms the cause of dissociating the school's name with the disaster. Simply from recent experiences, I've been asked "What are you reading?" and when I reply "Columbine," the inquirer knows exactly what I'm referring to. Cullen considers the students' preference by bringing up the fact that they don't want "Columbine" to mean the massacre, but titling his book with the word is counterproductive toward the students' cause.
Jasmine you said...
ReplyDeleteIt definitely seemed like long term planning and it's crazy how they didn't end up spilling anything to anybody. What Dylan and Eric did do was give people little hints about their plans because they thought it was funny and they knew that the "stupid inferiors" weren't going to pick up on it. I think that people didn't realized this because they probably thought they were just kidding around and of course they were wrong.
I agree with you on this. I also think that it seemed like long term planning. They wanted to do this for a really long time. It wasn't something they thought of out of nowhere. It took a lot of planning. Eric even wrote out step by step instructions and how he was going to do it in his diary, which shows the reader that he wasn't kidding around when he said he wanted to kill.
5. Eric and Dylan settled on a time and a place a year before the attack. Did this seem like rather long term planning for these two, given what we've seen of their failed plans? Are you surprised that they were able to carry this off without slipping up and letting someone else know about it in advance? Both boys wrote about NBK (as they called it) in their yearbooks. Dylan even goes so far at to mention revenge in the commons. Why do you think no one picked up on this? Do you think they were toying with people by providing as much information as they did ahead of time?
ReplyDeleteyes it did and it's a bit ironic as to how this plan failed (was supposed to explode (good that it didn't))just like the others. I'm very surprised that they were so proficient in their planning and that no one had any idea what laid ahead. I think no one picked up on it because no one thought that anything like this was even conceivable and thus didn't connect the two. i think Eric definitely was toying with people by letting on so much. As a psychopath, he reveled in letting bits and pieces of his plan out into the open. Dylan possibly but probably not to the condition that his partner displayed
Jazmine you said...
ReplyDeleteI think Eric was a psychopath and that label fit him well because he had all the characteristics of one. It definitely helped the investigators (and the readers) understand Erics frame of mind.
I agree with you on this. I think that he was a psychopath too, he acted like one and all of the characteristics matched up perfectly.
4. Analyze the rhetoric in the sympathy letters from the Harrises and Klebolds?
ReplyDeleteIn the letter from the Klebolds particularly, the diction stands out to me: they apoligize for "the role" that Dylan played in the death of Cassie Bernall. They make sure to use the word "our: before "wounded hearts." All of these details seem intentional, the diction is humble but does not take responsibility, having a more "sharing in grief together" tone than an "I'm so sorry for what my son did."
6. Again, you may have noticed many news stories lately covering cyber bullying and other types of bullying. How far should a school go to protect bullying victims? If someone is being tormented on Facebook, YouTube, etc. by classmates, is it the school's responsibility to step in?
ReplyDeleteI think schools should really pay more attention to cyber bullying. Probably not going as far as consistent monitoring of online sites but possibly taking more action or talking to the students more when they hear rumors of cyber-bullying going on. but i don't believe it's the school's responsibility because online sites like that are accessed at home and it's more of a parents responsibility. but the teacher shouldn't turn a deaf ear if they hear about cyber bullying happening or a student crying out for help.
6. Again, you may have noticed many news stories lately covering cyber bullying and other types of bullying. How far should a school go to protect bullying victims? If someone is being tormented on Facebook, YouTube, etc. by classmates, is it the school's responsibility to step in?
ReplyDeleteThe school already has choices available about bullying. We enforce the "No Tolerance" rule, and if a student is being bullied all they have to do is refer them to an administrator or get their parents to refer them, and the bully has to face to consequences - if the offense continues as determined by a hearing, the bully is liable for expulsion for at least one calendar year. The school's policy is already involved enough, bullying outside of school is the responsibility of the individual being bullied to speak with an adult about.
10. In 'Who Owns,' Cullen details the struggle between the school and the media upon its reopening. Does the media seem unnecessarily insensitive to you or are they just trying to do their job? Where do your sympathies lie here - with the parents, the media, or is it mixed?
ReplyDeleteYes, it was a big deal for Columbine to re-convene classes in the (generally) same building and same classrooms. No, the school environment is not an ideal place for media. I get that the media has to profit! They did, excessively. Back in APRIL 1999 and the following months. The issue at hand was still pressing, vital, a hold-your-breath issue, but how could the students be expected to go back-to-normal (as much as possible, at least) with badgering journalists, reporters, and cameramen? The victims put up with the media's relentless "attention" for long enough. A new school year, a turning of the page - let them be!
Khayl you said...
ReplyDeleteYes because he fits the checklist and it makes sense. He's uncaring, gruesome, and conniving. some of the key points listed for being a psychopath. and i think the label is useful because it gives people sort of an explanation as to why he was capable of doing this. him being a psychopath may explain to some how a high school student could conceive such a murderous plot
I agree with your point about how this classification helps people understand "how a high school student could conceive such a murderous plot." The plan in itself was difficult to grasp, the fact that a (more or less) normal teenager conceived it makes it all the more disturbing. Assigning the label of "psychopath" to Eric makes the whole situation more bearable (whether or not he really was)
8. 'Who Owns The The Tragedy' is a chapter in which Eric and Dylan don't appear. Do you think that focusing on someone other than them provides a relief to the reader? Do you think Dave intentionally gave the reader breathing space here?
ReplyDeleteI believe that it does. That chapter did make me tear at the emotions displayed and how empathetic i felt to all the people of Columbine High. I think Dave did intentionally make a break there for the reader to be able to unwind from all the horror they felt from reading about these two boys minds and ideas. this chapter symbolized a turning point for this tragedy and that was uplifting to experience through words
Jordanna you said...
ReplyDeleteYes, I think that having a chapter where they don't talk about Dylan or Eric at all is a relief to the reader. In some ways it lightens the mood and makes the reader have somewhat of a breather. The anecdote about how Patrick was improving in his speech makes the reader hopeful and optimistic. I think he did it intentionally to make the story flow better and to have the reader in a more optimistic mood.
That's a definite - this chapter and the exclusion of Eric and Dylan in it allows for a brighter, happier moment of the book. 'Who Owns...' is a huge contrast between the rest of the chapters; it's all good reading, but the depressingness makes it harder to pick up and turn the pages. the breather helps.
Jazmine said...
ReplyDelete2. The ultimate question that 'Psychopath' leads to is: Do you think Eric Harris was a psychopath? Why or why not? Do you think the label is useful or simply stigmatizing?
I think Eric was a psychopath and that label fit him well because he had all the characteristics of one. It definitely helped the investigators (and the readers) understand Erics frame of mind.
i agree completely and it think alot of people probably felt better by being able to feel that a 'normal' person wouldn't have been able to do this sort of thing
sammie k said...
ReplyDelete10. In 'Who Owns,' Cullen details the struggle between the school and the media upon its reopening. Does the media seem unnecessarily insensitive to you or are they just trying to do their job? Where do your sympathies lie here - with the parents, the media, or is it mixed?
Yes, it was a big deal for Columbine to re-convene classes in the (generally) same building and same classrooms. No, the school environment is not an ideal place for media. I get that the media has to profit! They did, excessively. Back in APRIL 1999 and the following months. The issue at hand was still pressing, vital, a hold-your-breath issue, but how could the students be expected to go back-to-normal (as much as possible, at least) with badgering journalists, reporters, and cameramen? The victims put up with the media's relentless "attention" for long enough. A new school year, a turning of the page - let them be!
i completely agree and i think you're very effective and persuasive with your rhetoric and your commanding tone. the media was being too hounding and the students did deserve to be given back their freedom
Stephen you said...
ReplyDeleteWayne Harris’ parallelism in the first three bullets serves to group those points together as problems that must be solved. The asyndeton in bullet 4 “TV, phone, computer, lights out, job, social” emphasizes that Wayne had many ideas for punishment to try to fix Eric’s habits. Honestly, I’m shocked that Eric could possibly have gotten away with getting the guns and making the bombs when Wayne was keeping such a close eye on him. This just shows that Wayne tried to fight Eric’s psychopathy rather than contributing to it.
It is shocking that Eric could get away with all he did get away with, you have a point there. In addition to this showing Wayne's efforts, I think it also reveals just how far gone Eric's lifestyle was. He had developed skills at evading his father's notice and had become a pro at giving off false fronts of improvement/responsibility. The list effectively identifies the magnitude of issues in Eric's behavior, and shows just how good at being bad he really was.
Jordanna said...
ReplyDelete8. 'Who Owns The The Tragedy' is a chapter in which Eric and Dylan don't appear. Do you think that focusing on someone other than them provides a relief to the reader? Do you think Dave intentionally gave the reader breathing space here?
Yes, I think that having a chapter where they don't talk about Dylan or Eric at all is a relief to the reader. In some ways it lightens the mood and makes the reader have somewhat of a breather. The anecdote about how Patrick was improving in his speech makes the reader hopeful and optimistic. I think he did it intentionally to make the story flow better and to have the reader in a more optimistic mood.
i agree and i think it was great to have that little light note placed in in order for the reader to feel, as you put it, 'hopeful and optimistic'. i think it did a great job of heightening the mood of this section
Jason R you said...
ReplyDeleteAs I first read this section I sympathized with the parents and kids to the exclusion of any sympathies to the media. That is the way that it appears to be written. The media are the big bad guys that spread the awful rumors and cause poor old Columbine to be overwhelmed by bad press and stigmas they don’t want. It’s very easy to blame the media because they’re and easy target. And let’s face it, they aren’t exactly coming out smelling like roses. However, my epiphany came from my realization that Cullen himself was a reporter- a member of the media. This entire expose of the tragedy, the entire airing of the truth is coming from a member of the cut-throat, twisted, evil media. So I wondered why he would portray the media as evil, because I truly think that that is what the media appears to be in this book at first glance. I figured that either he was trying to keep the narration as genuine as possible, and relate things from Columbine’s point of view, or he felt sorry for his spreading of misinformation during the crisis. I feel that it is the second, because he could easily present a non-biased portrayal of both the media and Littleton if he had chosen to. I believe that Cullen, along with many other members of the media, were just trying to get the truth, and were caught up in the same stereotypes and mistakes that the rest of us were. We didn’t know what a mistake the media made until we read about it in this book. How would they have known any differently. Sure, I bet there were some reporters that were just in it for the story, who wanted to use the media circus to get a pay check and the largest one possible at that. But those people are everywhere in every occupation. I feel like the media was in fact unnecessarily insensitive, and I sympathize with the parents and kids, but I also think that we can hardly blame the media for doing their jobs.
I like your observation that Cullen was a reporter, and I understand where you're coming from about him feeling sorry for it going as far as it did. Yes, I think he himself sees the media's overinvolvement in the whole thing, after the fact. Although you're right about us stereotyping the media by saying they were in it for the profit, I beleieve a large number of those who went to Columbine on its first day back truly were only there as part of their job, for the story, to quench their curiosity, for the paycheck... my sympathy still lies with the students/parents.
Jordanna said...
ReplyDelete1. How do you feel Eric matches up with the psychopathy checklist as described for juveniles on page 243? Which of Eric's behaviors exemplify the list Dr. Fuselier checks off on page 239? Given what you've read in the chapter 'psychopath' do you think Eric's parents played a role in his behavior - or was he 'born bad'?
