Rachel and Seung-hui

That's been bugging me for some time now, finally decided to post it.

Rachel was clearly depressed, angry and suicidal before 4/20. In one of her last journal entries (IIRC only fragments of her journal were released, never the whole thing) she wrote this poem:

Rachel Scott wrote:

I’m drowning

In my own lake of despair.

I’m choking

My hands wrapped around my neck.

I’m dying

Quickly my soul leaves, slowly my body withers.

It isn’t suicide,

I consider it homicide.

The world you created has led to my death.

Now, I ask you to compare it to this:

Compare it to this:

Seung-hui cho wrote:

(...)you decided to spill my blood. You forced me into a corner and gave me only one option. The decision was yours. Now you have blood on your hands that will never wash off (...) thanks to you I die

Well, her words are more calm and lyrical. After all its awritten poem, not an in-your-face rant to a camera. But the underlying message is the same: "I will die, but its not my fault or my decision, its you and your world that has caused it".

I didn't want to make this thread at first, because I thought people will consider comparing a victim's beliefs and feelings to the beliefs and feelings of a perpetrator to be harsh and tasteless.

But in view of the recent forum discussions, as well as teh upcoming Rachel film, I thought it will be best to be upfront about this. Let Rachel speak with her own voice in her own words, not filtered through a "feel-good-evangelical" lense for once.

Is it possible she was referring to her actual death?

Falcolus wrote:

Is it possible she was referring to her actual death?

How would that make sense? Especially lines like: "My hands wrapped around my neck" and "It isn’t suicide".

No, imho its entirely clear she is referring to an act she was planning to do to herself (or at least thinking about it).

If you think about getting shot at during a spree-killing, you have absolutely no purpose in stressing that it "isn't suicide" as its obvious and you might as well be saying: "Oh and its not like i was attacked by a poisonous jellyfish either".

Looking at it seriously, you want to stress "it isn't suicide, I consider it homicide" precisely if you plan to make a suicide and are trying to blame others for it.

Sabratha wrote:

That's been bugging me for some time now, finally decided to post it.

Rachel was clearly depressed, angry and suicidal before 4/20. In one of her last journal entries (IIRC only fragments of her journal were released, never the whole thing) she wrote this poem:

Rachel Scott wrote:

I’m drowning

In my own lake of despair.

I’m choking

My hands wrapped around my neck.

I’m dying

Quickly my soul leaves, slowly my body withers.

It isn’t suicide,

I consider it homicide.

The world you created has led to my death.

Now, I ask you to compare it to this:

Compare it to this:

Seung-hui cho wrote:

(...)you decided to spill my blood. You forced me into a corner and gave me only one option. The decision was yours. Now you have blood on your hands that will never wash off (...) thanks to you I die

Well, her words are more calm and lyrical. After all its  awritten poem, not an in-your-face rant to a camera. But the underlying message is the same: "I will die, but its not my fault or my decision, its you and your world that has caused it".

I didn't want to make this thread at first, because I thought people will consider comparing a victim's beliefs and feelings to the beliefs and feelings of a perpetrator to be harsh and tasteless.

But in view of the recent forum discussions, as well as teh upcoming Rachel film, I thought it will be best to be upfront about this. Let Rachel speak with her own voice in her own words, not filtered through a "feel-good-evangelical" lense for once.

Wow. Interesting post. I would have never put the two together. You're right of course. Rachel was alienated and angry just like Eric, Dylan and a good number of American adolescents. But the tendency by her family and friends to throw a smokescreen over this in her case is as bad as it is with Cullen and the Klebolds.

I remember Craig Scott remarking how he and Rachel had a fight the morning of NBK. He was running late because his hair had to be "just right." And he ran past her dead body when he exited the school, knowing it was her. I think that things were not particularly rosy for the Scott family and the smokescreen with all this godly b.s. is their way of remaining in denial.  In interviews, her mother seems like a decent woman and I get the feeling she really does believe in Christian ideals. However, Rachel was not happy, even her mother acknowledges this and she was not a saint of any kind.

