Scan barcode
A review by idiotplot
Columbine by Dave Cullen
Did not finish book. Stopped at 66%.
True crime is really a game of balance and perspective. It's quite easy to see describing a criminal's thinking as glorifying the criminal. But especially in a book like this, it's important to cover every aspect of the incident.
No account of true crime can be truly neutral according to me. And this book tries to be an exception, but we'll never truly know the extent of its success in being one. however, on further research and reading beyond the first 80 pages of the book, the author seems to push a black-and-white narrative onto the killer's psychoanalysis . caricatures of Dylan and Eric will not. Inconsistency is the human thing and the most prevalent thing in criminals, then why cover it?
the book simply does not cover the bases it claims to so proudly
This book makes us feel the weight of what happened, delivering on the minute-to-minute actions that were taken during the horrible incident, and occasionally maintaining a retrospective account of it as well. but I cannot ignore the talk about this book and the many statements that have come out since its publication.
I understand that there may never be a truly unbiased true crime book that covers every aspect of the events but this book has too many blunders that need to be corrected, especially the ones that have been called out by survivors.
this book does do a lot of good, but took a misstep in changing many interpretations and made blunders in reporting just to enhance the narrative. while trying to be a culture-shifting book, it seems that it has become a culture-serving one, much to its own demise
listen and watch the survivors instead, or at the least take the book considering this information.
Here is a thread that contains most of the debunked claims in this book
https://columbinemassacre.forumotion.com/t7040-fact-check-cullen-s-book?highlight=Cullen
No account of true crime can be truly neutral according to me. And this book tries to be an exception, but we'll never truly know the extent of its success in being one. however, on further research and reading beyond the first 80 pages of the book, the author seems to push a black-and-white narrative onto the killer's psychoanalysis . caricatures of Dylan and Eric will not. Inconsistency is the human thing and the most prevalent thing in criminals, then why cover it?
the book simply does not cover the bases it claims to so proudly
This book makes us feel the weight of what happened, delivering on the minute-to-minute actions that were taken during the horrible incident, and occasionally maintaining a retrospective account of it as well. but I cannot ignore the talk about this book and the many statements that have come out since its publication.
I understand that there may never be a truly unbiased true crime book that covers every aspect of the events but this book has too many blunders that need to be corrected, especially the ones that have been called out by survivors.
this book does do a lot of good, but took a misstep in changing many interpretations and made blunders in reporting just to enhance the narrative. while trying to be a culture-shifting book, it seems that it has become a culture-serving one, much to its own demise
listen and watch the survivors instead, or at the least take the book considering this information.
Here is a thread that contains most of the debunked claims in this book
https://columbinemassacre.forumotion.com/t7040-fact-check-cullen-s-book?highlight=Cullen