I feel Eric matches up to the psychopath checklist perfectly. He lies to manipulate people and he doesn't feel any emotions at all. In my opinion I don't necessarily think that his parents played a role in his behavior. Even though they punished him, he still went back and did things.He didn't learn his lesson at all and still wanted to kill.
i agree with how you said his parents didn't have a role in his behavior. i mean how could they? they did things that any normal parent would do, yet Eric still turned out a killer. i also agree that Eric was a psychopath, like a full blown out one. his whole personality just points to it
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteJazmine you said...
ReplyDeleteI think the school should protect bullying victims as far as providing some sort of (other than counselors because some students don't go to them) outlet for them to vent about whats going on. I think that it is somewhat of the schools responsibilty to step in and control the situation, but the school can only go so far. I definitley believe that if students are being bullied and their parents know about it then notify the school, they then have the responsibilty to take care of the situation and not ignore it.
Jazmine, I agree with your point about no one going to the administrators. Maybe another outlet to vent would be helpful - the Columbine students used the Mental Health Hotline, and on the 6th month anniversary they had to add another shift to handle all the calls. Maybe schools really should provide that anonymous outlet, I think it would help prevent a lot of depression and/or suicide attempts.
Jason R you said...
ReplyDeleteAs I first read this section I sympathized with the parents and kids to the exclusion of any sympathies to the media. That is the way that it appears to be written. The media are the big bad guys that spread the awful rumors and cause poor old Columbine to be overwhelmed by bad press and stigmas they don’t want. It’s very easy to blame the media because they’re and easy target. And let’s face it, they aren’t exactly coming out smelling like roses. However, my epiphany came from my realization that Cullen himself was a reporter- a member of the media. This entire expose of the tragedy, the entire airing of the truth is coming from a member of the cut-throat, twisted, evil media. So I wondered why he would portray the media as evil, because I truly think that that is what the media appears to be in this book at first glance. I figured that either he was trying to keep the narration as genuine as possible, and relate things from Columbine’s point of view, or he felt sorry for his spreading of misinformation during the crisis. I feel that it is the second, because he could easily present a non-biased portrayal of both the media and Littleton if he had chosen to. I believe that Cullen, along with many other members of the media, were just trying to get the truth, and were caught up in the same stereotypes and mistakes that the rest of us were. We didn’t know what a mistake the media made until we read about it in this book. How would they have known any differently. Sure, I bet there were some reporters that were just in it for the story, who wanted to use the media circus to get a pay check and the largest one possible at that. But those people are everywhere in every occupation. I feel like the media was in fact unnecessarily insensitive, and I sympathize with the parents and kids, but I also think that we can hardly blame the media for doing their jobs.
I like your observation of Cullen's being a reporter. I feel that maybe he didn't as much feel sorry about how far it all went as much as he just understood, plain and simple, the media's involvement went too far. I don't think he felt particularly responsible, but I do think he wants to readers to know that he understands this point of view, and that he sympathizes with the students and parents, as do I.
Jason R. said...
ReplyDeleteAs I first read this section I sympathized with the parents and kids to the exclusion of any sympathies to the media. That is the way that it appears to be written. The media are the big bad guys that spread the awful rumors and cause poor old Columbine to be overwhelmed by bad press and stigmas they don’t want. It’s very easy to blame the media because they’re and easy target. And let’s face it, they aren’t exactly coming out smelling like roses. However, my epiphany came from my realization that Cullen himself was a reporter- a member of the media. This entire expose of the tragedy, the entire airing of the truth is coming from a member of the cut-throat, twisted, evil media. So I wondered why he would portray the media as evil, because I truly think that that is what the media appears to be in this book at first glance. I figured that either he was trying to keep the narration as genuine as possible, and relate things from Columbine’s point of view, or he felt sorry for his spreading of misinformation during the crisis. I feel that it is the second, because he could easily present a non-biased portrayal of both the media and Littleton if he had chosen to. I believe that Cullen, along with many other members of the media, were just trying to get the truth, and were caught up in the same stereotypes and mistakes that the rest of us were. We didn’t know what a mistake the media made until we read about it in this book. How would they have known any differently. Sure, I bet there were some reporters that were just in it for the story, who wanted to use the media circus to get a pay check and the largest one possible at that. But those people are everywhere in every occupation. I feel like the media was in fact unnecessarily insensitive, and I sympathize with the parents and kids, but I also think that we can hardly blame the media for doing their jobs.
I agree completely in that many reporters were looking for a quick buck and weren't taking into account the feelings or repercussions that were to go along with their quick analysis. Most of my sympathy and condolences go out to the parents, rather than the reporters.
Sammie K you said..
ReplyDeleteIn the letter from the Klebolds particularly, the diction stands out to me: they apoligize for "the role" that Dylan played in the death of Cassie Bernall. They make sure to use the word "our: before "wounded hearts." All of these details seem intentional, the diction is humble but does not take responsibility, having a more "sharing in grief together" tone than an "I'm so sorry for what my son did."
I completely agree with you on this. It did seem like they were sorry for the situation and not really for what their son did. I think they wanted to side with them but didn't know how so they were sharing their grief together.
Jordanna said...
ReplyDeleteI feel Eric matches up to the psychopath checklist perfectly. He lies to manipulate people and he doesn't feel any emotions at all. In my opinion I don't necessarily think that his parents played a role in his behavior. Even though they punished him, he still went back and did things.He didn't learn his lesson at all and still wanted to kill.
I agree because his parents had no way of knowing. The fact that his personality fits that of the psychopath, as well as his underlying determination to kill leads me to believe that he was indeed a clinically defined psychopath.
Sammie K you said...
ReplyDeleteActually, Ima hafta say no. Eric Harris undoubtedly had issues, but classifying him as a psychopath is going too far. He didn't torture animals. He had some emotion- rage and excitement at least. My take on it is this: his father, Wayne, never made it okay to express emotion. He was a part the ...army?? navy?? something... and led a very strict household. There was no "let's sit down and have a heart-to-heart about our feelings," it was all "do your homework, do your chores, eat meat!" I think that had Eric grown up in a more sensitive environment, he would be more open about his emotions (I think he had them, just didn't know how or didn't know it was okay to express them).
In this point, I don't agree with you. Yes, I agree he didn't torture animals and that he had emotions sometimes, but just because he didn't torture animals and sometimes had a bit of emotion didn't stop him from being a psychopath. He manipulated things his way and lied his way out of everything, and he did it well. He felt no remorse killing the lives of innocent people. Just because his dad was in the military doesn't give a reason why he didn't have sympathy and killed innocent lives. That is the work of a psychopath, not a normal teenager like you and me.
Khayl you said..
ReplyDeleteYes because he fits the checklist and it makes sense. He's uncaring, gruesome, and conniving. some of the key points listed for being a psychopath. and i think the label is useful because it gives people sort of an explanation as to why he was capable of doing this. him being a psychopath may explain to some how a high school student could conceive such a murderous plot
Yes, I agree with you on this. All of his attitudes and his journal entries indicated him to the psychopath trail. I also agree with you that him being a psychopath also helps the reader understand why he might have done what he did.
Sammie K, you said...
ReplyDeleteThe school already has choices available about bullying. We enforce the "No Tolerance" rule, and if a student is being bullied all they have to do is refer them to an administrator or get their parents to refer them, and the bully has to face to consequences - if the offense continues as determined by a hearing, the bully is liable for expulsion for at least one calendar year. The school's policy is already involved enough, bullying outside of school is the responsibility of the individual being bullied to speak with an adult about.
I agree with you 100% when you said that it is the responsibility of the individual being bullied to speak with an adult for help.
Yes, it is the schools responsibility to intervene if they see something happening and definitely the parents duty to stop it immediately, but I also think that it is the students responsibility as well. I feel that if they need help they should speak up. I realize that they may be scared, but no one can read their minds.
Jordanna said...
ReplyDeleteYes, I think that having a chapter where they don't talk about Dylan or Eric at all is a relief to the reader. In some ways it lightens the mood and makes the reader have somewhat of a breather. The anecdote about how Patrick was improving in his speech makes the reader hopeful and optimistic. I think he did it intentionally to make the story flow better and to have the reader in a more optimistic mood.
I agree completely when you say it gives breathing room. The reader can get sick of reading disturbing things. By adding this brief anecdote of hope and optimism, Cullen lets the reader take a break from the usual gore and background info leading up to it all.
Sammie Kibbles said...
ReplyDeleteThe school already has choices available about bullying. We enforce the "No Tolerance" rule, and if a student is being bullied all they have to do is refer them to an administrator or get their parents to refer them, and the bully has to face to consequences - if the offense continues as determined by a hearing, the bully is liable for expulsion for at least one calendar year. The school's policy is already involved enough, bullying outside of school is the responsibility of the individual being bullied to speak with an adult about.
I agree with you when you say that the bullying is covered well by the school. On the other hand, I believe that there should be more of an outreach to victims of cyber bullying because it has led to death in recent times.
Sammie K, you said...
ReplyDeleteIn the letter from the Klebolds particularly, the diction stands out to me: they apoligize for "the role" that Dylan played in the death of Cassie Bernall. They make sure to use the word "our: before "wounded hearts." All of these details seem intentional, the diction is humble but does not take responsibility, having a more "sharing in grief together" tone than an "I'm so sorry for what my son did."
I thought this too! I felt like the Klebolds didn't take responsibility for what their son did and im glad that they didn't because it wasn't their fault. They definitely shared grief with the parents of the murdered victims and some people were able to see that the Klebolds unfortunatley lost their child to the madness just like them.
Khayl said...
ReplyDelete5. Eric and Dylan settled on a time and a place a year before the attack. Did this seem like rather long term planning for these two, given what we've seen of their failed plans? Are you surprised that they were able to carry this off without slipping up and letting someone else know about it in advance? Both boys wrote about NBK (as they called it) in their yearbooks. Dylan even goes so far at to mention revenge in the commons. Why do you think no one picked up on this? Do you think they were toying with people by providing as much information as they did ahead of time?
I agree because much like serial killers, some psychopaths are craving to get caught. By toying with the students, he was satisfying his craving for terror.
Khayl, you said...
ReplyDeleteThe book in a way harms their cause because just the very title is exactly what the students wanted to prevent. If he had possibly titled the book the Columbine Massacre, it would've been different then just titling it Columbine. Also the book does help their cause in how Cullen actually mentions the students disapproval of the way the word is used.
I really agree with you on this. The title itself instantly makes me think about the massacre that happened at the school. Cullens title 'Columbine' doesn't help the cause, but when he does talk about how the community doesn't like their schools name being used as a word to describe the massacre helps the point that they're trying to make.
6. Again, you may have noticed many news stories lately covering cyber bullying and other types of bullying. How far should a school go to protect bullying victims? If someone is being tormented on Facebook, YouTube, etc. by classmates, is it the school's responsibility to step in?
ReplyDeleteSchool's have to deal with the welfare of their students and that does include the mental state of the students. Allowing cyber bullying to proceed on it's own is not a responsible thing to do and they should have the right to stop the bullying just like they could enforce action for any other type of bullying. By allowing students to cyber bully, schools would encourage real life bullying of students which is completely unacceptable. Schools cannot provide a shelter for cyber bullys, they must take action.
Jason R, you said...