I also think "Rachel's Challenge" was/is pretty much a self-serving waste of time and energy. Bullying is a real problem, not just in school, but also in life. I don't see how a bunch of pledges and flowery talk accomplishes anything other than giving Craig Scott a reason to tour high-schools and be interviewed -- with his hair still having to be "just right."

I wrote about this before, she was clearly suicidal. Her life was too hectic (school, play rehearsals, work and youth group), she hated her parents (according to Devon Adams), she had to break up with her long term boyfriend Stephen Partridge because she wanted to have sex but it was against what she believed in (according to her mother in Rachel's Tears) and she was struggling big time with her faith in God (she questioned his existence in several diary entries).

Gustopoet2 wrote:

Sabratha wrote:

That's been bugging me for some time now, finally decided to post it.

Rachel was clearly depressed, angry and suicidal before 4/20. In one of her last journal entries (IIRC only fragments of her journal were released, never the whole thing) she wrote this poem:

Rachel Scott wrote:

I’m drowning

In my own lake of despair.

I’m choking

My hands wrapped around my neck.

I’m dying

Quickly my soul leaves, slowly my body withers.

It isn’t suicide,

I consider it homicide.

The world you created has led to my death.

Now, I ask you to compare it to this:

Compare it to this:

Seung-hui cho wrote:

(...)you decided to spill my blood. You forced me into a corner and gave me only one option. The decision was yours. Now you have blood on your hands that will never wash off (...) thanks to you I die

Well, her words are more calm and lyrical. After all its  awritten poem, not an in-your-face rant to a camera. But the underlying message is the same: "I will die, but its not my fault or my decision, its you and your world that has caused it".

I didn't want to make this thread at first, because I thought people will consider comparing a victim's beliefs and feelings to the beliefs and feelings of a perpetrator to be harsh and tasteless.

But in view of the recent forum discussions, as well as teh upcoming Rachel film, I thought it will be best to be upfront about this. Let Rachel speak with her own voice in her own words, not filtered through a "feel-good-evangelical" lense for once.

Wow. Interesting post. I would have never put the two together. You're right of course. Rachel was alienated and angry just like Eric, Dylan and a good number of American adolescents. But the tendency by her family and friends to throw a smokescreen over this in her case is as bad as it is with Cullen and the Klebolds.

I remember Craig Scott remarking how he and Rachel had a fight the morning of NBK. He was running late because his hair had to be "just right." And he ran past her dead body when he exited the school, knowing it was her. I think that things were not particularly rosy for the Scott family and the smokescreen with all this godly b.s. is their way of remaining in denial.  In interviews, her mother seems like a decent woman and I get the feeling she really does believe in Christian ideals. However, Rachel was not happy, even her mother acknowledges this and she was not a saint of any kind.

I also think "Rachel's Challenge" was/is pretty much a self-serving waste of time and energy. Bullying is a real problem, not just in school, but also in life. I don't see how a bunch of pledges and flowery talk accomplishes anything other than giving Craig Scott a reason to tour high-schools and be interviewed -- with his hair still having to be "just right."

The fundie stuff can be off-putting to those who aren't down with the Jesus thing, but I wouldn't be so hard on the Scotts. Losing your daughter in front of the whole world like that can't be easy.

That last part - "in front of the whole world" - is key. If she had been hit by a car, then all of her friends still would have turned out for her funeral, but CNN wouldn't have covered it live.

And keep in mind that the media hounded these people. They're like vultures - they literally stalk you. They call you at all hours and camp outside on your lawn. So put yourself in the shoes of folks who not only have lost their daughter in such a horrific way, but cannot even be left alone to grieve quietly.

One of Rachel's teachers wrote that, right after the massacre, she was freaking out because she thought of Rachel being trapped in the coffin, trying to claw her way out. But when went to see Rachel's body, and saw how stern she looked - in a way that she never did while alive - then she finally knew and accepted that Rachel was well and truly gone.

And Chris's hair is somewhat gnarly:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I'm not being hard on the Scotts. And I've seen Craig Scott's hair plenty of times, thanks.

Gustopoet2 wrote:

I'm not being hard on the Scotts.

You're not being soft on them, either.

