Violent Writing
I find it interesting that in the search for explanations into the Virginia Tech tragedy that everyone is focusing on the violent fiction of the shooter. It is only natural to want answers, but it often disgusts me that in the search for meaning, people focus in on these things.
I remember when Columbine happened, there was an uproar over the fact that the teen shooters had played the computer game DOOM. Yeah? So did millions of other teens who… *gasp* actually stayed sane and somehow managed to NOT shoot up their school!
Millions of people write or have written violent stories, just as millions play violent video games. It doesn’t even come close to explaining why a young man decided to kill a bunch of his fellow students.
Now any student who creatively expresses themselves by writing violent stories is going to be suspect as someone who might go on a rampage. I guarantee that violent fiction itself is going to become a central topic in the coming months.
I suppose it’s only natural for a society in shock and frustration over senseless deaths be motivated to go on a witch hunt. I know lots of people are hurting, and in addition, searching for answers. But let’s keep the search rational. There’s no need to knee-jerk into the realm of alarmism and censorship. But unfortunately everytime something like this happens, that’s exactly what we as a society do.
Cho Seung-Hui obviously had serious mental and emotional problems. Why can’t we leave it at that? What does his writing, or any writing, have to do with what his decision to mass murder? He made a condemnable choice of premeditated murder, and that’s all we really need to know. Why?
Because he was an unstable person. It’s not a great answer, but it’s probably the only rational one we’re going to get.
Trackbacks/Pings
Leave a reply
Comments
April 18th, 2007 at 6:08 pm
I agree. Every action that this guy did, wrote, or said is going to be put under a fine-toothed comb, but it’s all useless. Everything that he has done, wrote, or said has been done by millions of other people who did not go on killing spree’s. If people are going to use this guy’s crappy cliched violent writing as evidence that he was going to kill over 30 people, than they have to explain and defend why Shakespeare and thousands of other writers didn’t do likewise.
You’re right, he was just plain unstable; and you can’t always prevent unstable people from doing what they want to do.
April 20th, 2007 at 4:37 am
Amen. He’s a nutjob…that’s what we should be focusing on in regards to him. I about had a heart attack when I heard the news throwing a fit over his creative writing…ignorance is bliss I guess…
April 24th, 2007 at 2:27 am
Yeah, I can kinda see your point. I myself write very, very, very violent stories. One was about a hardcore detective who shot someone three times in the process of a carjacking and I haven’t felt the need to go and shoot some people. I have had the urge to severely hurt someone because they hurt me, but that is to be expected. That guy who shot up those people is a f*@#king nutjob and should be condemned to an eternity of suffering but! You shouldn’t condemn the genre of violent stories, just because one violent writer was f*@#ked up doesn’t mean the rest of us are. Violent writing is just a ventilation method, this guy gave violent stories a bad name. What a moron.
Lloyd Fhuerie