ReplyDeleteAs I first read this section I sympathized with the parents and kids to the exclusion of any sympathies to the media. That is the way that it appears to be written. The media are the big bad guys that spread the awful rumors and cause poor old Columbine to be overwhelmed by bad press and stigmas they don’t want. It’s very easy to blame the media because they’re and easy target. And let’s face it, they aren’t exactly coming out smelling like roses. However, my epiphany came from my realization that Cullen himself was a reporter- a member of the media. This entire expose of the tragedy, the entire airing of the truth is coming from a member of the cut-throat, twisted, evil media. So I wondered why he would portray the media as evil, because I truly think that that is what the media appears to be in this book at first glance. I figured that either he was trying to keep the narration as genuine as possible, and relate things from Columbine’s point of view, or he felt sorry for his spreading of misinformation during the crisis. I feel that it is the second, because he could easily present a non-biased portrayal of both the media and Littleton if he had chosen to. I believe that Cullen, along with many other members of the media, were just trying to get the truth, and were caught up in the same stereotypes and mistakes that the rest of us were. We didn’t know what a mistake the media made until we read about it in this book. How would they have known any differently. Sure, I bet there were some reporters that were just in it for the story, who wanted to use the media circus to get a pay check and the largest one possible at that. But those people are everywhere in every occupation. I feel like the media was in fact unnecessarily insensitive, and I sympathize with the parents and kids, but I also think that we can hardly blame the media for doing their jobs.
I think its cool that you added that Cullen was a reporter. It makes Cullens point of view on how the media acted seem more legit since he knows the buisness. I agree with you when you said that the media was just doing their job, but they also need to know when to just back off.
2. The ultimate question that 'Psychopath' leads to is: Do you think Eric Harris was a psychopath? Why or why not? Do you think the label is useful or simply stigmatizing?
ReplyDeleteI do believe Eric Harris was a psychopath. Given the mountain of evidence presented over the course of the book, it is impossible to claim otherwise and further more he was certainly a "full blown" psychopath. His lack of emotional response to the idea and the action of slaying hundreds of human lives a textbook example of being a psychopath. To take the label one step further, I do believe that identification of psychopathic traits in people could allow close ones such as family member and friends to keep an eye out for them before something bad happens. While simply being psychopathic is cause for concern, no action on the part of police of the government in general should directly affect the individual as doing so would allow for manipulation of rules through the misidentification of psychopaths.
3. The students of Columbine were repulsed by the use of their school name as a proper noun to describe school shootings or school violence. Does Cullen's book help or harm their cause?
ReplyDeleteCullen's book definitely does not help their cause. Cullen named his book "Columbine" after the incident, not the school or community and in doing so already hurt their cause. He goes on to describe the columbine shooting throughout the book with little other mention than the student's discomfort with it. The damage has been done and now "Columbine" is a nationally recognized term. Whether or not Cullen had taken a more active stance in their favor, nothing would have changed in the larger picture of things, so while he does not hurt their cause much, he certainly does not help them.
3. The students of Columbine were repulsed by the use of their school name as a proper noun to describe school shootings or school violence. Does Cullen's book help or harm their cause?
ReplyDeleteI believe Cullen's book adds to the stereotype. His in-depth analyses make the shooting seem like more of a conspiracy than anything else. It scares me when I hear the word Columbine. That's just how it's been engraved in my brain.
8. 'Who Owns The The Tragedy' is a chapter in which Eric and Dylan don't appear. Do you think that focusing on someone other than them provides a relief to the reader? Do you think Dave intentionally gave the reader breathing space here?
ReplyDeleteI personally got sick of reading about Dylan and Eric's wrong-doings and plans. It's good that Cullen thought to include this portion just to give the reader a break from the harsh reality of things and let them see a brighter side.
2. The ultimate question that 'Psychopath' leads to is: Do you think Eric Harris was a psychopath? Why or why not? Do you think the label is useful or simply stigmatizing?
ReplyDeleteThere is no doubt in my mind that Eric Harris was a psychopath. His lack of care for anyone's feelings and interest in inflicting pain are both key characteristics to analyzing his condition.
8. 'Who Owns the Tragedy' is a chapter in which Eric and Dylan don't appear. Do you think that focusing on someone other than them provides a relief to the reader? Do you think Dave intentionally gave the reader breathing space here?
ReplyDeleteIt is a relief that Dave doesn’t focus on the killers. I think his purpose in leaving Eric and Dylan out was to show how the survivors moved on from the tragedy. This chapter also shows how everybody took the media to be the enemy instead of continuing to be angry with the murderers, who were both dead, and how the fact of the killers’ suicide forced the families involved to choose a new enemy to conquer in order to “take back the school.”
5. Eric and Dylan settled on a time and a place a year before the attack. Did this seem like rather long term planning for these two, given what we've seen of their failed plans? Are you surprised that they were able to carry this off without slipping up and letting someone else know about it in advance? Both boys wrote about NBK (as they called it) in their yearbooks. Dylan even goes so far at to mention revenge in the commons. Why do you think no one picked up on this? Do you think they were toying with people by providing as much information as they did ahead of time?
ReplyDeleteFor planning a year ahead, I was seriously surprised by the disregard for key mechanisms like the bombs. The whole story would be more blown out of proportion if the year they planned ahead had actually contributed to more deaths.
1. How do you feel Eric matches up with the psychopathy checklist as described for juveniles on page 243? Which of Eric's behaviors exemplify the list Dr. Fuselier checks off on page 239? Given what you've read in the chapter 'psychopath' do you think Eric's parents played a role in his behavior - or was he 'born bad'?
ReplyDeleteI think Eric matches up with the psychopathy checklist very well. Everything that is mentioned, Eric shows. I also don't think that his parents had a role in his behavior and I just think he was born bad. For him to be so much of a psychopath, there's no way his parents could havve been the influence of all of that.
2. The ultimate question that 'Psychopath' leads to is: Do you think Eric Harris was a psychopath? Why or why not? Do you think the label is useful or simply stigmatizing?
ReplyDeleteI think that Eric was a psychopath. He had way too manny issues to not be one. No normal person just wants to go on killing sprees. I think the label 'psychopath' is useful because it gives a real meaning to Eric's behavior when there are no other words that will do that.
Jordanna, you said
ReplyDelete"Yes, I think that having a chapter where they don't talk about Dylan or Eric at all is a relief to the reader. In some ways it lightens the mood and makes the reader have somewhat of a breather. The anecdote about how Patrick was improving in his speech makes the reader hopeful and optimistic. I think he did it intentionally to make the story flow better and to have the reader in a more optimistic mood."
I was glad to have a little break from the depressing, morbid tone in previous chapters. The hopeful and optimistic tone shows how everybody moved on from the tragedy, especially the ending part about the "Take Back the School" rally. As for Patrick, the chapter leads me to believe that he will make a miraculous recovery, one that the doctors didn't think was possible when Patrick first arrived in the hospital.
3. The students of Columbine were repulsed by the use of their school name as a proper noun to describe school shootings or school violence. Does Cullen's book help or harm their cause?
ReplyDeleteI think that Cullen's book harms their cause because it draws more attention to what happened and therefore makes people use the word more. There is no way that creating a book about Columbine could help their cause.
5. Eric and Dylan settled on a time and a place a year before the attack. Did this seem like rather long term planning for these two, given what we've seen of their failed plans? Are you surprised that they were able to carry this off without slipping up and letting someone else know about it in advance? Both boys wrote about NBK (as they called it) in their yearbooks. Dylan even goes so far at to mention revenge in the commons. Why do you think no one picked up on this? Do you think they were toying with people by providing as much information as they did ahead of time?
ReplyDeleteI did find their planning extremely different from anything else they've done. It surprises me that they planned so much in advance. I think it was easy for them to keep it to themselves though because they don't have many people they would tell. I think that they may have been toying with people, hinting around about what they were about to do just to have a little fun.
Shelby, you said
ReplyDelete"I think Eric matches up with the psychopathy checklist very well. Everything that is mentioned, Eric shows. I also don't think that his parents had a role in his behavior and I just think he was born bad. For him to be so much of a psychopath, there's no way his parents could havve been the influence of all of that."
I agree with you. Since Eric fit the psychopathy checklist so well (and ended up planning and orchestrating a mass murder, which alone shows that there was something wrong), it seems to me that he was too psychopathic for his parents to have had much, if any, effect on him. Eric surely wasn't neglected; that couldn't be further from the truth, based on Wayne's bulleted point lecture. Eric's parents didn't abuse him either; after all, abuse wouldn't have caused Eric's extreme superiority complex or his lack of certain emotions such as guilt. Honestly, he was so bent on homicide that Wayne and Kathy couldn't possibly have done anything to cure him. Despite "a century of attempts" (245), we have been unable to cure psychopathy.
9. In 'Who Owns,' Cullen writes further about the recovery of Patrick Ireland. What do you feel we can learn about human resiliance from his story? Do you feel that the forgiveness that he espoused is necessary for complete healing? Why do you think it was more difficult for Patrick's mother to forgive the killers than Patrick?
ReplyDeleteHuman resilience is something which can overcome even the strongest inhibitions towards progress. Patrick's ability to learn to reuse his leg and to learn to talk over again speak volumes on the hope which he had for himself. As far as Patrick's healing process, by forgiving the shooters for the crime which they committed, he lifted a burden from his backs allowing him to continue his work with less effort. He was probably able to forgive easier than his mother because of this as well. Rather than dwell on the past, all Patrick wanted was to look forward and try to make something for himself. His mother was still thinking about everything as a bad situation caused by the shooters rather than working towards a better life for her son.
3. The students of Columbine were repulsed by the use of their school name as a proper noun to describe school shootings or school violence. Does Cullen's book help or harm their cause?
ReplyDeleteThe students of the school were right in their disgust at the use of "Columbine" as a reference to the shootings. Dave Cullen titled his book Columbine not as a term to describe the shooting, but simply as the name of the school. He wanted his book to be about Columbine High School and the students in attendance there during the tragedy.
8. 'Who Owns The The Tragedy' is a chapter in which Eric and Dylan don't appear. Do you think that focusing on someone other than them provides a relief to the reader? Do you think Dave intentionally gave the reader breathing space here?
ReplyDeleteI definitely think that this chapter provides a relief to the reader and I think that it is needed. After a while, it is just too much Eric and Dylan and there needs to be a change of pace. I think that Cullen intentionally does this because he knows that the reader needs some breathing room.
2. The ultimate question that 'Psychopath' leads to is: Do you think Eric Harris was a psychopath? Why or why not? Do you think the label is useful or simply stigmatizing?
ReplyDeleteYes, I do think that Eric was a psychopath. He had the characteristics of one and since the beginning of the book, the reader could tell that something was off about him. I think that this label was useful. It helped get a better understanding of why he did what he did.
5. Eric and Dylan settled on a time and a place a year before the attack. Did this seem like rather long term planning for these two, given what we've seen of their failed plans? Are you surprised that they were able to carry this off without slipping up and letting someone else know about it in advance? Both boys wrote about NBK (as they called it) in their yearbooks. Dylan even goes so far at to mention revenge in the commons. Why do you think no one picked up on this? Do you think they were toying with people by providing as much information as they did ahead of time?
ReplyDeleteNow that society knows Dylan and Eric as "psychopaths", it is safe to assume the two found some sort of enjoyment out of revealing such information to the community. Dylan and Eric probably got a kick out of the fact that no one reacted to their statements in the year before the shooting. The two boys, while being obviously disturbed, were cunning in their preparation for their revenge.
Stuart you said...
ReplyDeleteFor planning a year ahead, I was seriously surprised by the disregard for key mechanisms like the bombs. The whole story would be more blown out of proportion if the year they planned ahead had actually contributed to more deaths.
I agree with you Stuart. It was extremely surprising that they didn't do a better job of going through with their plans while they planned so far in advance. I also think that it's crazy how far in advance they planned when normally they just do stupid things on a whim.