But, hey, you're right: saying that "Rachel was a consummate saint and a perfect Christian martyr who never had any disturbing thoughts" is as much a lie as "Eric got laid more than the captain of the football team." In her own way, she was as deeply troubled as anyone at that school.

Quote :

And I've seen Craig Scott's hair plenty of times, thanks.  

It's so blonde and fluffy, isn't it?

LPorter101 wrote:

Gustopoet2 wrote:

I'm not being hard on the Scotts.

You're not being soft on them, either.

But, hey, you're right: saying that "Rachel was a consummate saint and a perfect Christian martyr who never had any disturbing thoughts" is as much a lie as "Eric got laid more than the captain of the football team." In her own way, she was as deeply troubled as anyone at that school.

Quote :

And I've seen Craig Scott's hair plenty of times, thanks.  

It's so blonde and fluffy, isn't it?

Really? I thought I was being pretty empathetic.

And yeah, Craig's hair is quite something. It's "gnarliness" seems as irrepressible as the Scott's general sanctimony.

The Scotts lost a child, they had a right to freak out, especially soon after the shooting when there was a media feeding frenzy and the details of what occured were still fuzzy. Adn its perfctly normal to stress teh good things about a deceased loved one and not the bad. So we need to be soft on the family imho.

Having said taht, I think we need to acknowledge the facts - Rachel by all evidence was suicidal, or at least was thinking of suicide in 1999. She was writing about suicide, not in any way anticipating murder. By all evidence, she was never asked the god question or shot point blank or killed for her beliefs. Also as I pointed out she was not the "ARachel and Jen" mentioned on the tapes.

Yet the Scotts keep repeating these things 16 years after columbine. Perhaps its their way of coping with it, but it needs to be stressed that it was not what really happened.

All teens go theough the "Woe is me" stage. Was she going to act on it... Doubtful... Every Christian goes through a is god real phase... Even ones that have been active for a long time. I'm sure Rachels parents went through "Is he real.. if so how could he let this happen"... It's human nature.

The Scotts were sanctimonious grandstanders long before NBK happened. Rachel was an attention-seeker and a self-proclaimed "savior" for those she felt were lost or beneath her. In one interview her mother speaks of (not wanting to) "take away from God's sovereignty" -- which to my ears is the epitome of Christian grandiosity and vanity. Most Christians say "God" when they mean "me." I don't see any exception in this case.

Gustopoet2 wrote:

Rachel was an attention-seeker and a self-proclaimed "savior" for those she felt were lost or beneath her.

I seriously doubt this was the case. Even the bible-basher Brooks admits he found some common langauge with her and that she was respectfull of his atheism. And keep in mind Brooks went out of his way to stress atheism and even his friends state that he specifically picked on christian kids in the debate club and was an all around well known Christ-hater.

One could argue he just wrote that about Rachel to be respectfull of the dead, but I think he was beign sincere. If he didn't liek Rachel, he could have just remained silent and write nothing about her at all.

Sabratha wrote:

Gustopoet2 wrote:

Rachel was an attention-seeker and a self-proclaimed "savior" for those she felt were lost or beneath her.

I seriously doubt this was the case. Even the bible-basher Brooks admits he found some common langauge with her and that she was respectfull of his atheism. And keep in mind Brooks went out of his way to stress atheism and even his friends state that he specifically picked on christian kids in the debate club and was an all around well known Christ-hater.

One could argue he just wrote that about Rachel to be respectfull of the dead, but I think he was beign sincere. If he didn't liek Rachel, he could have just remained silent and write nothing about her at all.

Rachel had a messiah complex just like Dylan and Eric. It emanated from her family's sanctimony. When it is a Christian who acts this way it is somehow more palatable to Westerners than when someone does it based on secular convictions.

Quote :

The Scotts were sanctimonious grandstanders long before NBK happened.

Even if you don't like fundies, you have to concede that any mother who has to watch this on TV:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

...knowing that that's her daughter lying there is entitled to a bit of sanctimony.

I'm sorry, but that is a ridiculous comment. It is also ridiculous to blow the picture up so large.

