Take a photo of a barcode or cover
6 reviews for:
Ceremonial Violence: Understanding Columbine and Other School Rampage Shootings
Jonathan Fast
3.53 AVERAGE
6 reviews for:
Ceremonial Violence: Understanding Columbine and Other School Rampage Shootings
Jonathan Fast
3.53 AVERAGE
carolineinthelibrary's review
challenging
dark
tense
slow-paced
2.0
This book had quite a lot to unpack but at the same time, didn’t really feel like it said much. While I don’t want to knock it too much as it’s definitely (and unfortunately) outdated - as well as the fact that school shooting, rampage shooters, and gun control are incredibly layered issues - some of the ideas presented seem underbaked or flat out wrong even for 2008.
The book examines some of the most high profile school shootings up until its writing, with the most focus given to Columbine. The author breaks down what happened in each case and what they believe led the shooter (or shooters) to their act of violence. While some of what’s described points to obvious signs of violence, the author doesn’t really expand upon the issues much. They’re mostly just stated (the person was bullied, neglected, etc.) with a small amount of psychological examination but not as fleshed out as I would have thought. There’s also just a lot of extrapolation and flaw to this method of examining violent acts. Could a neglected child lash out and commit an act of violence? Sure, but plenty don’t. Were Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold bullied and that’s why they did what they did? Experts disagree, but regardless of whether they were or weren’t, plenty of bullying takes place in schools and the amount of shootings doesn’t equal the amount of bullying. I had hoped some of this nuance would be touched upon but it wasn’t. The final chapter examines prevention and intervention for school professionals and communities but in much less depth than the cases. It didn’t go much beyond what you learn in a basic safety training and again, much of it has been disproven in our time where many more shootings have taken place and some with the intervention and prevention methods suggested in place. The book also made excuses for adults that could prevent violence, like teachers who witness an odd outburst or who grade a disturbing paper, saying you just can’t assume every weird paper could lead to violence…sure, but that’s what school counseling and social workers do. They know how to determine whether something is just creative expression or a warning sign, so why would that be brushed aside as an unreliable method of prevention?
There were also moments that felt horrifically exploitative…at one point the author describes Klebold as “stretched out on the autopsy table” to provide the reader with his height, weight and build and that just felt gross to me. He also quotes journals and videos left behind by shooters and tries to make it less exploitative by mentioning these weren’t released to the public to prevent copy cats…but he’s quoting them directly?? I understand some of this is for the purpose of examination but I felt it was done in a gross sort of way.
My final issue with this book is petty by comparison but there were SO MANY typos. It’s as if this was published without an editor and the author stopped proofreading at the end. People are being misnamed, spellings of names changed (Jenson vs Jensen but we’re referring to the same person) and just so many places where I had to double back and reread just to understand what a typo should have been. Combined with a hypothesis (if you can call it that) that felt weak and under developed, this just didn’t feel like it added anything to the conversation of school violence psychology and prevention.
Overall there’s better discussion and literature out there on the topic. I’d skip this one.
The book examines some of the most high profile school shootings up until its writing, with the most focus given to Columbine. The author breaks down what happened in each case and what they believe led the shooter (or shooters) to their act of violence. While some of what’s described points to obvious signs of violence, the author doesn’t really expand upon the issues much. They’re mostly just stated (the person was bullied, neglected, etc.) with a small amount of psychological examination but not as fleshed out as I would have thought. There’s also just a lot of extrapolation and flaw to this method of examining violent acts. Could a neglected child lash out and commit an act of violence? Sure, but plenty don’t. Were Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold bullied and that’s why they did what they did? Experts disagree, but regardless of whether they were or weren’t, plenty of bullying takes place in schools and the amount of shootings doesn’t equal the amount of bullying. I had hoped some of this nuance would be touched upon but it wasn’t. The final chapter examines prevention and intervention for school professionals and communities but in much less depth than the cases. It didn’t go much beyond what you learn in a basic safety training and again, much of it has been disproven in our time where many more shootings have taken place and some with the intervention and prevention methods suggested in place. The book also made excuses for adults that could prevent violence, like teachers who witness an odd outburst or who grade a disturbing paper, saying you just can’t assume every weird paper could lead to violence…sure, but that’s what school counseling and social workers do. They know how to determine whether something is just creative expression or a warning sign, so why would that be brushed aside as an unreliable method of prevention?
There were also moments that felt horrifically exploitative…at one point the author describes Klebold as “stretched out on the autopsy table” to provide the reader with his height, weight and build and that just felt gross to me. He also quotes journals and videos left behind by shooters and tries to make it less exploitative by mentioning these weren’t released to the public to prevent copy cats…but he’s quoting them directly?? I understand some of this is for the purpose of examination but I felt it was done in a gross sort of way.
My final issue with this book is petty by comparison but there were SO MANY typos. It’s as if this was published without an editor and the author stopped proofreading at the end. People are being misnamed, spellings of names changed (Jenson vs Jensen but we’re referring to the same person) and just so many places where I had to double back and reread just to understand what a typo should have been. Combined with a hypothesis (if you can call it that) that felt weak and under developed, this just didn’t feel like it added anything to the conversation of school violence psychology and prevention.
Overall there’s better discussion and literature out there on the topic. I’d skip this one.
biolexicon's review
4.0
This book was well researched and clearly written. Time is taken to present multiple explanations, making the theories closer to what happens in actuality (that there is no one true cause for school shootings). My only criticism of the book comes when it is retelling the events surrounding the shootings, the way they are told makes it feel a little more like a collection of stories than evidence that supports a theory.
ckirkhart's review
1.0
An overview of a handful of school shootings without much analysis or depth. A "psychological explanation of school shootings" it is most definitely not.
thebookcontent's review
4.0
Interesting read. A little disappointed it didn't go more into the "psychological explanation" as the title suggested it would.
merkurius's review against another edition
4.0
interesting stuff. does a good job at mapping out the before, during & after of each event, and delves into the psychological and environmental stressors that contribute to SR shootings. made some good points about bullying and gun control (if not anything all that revolutionary), but could've gone more in-depth into other preventative measures concerning children at risk of committing acts of extreme violence.