6. Again, you may have noticed many news stories lately covering cyber bullying and other types of bullying. How far should a school go to protect bullying victims? If someone is being tormented on Facebook, YouTube, etc. by classmates, is it the school's responsibility to step in?
ReplyDeleteJust because two people attend the same school does not mean the school system should take action. While bullying and public embarrasment certainly hurts some, these are not crimes. If the bullying is apparent during school hours and is disruptive to learning, the school should definitely intervene; otherwise, teachers have no business in the matter.
3. The students of Columbine were repulsed by the use of their school name as a proper noun to describe school shootings or school violence. Does Cullen's book help or harm their cause?
ReplyDeleteI do not think that this book helped their cause. Cullen is describing the shooting, not the school. When referring to the book title, people don't think of Columbine High School, they are thinking of the Columbine shooting.
8. 'Who Owns The The Tragedy' is a chapter in which Eric and Dylan don't appear. Do you think that focusing on someone other than them provides a relief to the reader? Do you think Dave intentionally gave the reader breathing space here?
ReplyDeleteA movie about a tragedy is depressing to say the least. While the director wants to get a depressing message across, there needs to be some sort of happy moment, a relief from a tone of sadness. Cullen was trying to accomplish this feeling with this chapter. The book can't entirely be about a shooting, the parents' sadness and the media's insensitivity. Cullen needed to offer the reader a rest from the disturbing stories that make up the rest of his book.
Khayl you said...
ReplyDeleteI believe that it does. That chapter did make me tear at the emotions displayed and how empathetic i felt to all the people of Columbine High. I think Dave did intentionally make a break there for the reader to be able to unwind from all the horror they felt from reading about these two boys minds and ideas. this chapter symbolized a turning point for this tragedy and that was uplifting to experience through words
I agree with you and also think that Cullen intentionally made a break and that it waas a necessary break to make. You make a good point when you say that this chapter is a turning point, and I agree with you.
10. In 'Who Owns,' Cullen details the struggle between the school and the media upon its reopening. Does the media seem unnecessarily insensitive to you or are they just trying to do their job? Where do your sympathies lie here - with the parents, the media, or is it mixed?
ReplyDeleteThroughout the aftermath of the shootings at Columbine, Dave Cullen has portrayed the media as extremely insensitive and cruel. He explains the media's exaggeration of what unfolded inside and its neglect for consideration towards the emotions of the parents. The parents of the children killed are surely to be sympathized with. The media has only worsened the blow on Littleton's pride.
Jazmine you said...
ReplyDeleteI think Eric was a psychopath and that label fit him well because he had all the characteristics of one. It definitely helped the investigators (and the readers) understand Erics frame of mind.
I agree with you and also think that Eric was a psychopath. The label 'psychopath' fits him well because it gives a name and reason for all of Eric's strange behaviors.
1. How do you feel Eric matches up with the psychopathy checklist as described for juveniles on page 243? Which of Eric's behaviors exemplify the list Dr. Fuselier checks off on page 239? Given what you've read in the chapter 'psychopath' do you think Eric's parents played a role in his behavior - or was he 'born bad'?
ReplyDeleteI believe that Eric shows numerous characteristics of psychosis. He truly does not fit everyone of checks in the list, excluding animal cruelty, but for him to fit all of the rest clearly show that he has mental problems. Basically, his brain did not properly react to emotions, such as fear and regret. He was born with these traits that all "psychopaths" embody, meaning he could not control them, he was wired to act the way he did, he could not reason with himself. Eric's behavior, listed by Dave Cullen on page 239, is amazingly identical to a person who has officially been recorded as a psychopath, for he is able to cover up his problems and desires with expressions that would not alarm the normal human-being. It is definite that Eric was born the way he was, for he is psychopath's brains, such as Eric's, do not react the way a normal brain would to depressing things, such as rape. Instead of fearing the word, their brains "analyze" it, trying to process what is being shown to them. This goes beyond pictures in a treatment center, for example, because of traits given to him at birth, he brought this out at Columbine High School. The only thing, is that his parents, in no way, can be held responsible for the things they clearly had no control over.
Jordanna said...
ReplyDelete3. The students of Columbine were repulsed by the use of their school name as a proper noun to describe school shootings or school violence. Does Cullen's book help or harm their cause?
I think it doesn't help their cause. The book shows a lot of media and a lot of envestigation in regards to Columbine, therefore it makes it seem for tragic, so people use the school as a proper noun because it was so tragic, and I think the book shows that.
My thoughts exactly. Society has certainly used "columbine" as a default when talking of the shootings at Columbine, which Cullen has revealed in his book.
Jordanna you said...
ReplyDeleteI think it doesn't help their cause. The book shows a lot of media and a lot of envestigation in regards to Columbine, therefore it makes it seem for tragic, so people use the school as a proper noun because it was so tragic, and I think the book shows that.
I agree with you and think that it doesn't help their cause as well. I also think that it 'Columbine' is used as a noun because the event was so tragic. The book definitely doesn't help their cause though.
5. Eric and Dylan settled on a time and a place a year before the attack. Did this seem like rather long term planning for these two, given what we've seen of their failed plans? Are you surprised that they were able to carry this off without slipping up and letting someone else know about it in advance? Both boys wrote about NBK (as they called it) in their yearbooks. Dylan even goes so far at to mention revenge in the commons. Why do you think no one picked up on this? Do you think they were toying with people by providing as much information as they did ahead of time?
ReplyDeleteIt did seem like a long time to be planning something like this, and it was surprising that part of their plan failed, even though it was a blessing that the bombs didnt go off. I am surprised they went that long without anyone else knowing, but at the same time, neither Eric or Dylan would have let something like that slip. I think they were toying with people by giving little hints about their plans and they were just doing it for their amusement.
Jazmine said...
ReplyDelete5. Eric and Dylan settled on a time and a place a year before the attack. Did this seem like rather long term planning for these two, given what we've seen of their failed plans? Are you surprised that they were able to carry this off without slipping up and letting someone else know about it in advance? Both boys wrote about NBK (as they called it) in their yearbooks. Dylan even goes so far at to mention revenge in the commons. Why do you think no one picked up on this? Do you think they were toying with people by providing as much information as they did ahead of time?
It definitely seemed like long term planning and it's crazy how they didn't end up spilling anything to anybody. What Dylan and Eric did do was give people little hints about their plans because they thought it was funny and they knew that the "stupid inferiors" weren't going to pick up on it. I think that people didn't realized this because they probably thought they were just kidding around and of course they were wrong.
The students who had bits of Eric and Dylan's plans revealed to them most definitely thought the two were kidding around. Such normal boys couldn't perform a horrific act such as this, now could they? The use of "stupid inferiors" certainly gets the point across that Eric and Dylan thought themselves better than the others at their school. I completely agree.
Clay you said...
ReplyDeleteJust because two people attend the same school does not mean the school system should take action. While bullying and public embarrasment certainly hurts some, these are not crimes. If the bullying is apparent during school hours and is disruptive to learning, the school should definitely intervene; otherwise, teachers have no business in the matter.
I aagree with you. I think that the school shouldn't get involved unless the bullying crosses into school territory. Even though it is awful that this happens, I don't think it is the place of the school to take action.
Khayl said...
ReplyDelete6. Again, you may have noticed many news stories lately covering cyber bullying and other types of bullying. How far should a school go to protect bullying victims? If someone is being tormented on Facebook, YouTube, etc. by classmates, is it the school's responsibility to step in?
I think schools should really pay more attention to cyber bullying. Probably not going as far as consistent monitoring of online sites but possibly taking more action or talking to the students more when they hear rumors of cyber-bullying going on. but i don't believe it's the school's responsibility because online sites like that are accessed at home and it's more of a parents responsibility. but the teacher shouldn't turn a deaf ear if they hear about cyber bullying happening or a student crying out for help.
Good point about teachers overhearing cyber-bullying rumors. I was thinking that if the problems on the internet conflict with the focus of the class, the techers should take action, but if the cruelty is unknown to those running the school, it's up to the parents to solve the problems.
6. Again, you may have noticed many news stories lately covering cyber bullying and other types of bullying. How far should a school go to protect bullying victims? If someone is being tormented on Facebook, YouTube, etc. by classmates, is it the school's responsibility to step in?
ReplyDeleteCyber bullying is definately becoming more of a problem, but I think that schools should not step in unless the bullying is through the school or happens at school. For example, the school should not step in if a child is being bullied through facebook because it is not happening at school. It is a problem that should be dealt with at the childs home.
Stuart said...
ReplyDelete8. 'Who Owns The The Tragedy' is a chapter in which Eric and Dylan don't appear. Do you think that focusing on someone other than them provides a relief to the reader? Do you think Dave intentionally gave the reader breathing space here?
I personally got sick of reading about Dylan and Eric's wrong-doings and plans. It's good that Cullen thought to include this portion just to give the reader a break from the harsh reality of things and let them see a brighter side.
I, too, felt this chapter was necessary to sort of comfort the reader as they discover Eric and Dylan's pyschotoc nature. One cannot read about killings all day. There needs to be a brighter side to every story, and Cullen offers it here.
sammie k said...
ReplyDelete10. In 'Who Owns,' Cullen details the struggle between the school and the media upon its reopening. Does the media seem unnecessarily insensitive to you or are they just trying to do their job? Where do your sympathies lie here - with the parents, the media, or is it mixed?
Yes, it was a big deal for Columbine to re-convene classes in the (generally) same building and same classrooms. No, the school environment is not an ideal place for media. I get that the media has to profit! They did, excessively. Back in APRIL 1999 and the following months. The issue at hand was still pressing, vital, a hold-your-breath issue, but how could the students be expected to go back-to-normal (as much as possible, at least) with badgering journalists, reporters, and cameramen? The victims put up with the media's relentless "attention" for long enough. A new school year, a turning of the page - let them be!
I can certainly see how the students were bogged down by the media at their return to classes. This going back to school had to have been difficult for them, and the camera crews did not help one bit.
Clay said...
ReplyDeleteNow that society knows Dylan and Eric as "psychopaths", it is safe to assume the two found some sort of enjoyment out of revealing such information to the community. Dylan and Eric probably got a kick out of the fact that no one reacted to their statements in the year before the shooting. The two boys, while being obviously disturbed, were cunning in their preparation for their revenge.
I definately agree. Eric and Dylan probably did find amusement out of giving people hints about their plans and it probably was funny to them that no one picked up on their hints.
James said...
ReplyDeleteI do believe Eric Harris was a psychopath. Given the mountain of evidence presented over the course of the book, it is impossible to claim otherwise and further more he was certainly a "full blown" psychopath. His lack of emotional response to the idea and the action of slaying hundreds of human lives a textbook example of being a psychopath. To take the label one step further, I do believe that identification of psychopathic traits in people could allow close ones such as family member and friends to keep an eye out for them before something bad happens. While simply being psychopathic is cause for concern, no action on the part of police of the government in general should directly affect the individual as doing so would allow for manipulation of rules through the misidentification of psychopaths.
I totally agree. I think Eric was a psychopath because he definately showed the signs and characteristics of a psychopath. No sane person could go into a school and shoot and kill their classmates and not feel bad. Plus, his plan wasn't even to just shoot people, he was planning to kill many more people with his bombs that thankfully failed to go off.
1. How do you feel Eric matches up with the psychopathy checklist as described for juveniles on page 243? Which of Eric's behaviors exemplify the list Dr. Fuselier checks off on page 239? Given what you've read in the chapter 'psychopath' do you think Eric's parents played a role in his behavior - or was he 'born bad'?