They had plenty of sanctimony before Rachel was killed.

Gustopoet2 wrote:

I'm sorry, but that is a ridiculous comment. It is also ridiculous to blow the picture up so large.

That is the size of the original file that I downloaded ... I didn't resize it.

Quote :

They had plenty of sanctimony before Rachel was killed.

Well, I'm not defending them ... I'm only saying that it's too easy for someone who wasn't involved to say, "Oh, look at those sanctimonious preachy pricks ... Craig Scott is an attention-whoring closet case."

Yes, but I am saying they were "high and mighty" before Rachel was killed. Also, I did not use the words you have put in quotes and insinuated are attributable to me; nor did my statements in any way reflect those ideas. Those are your ideas, not mine.

I wonder if you would be making the same case for a family whose young son was murdered in a mass-shooting, who was a Satanist, from a family of Satanists, and whose surviving family members went on speaking tours to promote the liberation of the Self and the end of all prohibitive morals as the best way to stop violence.

For me Christianity does not function as some kind of "deodorant" for people's misplaced ideals, desire for power, or need to espouse condescending, messianic convictions; nor does being a Christian make a person's death more or less tragic or meaningful than anyone else's death.

Gustopoet2 wrote:

Yes, but I am saying they were "high and mighty" before Rachel was killed. Also, I did not use the words you have put in quotes and insinuated are attributable to me; nor did my statements in any way reflect those ideas. Those are your ideas, not mine.

Whatever.

Quote :

I wonder if you would be making the same case for a family whose young son was murdered in a mass-shooting, who was a Satanist, from a family of Satanists, and whose surviving family members went on speaking tours to promote the liberation of the Self and the end of all prohibitive morals as the best way to stop violence.

I'm a fairly open-minded guy.

Quote :

For me Christianity does not function as some kind of "deodorant" for people's misplaced ideals, desire for power, or need to espouse condescending, messianic convictions; nor does being a Christian make a person's death more or less tragic or meaningful than anyone else's death.

Well, we do agree on that. I've known lots of nasty, awful, hypocritical jerks who call themselves Christians. I've also known some insufferably smug, close-minded pricks who call themselves atheists. Anyone can be an asshole.

LPorter101 wrote:

Gustopoet2 wrote:

Yes, but I am saying they were "high and mighty" before Rachel was killed. Also, I did not use the words you have put in quotes and insinuated are attributable to me; nor did my statements in any way reflect those ideas. Those are your ideas, not mine.

Whatever.

Quote :

I wonder if you would be making the same case for a family whose young son was murdered in a mass-shooting, who was a Satanist, from a family of Satanists, and whose surviving family members went on speaking tours to promote the liberation of the Self and the end of all prohibitive morals as the best way to stop violence.

I'm a fairly open-minded guy.

Quote :

For me Christianity does not function as some kind of "deodorant" for people's misplaced ideals, desire for power, or need to espouse condescending, messianic convictions; nor does being a Christian make a person's death more or less tragic or meaningful than anyone else's death.

Well, we do agree on that. I've known lots of nasty, awful, hypocritical jerks who call themselves Christians. I've also known some insufferably smug, close-minded pricks who call themselves atheists. Anyone can be an asshole.

Yes, and some people think they are doing everyone a great favor by being a jerk. And still others wrap all of their jerkiness up in a pretty package and call it "compassion." I am always very suspicious of people who put words before actions. I have yet to meet a Christian where this was not the case. I know they are out there; I just haven't had the pleasure...

OK, you could feel empathy for a dead Satanic boy, that's nice. What if he was ugly, too. What if he had planned on blowing up a church two days later had he not been killed?

My point here is that it is not Rachel that everyone gloms onto in these discussions; it is the archetype of the martyr. I simply dispute her status as such. I think she was a troubled kid who maybe had huge doubts about society just like Eric and Dylan. And if it is nastiness you want from me, well then I would say: young Craig Scott looked like a prime candidate for being a bully to me. I would also say Richard C. wasn't eating lunch w/ Rachel to discuss Leviticus. I'm guessing he had something a little more secular on his mind.

