The 1999 tragedy in Littleton, Colorado, reinitiated and added fuel to an already long-standing debate. The documentary "Bowling for Columbine," which will be showing every night next week in Newcomb, enters this debate by grappling with many of the issues raised by gun violence.
This, however, is not why you should go see it. Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" is about far more than Columbine, gun violence or the Second Amendment. It is an exercise in free-association that travels through just about everything that's wrong with America. Anyone who wants to think seriously about why our country is in its current state should see this movie, make everyone they know see it, and then, most importantly, talk about it.
Moore explores the various topics on which the media focuses when a shooting occurs, such as the possible influence of violent entertainment or the so-called breakdown of the American family. He finds each one of these to be an inadequate explanation, but they become starting-off points for his investigation.
Tragedies often spur into action an army of pundits who barrage us with answers to a deceptively simple question: Why? After Columbine, the primary focus of both the media and legislatures was gun control. However, we need to ask more than simply how they got guns or what security measures could have been installed to stop them, though these issues should be addressed as well. Taking away a troubled youth's ability to commit violent acts would not change the fact that he or she had some reason to want to commit them in the first place, and this social malaise would find another way to actualize itself, leaving us still with a very big "why."
So what answer does Moore give? Actually, he skillfully avoids giving any, and this is the documentary's main strength. The same violent movies and music that are marketed to American teenagers are consumed by many people around the world, many have even greater access to guns and many also have fewer security measures. While these and a dozen other possibilities purport to be easy answers, and they are offered by many interviewed in the movie, real life is far more complicated.
The topics covered by Moore include gun control, the portrayal of blacks in the media, suburbia, economically failing communities, welfare-to-work, U.S. foreign policy, nuclear weapons and terrorism. Certainly, these are related only in varying degrees to the Columbine tragedy, but the documentary makes the point that we cannot isolate a facet of our society from the influence of the rest. There is one theme that connects with all the others, however, and that is the fear-inducing media. His portrayal of how television news shows cover stories is most shocking and caustic because it is so true.
The looming epidemic of the West Nile virus, the mind-numbing battery of unfounded opinions and bad advice during the D.C. sniper situation (remember how safe you felt walking at sharp angles?) and the excessive coverage of shark attacks in 2001 are specific instances of what Moore describes. Also, general examples occur over long periods of time, such as the manner in which the news's focus on violent crime implies that it is far more common than it actually is. These are situations in which the media instills an irrational fear of something that people cannot control and probably do not even need to be concerned with.
Moore's exploration of this theme ties much of the rest of the documentary together, and will leave an audience member unable to watch the cable news networks in quite the same way as before. But in truth, even the craziest of lefties will find him guilty of a misrepresentation or two. For example, a sequence that lists the number of gun deaths in various countries should have given them as percentages of population.
At another point, there is a very flimsy connection made between the media's stereotypical inner-city black male and the occasional reports that killer "Africanized" bees are spreading north from Mexico. However if you need any more proof that there is still racism in the United States, more than one person interviewed blamed gun violence on our country's "diverse population."
The importance of "Bowling for Columbine" does not lie in any facts it may bring to light or any personal stories it may give voice to. No one should leave the theatre simply nodding in agreement, because there's very little to agree with: Far more questions are asked than answered. Even still, this documentary should be more than just food for thought.
For anyone who has lamented the lack of political activism at the University, this is an opportunity to change that. Activism is not just about meetings or rallies; it is also about grappling daily with the issues and events that define American society. If we deal with issues only when headlines draw our attention to them, all of our solutions will be quick-fix band-aids that fail to reach the broader problems.
Debate on gun control as well as every other major issue should be ongoing. Drag everyone you know to see this movie, and then sit down over some coffee or some beer and decide for yourself whether, as the tagline goes, we may be a nation of nuts.
(Dave Algoso's column appears Fridays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at dalgoso@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
EDITORIAL: Carla Williams deserves her seat at the table
By Editorial Board | 6 hours agoLooking beyond basketball and football reveals that Virginia Athletics is, in many ways, thriving.
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | 2 days agoInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