ReplyDelete- I think he fits it perfectly. he shows the exact same symptoms of this mental disorder. "Appaling failure of empathy" fits eric very well. He was born bad, his parents gave him a good environment, whatever was wrong with him had to have been inherited, not learnt.
2. The ultimate question that 'Psychopath' leads to is: Do you think Eric Harris was a psychopath? Why or why not? Do you think the label is useful or simply stigmatizing?
ReplyDeleteMy answer to this question is that Eric Harris is, without a doubt, a psychopath. Not only does he perfectly fit the description given by Dr. Fuselier, he acted out and made irrational decisions that another psychopath would have made. He tries to put on a mask, covering up his true intentions, solely to get under your skin, in order to complete the horrid plans he has had in store for quite sometime. Rarely does he improvise, therefor, he plans his things out well before the date set for the instance. Though well fit for Eric, psychopath is not really a valid title for all people that comitt crimes to the extent that Eric and Dylan both comitted, many people have didnt motives, while some a little more sensible than others, they are not all the same, meaning there should be different levels of mental problems.
8. 'Who Owns The The Tragedy' is a chapter in which Eric and Dylan don't appear. Do you think that focusing on someone other than them provides a relief to the reader? Do you think Dave intentionally gave the reader breathing space here?
ReplyDeleteThis chapter in which Eric and Dylan do not appear does give the reader a break from the incessant analyzing of Eric and Dylan's personalities. I'm not entirely sure whether the author created this chapter with a break in mind, but it certainly is good placement in the book.
Shelby said...
ReplyDeleteI think Eric matches up with the psychopathy checklist very well. Everything that is mentioned, Eric shows. I also don't think that his parents had a role in his behavior and I just think he was born bad. For him to be so much of a psychopath, there's no way his parents could havve been the influence of all of that.
I agree with you on this. Eric definately showed the signs of a psychopath and his personality fit the checklists very well. I also don't think his parents played a role in his personality and behavior. He had a pretty normal family and there was nothing his parents could have done to make Eric the way that he was. Also, even if they had realized that he was not sane, they would not have been able to change his ways.
Khayl said...
ReplyDeleteThe book in a way harms their cause because just the very title is exactly what the students wanted to prevent. If he had possibly titled the book the Columbine Massacre, it would've been different then just titling it Columbine. Also the book does help their cause in how Cullen actually mentions the students disapproval of the way the word is used.
I definately agree with you, the book really does harm their cause. The title Columbine is referring to the shooting at the school, not the actual High School. Your right, Cullen mentioning the students disapproval of the way that the word COlumbine is used, does not help their cause either.
2. The ultimate question that 'Psychopath' leads to is: Do you think Eric Harris was a psychopath? Why or why not? Do you think the label is useful or simply stigmatizing?
ReplyDelete- Yes, i honestly think he was a psychopath. The reason being, is because he fits the mold. One indication was that he did not feel emotions, he played the Doom video games and related that too humans with no emotional connection. the label is useful because it correctly gives us a reason as to why he had the ability to pull off the attack.
3. The students of Columbine were repulsed by the use of their school name as a proper noun to describe school shootings or school violence. Does Cullen's book help or harm their cause?
ReplyDeleteI am stuck in the middle of this argument, for I can see the answer going both ways, both for that idea that Cullen's book promotes "columbine" being used as a proper noun, while I also would be happy with people believing that the book avoids the use of "Columbine" as an idea of violence and gun problems. For now, I will stick with Cullen's book using the name "columbine" as a word to describe violence in schools. Cullen constantly uses the name to relate things to violence in schools. Thoguh Cullen most likely did not originally intend on making it this way, he probably also overlooked it after the completion of the book, Cullen still uses it, regardless to what one thinks he truly wanted to have happen. Understanding this, Cullen still manages to help the Columbine cause.
Jordanna said...
ReplyDeleteBullying is a growing problem today, especially on the internet. As far as the school goes, I think they should protect bullying as far as in the school. At home, it is at home. I think that if the school interfering isn't the best idea. I think they should do their best to prevent it in school.
I also thought that the school should just prevent cyber bullying in school. Schools should not get involved in bullying that goes on outside of school, that is a problem for the child to deal with at home.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete3. The students of Columbine were repulsed by the use of their school name as a proper noun to describe school shootings or school violence. Does Cullen's book help or harm their cause?
ReplyDelete- Cullen's book definitely helps the cause. The title of the book is referencing the physical place, not exactly the act like the kids were getting angry about. When people hear the word Columbine they will only think of death, and tragedy, not for the positive aspects of the school.
Sam Said:
ReplyDelete4. Analyze the rhetoric in the sympathy letters from the Harrises and Klebolds?
In the letter from the Klebolds particularly, the diction stands out to me: they apoligize for "the role" that Dylan played in the death of Cassie Bernall. They make sure to use the word "our: before "wounded hearts." All of these details seem intentional, the diction is humble but does not take responsibility, having a more "sharing in grief together" tone than an "I'm so sorry for what my son did."
At this point, saying sorry for what her son did would not only be ineffective, but would also cause parents even more anger towards her for not stopping her son. To take responsibility would simply have angered the other families, but my "sharing in grief together" the parents really do help the recovery process.
Jason W wrote:
ReplyDelete3. The students of Columbine were repulsed by the use of their school name as a proper noun to describe school shootings or school violence. Does Cullen's book help or harm their cause?
- Cullen's book definitely helps the cause. The title of the book is referencing the physical place, not exactly the act like the kids were getting angry about. When people hear the word Columbine they will only think of death, and tragedy, not for the positive aspects of the school.
I read the cover as referring to the incident "Columbine" rather than the high school, but I suppose it could be read either way depending on the viewpoint on the reader. That's exactly it though, most readers will probably read it as the incident rather than the school due to the various media references to the "Columbine" incident. I understand where you're coming from, but I disagree with you.
4. Analyze the rhetoric in the sympathy letters from the Harrises and Klebolds?
ReplyDelete-The rhetoric was an appeals to pathos, they wanted a way to say they were sorry for an unforgivable thing. How do you say your sorry to a parent who lost their kid due to your sons doing? its impossible, the letter was the only way the family could reach out to the victims family and hoped they would respond positively to their attempt.
Jordanna said...
ReplyDeleteBullying is a growing problem today, especially on the internet. As far as the school goes, I think they should protect bullying as far as in the school. At home, it is at home. I think that if the school interfering isn't the best idea. I think they should do their best to prevent it in school.
I feel like prevention in school would be ineffective. For the most part, people can't even use the internet for cyber bullying anyways during school hours and if they can they probably broke some rule about technology misuse long before that. Also, despite the fact that we can't really get on these social media sites in order to cyber bully at school, it still occurs, so I don't feel like simply regulating it in school would be effective at all, if less effective than school systems simply prohibiting use of social media sites at school.
5. Eric and Dylan settled on a time and a place a year before the attack. Did this seem like rather long term planning for these two, given what we've seen of their failed plans? Are you surprised that they were able to carry this off without slipping up and letting someone else know about it in advance? Both boys wrote about NBK (as they called it) in their yearbooks. Dylan even goes so far at to mention revenge in the commons. Why do you think no one picked up on this? Do you think they were toying with people by providing as much information as they did ahead of time?
ReplyDeleteI am honestly amazed how lucky the students were to have not gone through the bombsthat were intended to kill over a thousand students, even with the excessive time of planning. Even with all the warning sings and just plain evidence they shared, they still managed to slyly slither their way around detecion of anyone of importance. With what was openly given, it seemed that they didn't care if they got caught, for Eric most likely would have used his charm to get past the detectors, giving them even more of the thrilled they craved throughout the whole process. I believe that people, at least, heard of their plans, whether it be only a fraction or even almost the whole plot, but ignored it because they most likely knew the two bright fellows, and since school shootings were very, very rare at the time, no one believed any single person would go through with it, especially those like Eric and Dylan. I know for a fact that by Eric and Dylan openly giving away portions of their plans to people, they intended on toying with their soles, knowing, or in this case hoping, they would all die as the school went up in flames after the successful explosion of the bombs.
Stuart said...
ReplyDelete8. 'Who Owns The The Tragedy' is a chapter in which Eric and Dylan don't appear. Do you think that focusing on someone other than them provides a relief to the reader? Do you think Dave intentionally gave the reader breathing space here?
I personally got sick of reading about Dylan and Eric's wrong-doings and plans. It's good that Cullen thought to include this portion just to give the reader a break from the harsh reality of things and let them see a brighter side.
I definitely agree with you. The fact that Cullen would recognize the slow analyzing of Eric and Dylan's act was already impressive, but to counter the monotony of it using reflections on the current state of events was a wonderful way to keep moods up while reading the book.
6. Again, you may have noticed many news stories lately covering cyber bullying and other types of bullying. How far should a school go to protect bullying victims? If someone is being tormented on Facebook, YouTube, etc. by classmates, is it the school's responsibility to step in?
ReplyDeleteThough a school should step in immediately, once notified, when one of their students is either being bullied or is the one bullying.
It is ultimately the student who is being bullied's resposibility to report the bullying, because the school would, otherwise, have no knowledge over the fact that one of their own students is being bullyied, because it is not like the school monitors over every single corner of their student's outside life.
Jazmine said...
ReplyDeleteI think Eric was a psychopath and that label fit him well because he had all the characteristics of one. It definitely helped the investigators (and the readers) understand Erics frame of mind.
Eric's "frame of mind" is only one of the aspects leading up to the killings. I agree with you that he was definitely a psychopath, but other things may have contributed as well. His ability to go unpunished for so long committing crimes and deceiving people into believing his lies also helped.
5. Eric and Dylan settled on a time and a place a year before the attack. Did this seem like rather long term planning for these two, given what we've seen of their failed plans? Are you surprised that they were able to carry this off without slipping up and letting someone else know about it in advance? Both boys wrote about NBK (as they called it) in their yearbooks. Dylan even goes so far at to mention revenge in the commons. Why do you think no one picked up on this? Do you think they were toying with people by providing as much information as they did ahead of time?
ReplyDelete- that part was surprising to me, how could these guys keep a secret like killing everyone in the school hidden from everyone else. I think the reason why it worked was because both guys were pretty smart, and would know better than to blab, and tell people about this. also the parents never went through their stuff so it was easier for them to hide something like this from them. i think if people did find out they wouldn't have taken them seriously. Wouldn't believe they were capable of something like this.
2. The ultimate question that 'Psychopath' leads to is: Do you think Eric Harris was a psychopath? Why or why not? Do you think the label is useful or simply stigmatizing?
ReplyDeleteI do think Eric was a psychopath because of his actions throughout the book and all the background information that is provided. This label allows the reader to have less sympathy for him, but more for Dylan.
3. The students of Columbine were repulsed by the use of their school name as a proper noun to describe school shootings or school violence. Does Cullen's book help or harm their cause?
ReplyDeleteI don't think it helps their cause.The book goes into detail about the massacre and the investigation that went along with it. By doing this, the book hurts the cause of the students.
Sam Said...
ReplyDelete4. Analyze the rhetoric in the sympathy letters from the Harrises and Klebolds?
In the letter from the Klebolds particularly, the diction stands out to me: they apoligize for "the role" that Dylan played in the death of Cassie Bernall. They make sure to use the word "our: before "wounded hearts." All of these details seem intentional, the diction is humble but does not take responsibility, having a more "sharing in grief together" tone than an "I'm so sorry for what my son did."
I believe that if the Klebolds had merely apologized for what their son, Dylan, had done, it would cause a negative effect over the Bernall's, mainly because to just plainly apologize is rather a sign of disrespect and carelessness. Therefor the way she phrased her letter was very crucial for the apology to be accpeted.
8. 'Who Owns The The Tragedy' is a chapter in which Eric and Dylan don't appear. Do you think that focusing on someone other than them provides a relief to the reader? Do you think Dave intentionally gave the reader breathing space here?
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, this chapter provided some breathing room. Dave Cullen probably did this to focus on other aspects of the story than the actualy massacre itself.
Jake Levin said...
ReplyDeleteMy answer to this question is that Eric Harris is, without a doubt, a psychopath. Not only does he perfectly fit the description given by Dr. Fuselier, he acted out and made irrational decisions that another psychopath would have made. He tries to put on a mask, covering up his true intentions, solely to get under your skin, in order to complete the horrid plans he has had in store for quite sometime. Rarely does he improvise, therefor, he plans his things out well before the date set for the instance. Though well fit for Eric, psychopath is not really a valid title for all people that comitt crimes to the extent that Eric and Dylan both comitted, many people have didnt motives, while some a little more sensible than others, they are not all the same, meaning there should be different levels of mental problems.
- i completely agree, eric was definitely a psychopath he hid it pretty well but if you go through his journals, his ideas it is pretty evident that he resembles the characteristics of a psychopath.
4. Analyze the rhetoric in the sympathy letters from the Harrises and Klebolds?
ReplyDeleteI think this letter was an appeal to pathos. It was the best way they could reach out to the families. This drew the reader in and also allowed them to give some sympathy to Eric and mostly Dylan.
Chanan said...
ReplyDelete2. The ultimate question that 'Psychopath' leads to is: Do you think Eric Harris was a psychopath? Why or why not? Do you think the label is useful or simply stigmatizing?
I do think Eric was a psychopath because of his actions throughout the book and all the background information that is provided. This label allows the reader to have less sympathy for him, but more for Dylan.
Because Eric was the definition of psychopath, and that Dr. Fuselier claimed that Eric used Dylan, an emotional person of lesser power, to go through with the plans, mainly is the reason that we tend to sympathize for Dylan, while hating everything Eric Harris did, up to the point of infamy.
Chanan said...
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, this chapter provided some breathing room. Dave Cullen probably did this to focus on other aspects of the story than the actualy massacre itself.
- i agree it was good to have a break. I like dave cullens style where he focuses intently on the tragedy and the cold facts, then takes a break to focus on something else.
6. Again, you may have noticed many news stories lately covering cyber bullying and other types of bullying. How far should a school go to protect bullying victims? If someone is being tormented on Facebook, YouTube, etc. by classmates, is it the school's responsibility to step in?
ReplyDeleteIt is safe to say that it is impossible to 100% prevent cyber bullying. The school can't stop it. Yes, they can block websites, but they can't monitor what's going on outside of school. If a teacher is notified, they should step in to stop the bullying. On the other hand, it is the students responsibility to report it.
ELizabeth said...
ReplyDeleteYes, I do think that Eric was a psychopath. He had the characteristics of one and since the beginning of the book, the reader could tell that something was off about him. I think that this label was useful. It helped get a better understanding of why he did what he did.
- i completely agree, thats the big question which was why he did this horrible thing, and what helps to answer that was he was sick mentally, it did help us get a better understanding of him.
Jazmine said...
ReplyDelete6. Again, you may have noticed many news stories lately covering cyber bullying and other types of bullying. How far should a school go to protect bullying victims? If someone is being tormented on Facebook, YouTube, etc. by classmates, is it the school's responsibility to step in?
I think the school should protect bullying victims as far as providing some sort of (other than counselors because some students don't go to them) outlet for them to vent about whats going on. I think that it is somewhat of the schools responsibilty to step in and control the situation, but the school can only go so far. I definitley believe that if students are being bullied and their parents know about it then notify the school, they then have the responsibilty to take care of the situation and not ignore it.
I agree with you that parents should step in and alert the school after discovering the harrassment of their child, because this is really the only way to prevent what happened at Columbine High school. I also disagree with you when you say the schools might ignore it. The Administration at the High school did not act on the problem with Dylan and Eric, only because they were not aware fo it, not ignoring it.
Jazmine, you said...
ReplyDeleteI think the school should protect bullying victims as far as providing some sort of (other than counselors because some students don't go to them) outlet for them to vent about whats going on. I think that it is somewhat of the schools responsibilty to step in and control the situation, but the school can only go so far. I definitley believe that if students are being bullied and their parents know about it then notify the school, they then have the responsibilty to take care of the situation and not ignore it.
I agree with your first comment. Schools should do more to prevent cyber bullying, but the problem is what all can they really do? I think that either way, it's still going to happen.
Shelby, you said...
ReplyDeleteI did find their planning extremely different from anything else they've done. It surprises me that they planned so much in advance. I think it was easy for them to keep it to themselves though because they don't have many people they would tell. I think that they may have been toying with people, hinting around about what they were about to do just to have a little fun.
I was also surprised that they planned so far in advance. What was sad is that they planned ahead, but the bombs failed. A year in advance makes me wonder if they were ever considering backing out.
Chanan said...
ReplyDelete6. Again, you may have noticed many news stories lately covering cyber bullying and other types of bullying. How far should a school go to protect bullying victims? If someone is being tormented on Facebook, YouTube, etc. by classmates, is it the school's responsibility to step in?
It is safe to say that it is impossible to 100% prevent cyber bullying. The school can't stop it. Yes, they can block websites, but they can't monitor what's going on outside of school. If a teacher is notified, they should step in to stop the bullying. On the other hand, it is the students responsibility to report it.
I agree that it is not possible to completely whipe out cyber bullying, because people will inevitably find a way to harrass those they do not agree with. Once notified, school official can step in and help, but not insure, incidents from happening. I definitely agree with the fact that it is the students responsibility to bring the problem up in the first place.
Jason W, you said...
ReplyDelete- Cullen's book definitely helps the cause. The title of the book is referencing the physical place, not exactly the act like the kids were getting angry about. When people hear the word Columbine they will only think of death, and tragedy, not for the positive aspects of the school.
I didn't really think about it like this. I saw it as hurting the cause because of the media. But I see your point!
Elizabeth, you said...
ReplyDeleteCyber bullying is definately becoming more of a problem, but I think that schools should not step in unless the bullying is through the school or happens at school. For example, the school should not step in if a child is being bullied through facebook because it is not happening at school. It is a problem that should be dealt with at the childs home.
I see your point, but at the same time sometimes school is the only place victims can get help. They may be afraid to go to their parents or their parents may be completely oblivious to the bullying.
Chanan said...
ReplyDelete4. Analyze the rhetoric in the sympathy letters from the Harrises and Klebolds?
I think this letter was an appeal to pathos. It was the best way they could reach out to the families. This drew the reader in and also allowed them to give some sympathy to Eric and mostly Dylan.
I, too, believe that this was the best way to apologize for their son's sins, rather than just plainly sayin "I'm sorry". By Cullen giving the letter, it allows the reader to understand what kind of person Susan Klebold was, a nice and caring person, not an evil, satanic woman, like the public and media would like to see.
Stephen said...
ReplyDeleteWayne Harris’ parallelism in the first three bullets serves to group those points together as problems that must be solved. The asyndeton in bullet 4 “TV, phone, computer, lights out, job, social” emphasizes that Wayne had many ideas for punishment to try to fix Eric’s habits. Honestly, I’m shocked that Eric could possibly have gotten away with getting the guns and making the bombs when Wayne was keeping such a close eye on him. This just shows that Wayne tried to fight Eric’s psychopathy rather than contributing to it.
- i agree, Wayne had many ideas for punishment to try to fix Eric’s habits. i like your analysis on wayne. it did seem like he was trying to fight eric's psychopathy rather contribute to it
Jordanna, you said...
ReplyDeleteYes, I think he was a psychopath. I think that he didn't have any emotions at all and he liked to decieve people and that is what psychopaths do. I don't think the label is useful. In some ways I think that it makes it more clear the reason he did that, but I think it is still stigmatizing.
I see what you mean about him not having any emotions. He did not care about anyone or anything. Well, he didn't even really care for himself. He was fed up with this world and was definately a psychopath.
Shelby Dover said...
ReplyDeleteI did find their planning extremely different from anything else they've done. It surprises me that they planned so much in advance. I think it was easy for them to keep it to themselves though because they don't have many people they would tell. I think that they may have been toying with people, hinting around about what they were about to do just to have a little fun.
- i agree it surprised me that they planned sooo far in advanced. Its crazy that they knew one year in advanced the day they were going to die. The only way they could go unsuspecting is if they toyed with people. then people wouldn't take them seriously.
3. The students of Columbine were repulsed by the use of their school name as a proper noun to describe school shootings or school violence. Does Cullen's book help or harm their cause?
ReplyDeleteDave Cullen gave the title of this book Columbine to cleverly express a double meaning; one being the dreadful tragedy, and the other, name of the distraught high school. Throughout the book, the term is used in both cases. Cullen more frequently refers to Columbine as an incident. However, he does not oppose the cause of Columbine students. Although he generally refers to Columbine as an incident, he overshadows it with his vivid portrayal of the community, especially the students. Appealing to pathos, his accurate descriptions of student’s reactions to the incident express a sense of sympathy for them.
Stephen said…
ReplyDeleteEric matches up very well with the psychopathy checklist. He was popular in school but had no sense of empathy for other people. As we can see from his journals, he did feel anger and strong hate, and he had the “staggering ego and sense of superiority” (243) that eventually led him to kill. Furthermore, Eric had no feelings of love, grief, or hope for his own future, but he was able to fake these “emotions” effectively without overdoing it because he was so manipulative. Kathy and Wayne did not abuse or neglect Eric, unless you consider the punishments Wayne inflicted on Eric (taking away his computer, for example) to be abuse, so I think Eric was a psychopath who was “born to be bad” (241). I don’t think Eric’s childhood could have been one of the “violent upbringings” that cause psychopaths to become worse, so, except for the possibility that Wayne’s military background caused Eric’s thoughts to turn violent, Eric’s upbringing seems to have played a relatively minor role in his behavior.
I said much of the same thing, although there are just two things I wanted to point out. I’m fairly sure I read somewhere in this chapter that psychopathy can be made worse by an unstable home situation. The fact that Eric moved around all the time as a kid due to his father’s military background could have made the situation a little bit worse, though I don’t think that it was a direct cause. I think that Eric was going to kill someone at some point, it was only a matter of time. I actually did consider that Wayne could have been abusive, but I don’t think there were enough signs. We only have the information from Eric’s journals, but I feel like Eric would have at least hinted at abuse, if not stated it outright.
10. In 'Who Owns,' Cullen details the struggle between the school and the media upon its reopening. Does the media seem unnecessarily insensitive to you or are they just trying to do their job? Where do your sympathies lie here - with the parents, the media, or is it mixed?
ReplyDeleteThe way the media is portrayed does make it (them?) seem rather insensitive and emotionless. They were just doing their job, but the way that the some of the reporters were portrayed in this chapter reinforced a selfish image. I would say that my sympathy is with the parents as opposed to the media due to what I read, but it is more of the students/victims I sympathize with (since it is them that the media is focusing on the most).
Clay said…
ReplyDelete“Throughout the aftermath of the shootings at Columbine, Dave Cullen has portrayed the media as extremely insensitive and cruel. He explains the media's exaggeration of what unfolded inside and its neglect for consideration towards the emotions of the parents. The parents of the children killed are surely to be sympathized with. The media has only worsened the blow on Littleton's pride.”
Yes, I agree that the media was cruel inadvertently to the people of Littleton, but I don’t think it’s fair to place all of the blame on them. The media wouldn’t relentlessly hound people for information if we, the consumers, didn’t hunger for it ourselves. We might as well blame ourselves- it’s none of our business what people’s most intimate thoughts about their personal tragedies are. If we didn’t have a hunger for gossip and a tendency to butt ourselves into other peoples’ business, the townspeople wouldn’t be in the situation in the first place. Also, I think that some individuals in the media just want to find the truth and express their opinion. Not every reporter is a bloodhound starving for the next greatest story (although I’m sure some are). It’s easy to label the media as the victims here, but if the situation was flipped and it was the Wheeler High Massacre, I’m sure the people of Littleton would be pressed to their TVs, waiting to hear the most recent stories.
James said…
ReplyDelete“Human resilience is something which can overcome even the strongest inhibitions towards progress. Patrick's ability to learn to reuse his leg and to learn to talk over again speak volumes on the hope which he had for himself. As far as Patrick's healing process, by forgiving the shooters for the crime which they committed, he lifted a burden from his backs allowing him to continue his work with less effort. He was probably able to forgive easier than his mother because of this as well. Rather than dwell on the past, all Patrick wanted was to look forward and try to make something for himself. His mother was still thinking about everything as a bad situation caused by the shooters rather than working towards a better life for her son.”
I like that you specifically said that Patrick’s mother was occupied by her anger. I’m going to take it a step further (or rather just restate it more clearly). I said something like this in my response to this question, but you put it in words more fluently. I think that dwelling on anger and hatred and other negative emotions is a waste of time. She could be working on ways to help her son, and I’m sure she did, but her anger distracted her. Being angry at dead people will never accomplish anything; it cannot do anything constructive. Patrick wasn’t distracted by rage and so he could focus on the present, on taking control of his life. I think that we can all learn a lesson on letting go of negative feelings, as well as working hard, from Patrick.
6. Again, you may have noticed many news stories lately covering cyber bullying and other types of bullying. How far should a school go to protect bullying victims? If someone is being tormented on Facebook, YouTube, etc. by classmates, is it the school's responsibility to step in?
ReplyDeleteI think that the best that the school can do is respond to the bullying that they are informed of. Having school staff or who ever it may be checking up on students' online social life may bring up many issues dealing with privacy and just cause more worry. It is also not necessarily the school's RESPONSIBILITY to handle cyber bullying, but rather a more effective way of stopping it.
Khayl said…
ReplyDelete“I believe that it does. That chapter did make me tear at the emotions displayed and how empathetic i felt to all the people of Columbine High. I think Dave did intentionally make a break there for the reader to be able to unwind from all the horror they felt from reading about these two boys minds and ideas. this chapter symbolized a turning point for this tragedy and that was uplifting to experience through words”
I agree with you. I think that Cullen balanced anecdotes of horror and hope to give the audience a break, and also because I feel like part of the purpose of the book isn’t just to tell truths about Columbine, but also to show the tenacity of the people. The citizens of Littleton endured so much tragedy and yet still managed to come out on top. I think that Cullen wanted to show how admirable they were for this, or at least how much he admired them for it.
2. The ultimate question that 'Psychopath' leads to is: Do you think Eric Harris was a psychopath? Why or why not? Do you think the label is useful or simply stigmatizing?
ReplyDeleteAfter finishing this chapter, I think it is safe to agree that Eric did have some sort of mental issue. His rage toward the world for no apparent reason was already a big clue that something was wrong. The label given to Eric now somewhat proves why he was the "brains behind the operation." He appears to be more of the kind of person to want to pull off a massacre like he did in comparison with Dylan, who was just lost in his own world.
5. Eric and Dylan settled on a time and a place a year before the attack. Did this seem like rather long term planning for these two, given what we've seen of their failed plans? Are you surprised that they were able to carry this off without slipping up and letting someone else know about it in advance? Both boys wrote about NBK (as they called it) in their yearbooks. Dylan even goes so far at to mention revenge in the commons. Why do you think no one picked up on this? Do you think they were toying with people by providing as much information as they did ahead of time?
ReplyDeleteTheir thorough planning began far before the event would actually take place. This preparation reflected their strong hatred, specifically Eric’s, toward the inferiors and longing to eradicate them. Also, it is incredible that two teenagers can uphold and conceal such a devious plan over such a long period of time. Especially since they cleverly warned people of the wrath they would soon suffer. These indications proved to be too insignificant for anyone to take heed of. Eric and Dylan understood that their leads were not perceptible to the inferiors, only making them look more stupid.
6. Again, you may have noticed many news stories lately covering cyber bullying and other types of bullying. How far should a school go to protect bullying victims? If someone is being tormented on Facebook, YouTube, etc. by classmates, is it the school's responsibility to step in?
ReplyDeleteIt is not the school’s responsibility to oversee cyber bullying or protect their students from being verbally bullied over the Internet. If a student is being bullied he/she should notify a parent. It is the parent’s obligation to handle the situation. A school’s responsibility may come into play now by addressing the situation to the bully and contacting his parents. If situations are more drastic or there seems to be no resolution, then authorities should be contacted and the ordeal can be presented lawfully.
Sammie k said…
ReplyDelete“The school already has choices available about bullying. We enforce the "No Tolerance" rule, and if a student is being bullied all they have to do is refer them to an administrator or get their parents to refer them, and the bully has to face to consequences - if the offense continues as determined by a hearing, the bully is liable for expulsion for at least one calendar year. The school's policy is already involved enough, bullying outside of school is the responsibility of the individual being bullied to speak with an adult about.”
The only problem with our No Tolerance policy is that it doesn’t extend outside the school. Cyber bullying is a very real topic that is becoming a big issue with the rise of social networking like facebook. People can be really torn down online, especially by the vicious preteen middle school girls. I don’t think there is anyone who can be quite as cruel as the “popular” middle school girl. The problem is that there’s such as fine distinction between what’s bullying outside of school and what’s bullying inside of school. Sure, the kids post online after school, but the negative feelings still go in and out of the school every day. I don’t think that schools should start monitoring facebook, but I do think they need to do something to keep it under control.
8. 'Who Owns The Tragedy' is a chapter in which Eric and Dylan don't appear. Do you think that focusing on someone other than them provides a relief to the reader? Do you think Dave intentionally gave the reader breathing space here?
ReplyDeleteThere are several chapters throughout the book that mention Eric or Dylan little to none. Cullen is not trying to relieve his audience of their presence. Instead, he is only attempting to cover every aspect of the story and sometimes Eric and Dylan are not the main focus. As a reader, I enjoy the chapters that are based around Eric and Dylan. They are usually suspenseful and interesting.
10. In 'Who Owns,' Cullen details the struggle between the school and the media upon its reopening. Does the media seem unnecessarily insensitive to you or are they just trying to do their job? Where do your sympathies lie here - with the parents, the media, or is it mixed?
ReplyDeleteThe media seems incredibly insensible to the parents involved in the Columbine incident. It is understood that it is their job to retrieve information but their dedication was overaggressive. Their eagerness to retrieve and vent information was frequent and grew annoying. Even if they were simply fulfilling their job, they crossed the line by disgracing those that were strongly affected by the Columbine incident. Although their portrayal as the ones that spread rumors and provide misconceptions about Columbine may be a bit over exaggerated, it is not far from the truth.
1. How do you feel Eric matches up with the psychopathy checklist as described for juveniles on page 243? Which of Eric's behaviors exemplify the list Dr. Fuselier checks off on page 239? Given what you've read in the chapter 'psychopath' do you think Eric's parents played a role in his behavior - or was he 'born bad'?
ReplyDeleteThe characteristics/behavioral patterns for a psychopath fit Eric just about right. He was far from a normal teenager in the way that he wrote about people and what/why he wanted to do inhumane things to them. However, insane was overdramatic, since he still had normal qualities to himself rather than (oh, I don't know, "spazzing out"). I don't believe that his parents deserve any of the blame for Eric's condition. Genetics maybe, but his parents raised their son to the best of their ability; they were just naive to his later plans
2. The ultimate question that 'Psychopath' leads to is: Do you think Eric Harris was a psychopath? Why or why not? Do you think the label is useful or simply stigmatizing?
ReplyDelete-Eric Harris was absolutely a psychopath. He matched all of the characteristics of a psychopath perfectly. He also seemed unable to feel normal human emotions, and his actions prove that. I think the label is useful. Especially in situations such as Columbine, where if the SWAT team had known Eric was a psychopath and didn't have normal motives, perhaps they would have acted faster.
3. The students of Columbine were repulsed by the use of their school name as a proper noun to describe school shootings or school violence. Does Cullen's book help or harm their cause?
ReplyDelete-I think that Cullen's book actually helps their cause, despite the title "Columbine". Years ago, when I heard Columbine, I literally thought it was a word interchangeable for school shooting, and I had no idea that it was a specific school or case of a school shooting. Cullen's book sheds light on the actual story of Columbine, and he goes out of his way to distinguish Columbine as a school when he describes it before, during, and after the shooting.
5. Eric and Dylan settled on a time and a place a year before the attack. Did this seem like rather long term planning for these two, given what we've seen of their failed plans? Are you surprised that they were able to carry this off without slipping up and letting someone else know about it in advance? Both boys wrote about NBK (as they called it) in their yearbooks. Dylan even goes so far at to mention revenge in the commons. Why do you think no one picked up on this? Do you think they were toying with people by providing as much information as they did ahead of time?
ReplyDelete-Given Eric's desperation for a large-scale, catastrophic massacre, I am not surprised that he chose a date so far in advance. He realized how much planning it would require in order to reap maximum havoc on the school. I am actually extremely shocked that they were able to carry their plan out given the clues everyone was given of their intentions. Perhaps since I am younger and have grown up with the zero tolerance policy throughout my entire school experience, I am just not used to so many threats going unnoticed. My generation tends to get in trouble for sticking two fingers out that look like a gun, or bringing a plastic disposable knife to school to cut a birthday cake. I guess in Eric and Dylan's generation, threats weren't taken as seriously and could be overlooked. Still, it baffles me how blatant their intentions were and that no one noticed. Even worse, when people began to notice frightening things hinting towards the shooting, such as the Brownses and Dylan's teacher, the police did little to investigate into the matter. I definitely think they were toying with people. Eric bragged about how obvious their plans were and people's lack of suspicion. He enjoyed being able to pull the wool over everyone's eyes with the most unlikely odds.
6. Again, you may have noticed many news stories lately covering cyber bullying and other types of bullying. How far should a school go to protect bullying victims? If someone is being tormented on Facebook, YouTube, etc. by classmates, is it the school's responsibility to step in?
ReplyDelete-I think that bullying to some degree is inevitable. However, when it becomes a significant issue, such as in Brooks' case, or even in less severe cases, everything possible should be done to prevent it. What saddens me is that Brooks' case was largely ignored by the Jeffco authorities. Kids have a hard enough time growing up, and they shouldn't have to deal with being harassed. Schools should definitely notify the parents when they notice cyberbullying, and if it is something as serious as threats, then the law should be involved. However, since a lot of these cases go on undetected until it's too late, I think the best thing the school can do is provide programs that help the kids deal with it and come forward when they need help.
9. In 'Who Owns,' Cullen writes further about the recovery of Patrick Ireland. What do you feel we can learn about human resiliance from his story? Do you feel that the forgiveness that he espoused is necessary for complete healing? Why do you think it was more difficult for Patrick's mother to forgive the killers than Patrick?
ReplyDelete-Just like in "The Glass Castle", like Jeannette Walls, Patrick had to put his past behind him, forgive, and avoid dwelling on past situations that can't be fixed in order to move forward with his life. Forgiving was more important for Patrick's sake than the killers' sake. While it obviously wouldn't do Eric or Dylan any good it allowed Patrick to maintain a positive mindset when he needed his focus the most. It was probably much more difficult for Patrick's mother to forgive the killer's than Patrick. As a mother, she undoubtedly has strong maternal, mama bear-like instincts to protect her children. Even when Eric and Dylan weren't around she probably has extreme anger towards them, especially since they placed her in a position where she was unable to protect her baby. Also, Patrick keeps himself busy working towards getting his life back to normal, whereas Kathy is left alone with her thoughts without being able to fix the situation. She dwells on the past and her failure to protect her child (even when it was impossible) whereas Patrick has the opportunity to make progress towards a better life.
Jordanna said...
ReplyDelete"Yes, I think that having a chapter where they don't talk about Dylan or Eric at all is a relief to the reader. In some ways it lightens the mood and makes the reader have somewhat of a breather. The anecdote about how Patrick was improving in his speech makes the reader hopeful and optimistic. I think he did it intentionally to make the story flow better and to have the reader in a more optimistic mood."
-I completely agree, I think that it takes a load off to get outside of the minds of the killers, even though I think it is more painful emotionally. The normal, human emotions expressed by the survivors is comfortable territory in comparison with the psychopathic mindset and depressive attitude of Dylan. I also think that by switching back and forth between both perspectives reminds the reader that both parts are intertwined.
Stephen said...
ReplyDelete“In today’s world, if a student gave even remotely similar signs that he was planning some sort of mass murder, somebody would notice and notify the police, who would take the report seriously and attempt to thwart the student’s plans. A year in advance seems like very long-term planning for Dylan, but, given Eric’s strong desire for revenge, it doesn’t seem all that strange for Eric. In fact, Eric’s meticulous planning leads me to believe that the failure of the bombs was a divine miracle, since it prevented many times more deaths. Eric and Dylan believed that everybody else was stupid, so they gave a bunch of people little hints “to show us how stupid we all are” (258).”
- Yes. Eric and Dylan’s main intention of revealing their devious information was to “show us how stupid we all are.” Their early planning was surprising in Dylan’s case, since he was not as involved in the plan as Eric was. I disagree that the failure of the bombs was a miracle. Yet, it may have been a miracle that Eric poorly wired them, as noticed by the SWAT.
Jazmine said...
ReplyDelete“I think the school should protect bullying victims as far as providing some sort of (other than counselors because some students don't go to them) outlet for them to vent about whats going on. I think that it is somewhat of the schools responsibilty to step in and control the situation, but the school can only go so far. I definitley believe that if students are being bullied and their parents know about it then notify the school, they then have the responsibilty to take care of the situation and not ignore it.”
- I have never heard of anyone going to a school counselor to address their problems; maybe in elementary school when small problems seemed immense, but not in high school where dilemmas seem to linger. I agree with your idea of handling a cyber bullying situation, by first notifying parents and then the school if necessary. Further steps, like contacting the law, could be taken if the circumstances seem more sever.
Jordanna said...
ReplyDelete“Yes, I think he was a psychopath. I think that he didn't have any emotions at all and he liked to decieve people and that is what psychopaths do. I don't think the label is useful. In some ways I think that it makes it more clear the reason he did that, but I think it is still stigmatizing."
- I agree. Eric’s strongest characteristic of a psychopath is his ability to effectively deceive people and feign emotions. Dave Cullen presents enough information for the reader to make a conclusion about Eric’s condition. Having taken psychology my freshman year, know his information is accurate. In essence, the label is useful in better clarifying Eric’s motives.
sammie k said...
ReplyDelete“The book's title suits it perfectly, but it certainly harms the cause of dissociating the school's name with the disaster. Simply from recent experiences, I've been asked "What are you reading?" and when I reply "Columbine," the inquirer knows exactly what I'm referring to. Cullen considers the students' preference by bringing up the fact that they don't want "Columbine" to mean the massacre, but titling his book with the word is counterproductive toward the students' cause.”
- I believe Dave Cullen titled this book understanding that the title is controversial. Although “Columbine” is commonly referred to as the incident, it is also name of the high school. Cullen’s mentioning of the student’s concern serves as a hint towards his sympathy for him. His compelling stories of their expression of feelings represent his understanding of their cause.
Khayl said...
ReplyDelete“I believe that it does. That chapter did make me tear at the emotions displayed and how empathetic i felt to all the people of Columbine High. I think Dave did intentionally make a break there for the reader to be able to unwind from all the horror they felt from reading about these two boys minds and ideas. this chapter symbolized a turning point for this tragedy and that was uplifting to experience through words”
- Well, in fact, this chapter also seems to display the emotions of the people of Columbine. Cullen’s additional focuses were only results in his attempt to cover the story from every view possible. Also, I enjoy the chapters that tap into Eric and Dylan’s minds because I am curious of their mind frames. It is understandable how someone could be horrified by reading about the ideas of these two boys. However, I believe if they were, they would have stopped reading Columbine a long time ago, or never picked the book up at all.
Stephen said...
ReplyDelete"Though I do believe that cyber bullying is a problem, it isn’t the school’s responsibility to protect bullying victims unless the bully is using a school computer to torment the victim. If the student is using a school computer, then the school is best equipped to end the bullying by taking computer privileges away from the perpetrator and calling the bully’s parents, who would punish the bully in one of several ways, possibly by restricting Internet use. It is highly unlikely that someone would try to cyber-bully another student using school computers, since cyber bullying would be discovered on about the second or third post (there’s no privacy on school computers). If the bullying occurs on a home computer, the victim will probably tell their parents, who would then call the parents of the bully. There is also the chance that the person being bullied would contact the bully’s parents directly. The school has no right to intrude on anything that happens on home computers unless those involved and their parents cannot solve the issue on their own. If the problem persists or gets worse despite efforts from parents, or if the parents don’t even care, then the school can and should get involved, even if the bullying takes place on home computers."
-I disagree, I think that, just like any individual person, the school has the right to interfere. If they notice cyberbullying and don't at least mention it to the parents, and something horrible comes as a result, then it was something that could have been prevented. The parents can then handle it how they want to. Too many people forget the simple things we learn as a child (Ex: The golden rule). These basic principles should stick with your life. Not only does it help whoever was being bullied, it is better for the bully to learn sooner rather than later that they won't be able to navigate life easily if they continue to treat people so cruely. In Eric's case, he probably wouldn't have cared, and he made threats which were reported to the police by the Brownses. In that matter, it was the Jeffco authorities' fault for not further investigating and pursuing punishment.
Jason Wani said...
ReplyDelete"- I think he fits it perfectly. he shows the exact same symptoms of this mental disorder. "Appaling failure of empathy" fits eric very well. He was born bad, his parents gave him a good environment, whatever was wrong with him had to have been inherited, not learnt."
-I completely agree, I think that a normal, mentally healthy person would have developed just fine in the Harris household. However, Eric was doomed from the beginning, due to the fact that he was a psychopath. Although, I'm not saying the Harrises couldn't have helped the situation. Had they taken more steps to look into Eric's activities, they would have found all of the evidence that he left behind for the world. After all, he was cooking Napalm in their very own kitchen!!!
Jordanna said...
ReplyDelete"Bullying is a growing problem today, especially on the internet. As far as the school goes, I think they should protect bullying as far as in the school. At home, it is at home. I think that if the school interfering isn't the best idea. I think they should do their best to prevent it in school."
-I wouldn't say they should go out of their way to hunt down cyber bullying, but I think if they are aware of it. Say, a teacher comes across it, it would be her right to bring it up with the parents. Also, when it becomes threatening, I would absolutely say they should interfere whether it is at school or not.
Chanan said...
ReplyDelete"I do think Eric was a psychopath because of his actions throughout the book and all the background information that is provided. This label allows the reader to have less sympathy for him, but more for Dylan."
-For some reason, I still really have any more sympathy for Dylan. Maybe because he was born normal and was able to access the feelings that prevent most people from killing. He suppressed those feelings to simply go along with Eric's plan, whereas Eric didn't have them to begin with. I'm definitely not saying that I feel any sympathy towards Eric because he was born a psychopath though. He couldn't even access the emotion of sympathy...so I find it impossible to feel bad for someone who is incapable of feeling bad for anyone else.
*I meant to say "For some reason I still really DON'T have any more sympathy for Dylan"
ReplyDelete9. In 'Who Owns,' Cullen writes further about the recovery of Patrick Ireland. What do you feel we can learn about human resiliance from his story? Do you feel that the forgiveness that he espoused is necessary for complete healing? Why do you think it was more difficult for Patrick's mother to forgive the killers than Patrick?
ReplyDeleteIt takes a great feat of strength to be able to forgive someone who disabled half of you in one careless incident. Patrick Ireland did just that, despite how soon he forgave Dylan and Eric and how enraged his mother was, he continued on, wanting to continue his life.It would have to be more difficult for Mrs. Ireland to forgive than Patrick because that was her son who is now crippled and need aid to accomplish ordinary human tasks. Patrick just sees it as an obstacle that can be overcome with some work.
Shelby Dover said...
ReplyDeleteI did find their planning extremely different from anything else they've done. It surprises me that they planned so much in advance. I think it was easy for them to keep it to themselves though because they don't have many people they would tell. I think that they may have been toying with people, hinting around about what they were about to do just to have a little fun.
I was thinking the same thing. To know so much about how and when you are supposed to complete a mass murder and suicide so far ahead of time is completely strange and odd. Since Eric did like to toy around with people, it wouldn't be surprising if he went around boasting his plans just to see the kind of response he would work up.
Chanan said...
ReplyDelete"I do think Eric was a psychopath because of his actions throughout the book and all the background information that is provided. This label allows the reader to have less sympathy for him, but more for Dylan."
The "Psychopath" chapter did in fact made Eric's condition very obvious. However, I don't think that it was included to make the reader have more sympathy for Dylan. I think Cullen just included that particular chapter because it explained Eric's behavior/writings and gave the reader a different perspective on this killer.
Lucus said...
ReplyDeleteThe media seems incredibly insensible to the parents involved in the Columbine incident. It is understood that it is their job to retrieve information but their dedication was overaggressive. Their eagerness to retrieve and vent information was frequent and grew annoying. Even if they were simply fulfilling their job, they crossed the line by disgracing those that were strongly affected by the Columbine incident. Although their portrayal as the ones that spread rumors and provide misconceptions about Columbine may be a bit over exaggerated, it is not far from the truth.
I completely agree with you. The media took it to the next level by trying to pursue information, even when the parents/community members "blockaded" them from being nosy. It was very disrespctful and rude of the media to continue to press for access to the rally, even it was only their job to do so. I would feel rather annoyed as well if I were in the same situation.
Chanan said...
ReplyDeleteIt is safe to say that it is impossible to 100% prevent cyber bullying. The school can't stop it. Yes, they can block websites, but they can't monitor what's going on outside of school. If a teacher is notified, they should step in to stop the bullying. On the other hand, it is the students responsibility to report it.
I agree with you. The school isn't completely responsible for keeping up with and preventing all bullying that occurs in and out of school. It is the responsibility of the students/others who witness the bullying to report it to the school or an adult to at least try to end the bullying. There would be way too many people complaining about invasion of privacy if the school were to keep track of the students' online history.