I don't think Rachel, Eric or Dylan had a messiah complex.

I do think both Eric, Dylan and also Rachel felt themselves to be unique individuals, who see farther, clearer and have a more frank outlook on life than most people. Rachel seems to have been depressed or even suicidal.

Sure, many teenagers have moments of doom and gloom. However (again just like with Eric) I think its worth lookign closely not at what is common with most teenagers, btu what is rare. What is unusual is Rachel's "wide" take on it. Its not that her school sucks, her friends suck or even her life sucks it is the world you created. That's a pretty grand scope, even for a teenager.

Also as mentioned before, she squarely puts the blame on others. Unlike Eric, but certainly like Cho or Dylan.

Frankly, I think "Rachel the christian martyr" is something people came up with to cope with 4/20, then otehrs canned the story and are trying to sell it (I don't mean her parents, rather the born again movement as a whole). "Rachel the martyr" is not really a very interesting thing for me at least and I do not think its really what she was about.

Still, I think people who have made public some of her poems have in fact accidentally given us a small window to look at the real Rachel. As her own poem clearly suggest that real Rachel was a depressed and possibly suicidal teenager who was angry at the world and blaming the society around her.

Sounds oddly familiar, doesn't it?


Is there a fuller verison of her journal available anywhere? Her family's memorial website has some excerpts from her journal, bust the alst entries are from spring 1998 and even these  
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Sabratha wrote:

I don't think Rachel, Eric or dylan had a messiah complex. [/url]

You have got to be joking on this one.... Eric and Dylan were overt in calling themselves "godlike" and they thought they were "kickstarting" natural selection. They often referred to themselves as "Gods" and "leaders" -- one need not be benevolent to be a messiah. I could fill a dozen or more pages with evidence, replete with standard psychological theory and models, to refute this assertion.

W/ Rachel I can see maybe it as a more subtle thing, but I'm convinced that she was a typical Christian 'savior" always out to judge others and help them when they were too sinful or lowly to help themselves. Rachel. Dylan, and Eric all three felt they had been "chosen" to make a difference by leading humanity particularly those they viewed as "less" than themselves. That is what "messianic" means.

Well, they were grandiose and felt superior, but that alone doesn't make a messiah complex.

They are saying they are doing it for themselves and Eric states he wants to kill everyone save maybe 5 people. They don't consider themselves martyrs that will die to save millions. Seung-Hui did, they did not. They just spoke about havign "followers" not massess of opressed people they will liberate. There's a difference. They were in it for themselves, not making a cause for others.

Gustopoet2 wrote:

W/ Rachel I can see maybe it as a more subtle thing, but I'm convinced that she was a typical Christian 'savior" always out to judge others and help them when they were too sinful or lowly to help themselves.

Even anti-christian Brooks doesn't agree. Also what little real insight we have into Rachel's ntimate journal entries suggests she felt depressed, angry and had both feelings of uniqueness, superiority and inferiority (remember the "I am nothing" poem?).

Gustopoet2 wrote:

Rachel. Dylan, and Eric all three felt they had been "chosen" to make a difference by leading humanity particularly those they viewed as "less" than themselves. That is what "messianic" means.

I don't think that the "leader" part was realy all that important. Eric wanted to be feared, be infamous, go down in history and "leave a lasting impression on the world". Infamy and making a mark is different from being a leader.

Rachel... I think we have too little significant information on her made availabel to guess with certainty. But her poems, being the few significant parts about her made public, show a very different person that what evangelicals were told about her.[/quote]

Sabratha wrote:

Well, they were grandiose and felt superior, but that alone doesn't make a messiah complex.

They are saying they are doing it for themselves and Eric states he wants to kill everyone save maybe 5 people. They don't consider themselves martyrs that will die to save millions. Seung-Hui did, they did not. They just spoke about havign "followers" not massess of opressed people they will liberate. There's a difference. They were in it for themselves, not making a cause for others.

Gustopoet2 wrote:

W/ Rachel I can see maybe it as a more subtle thing, but I'm convinced that she was a typical Christian 'savior" always out to judge others and help them when they were too sinful or lowly to help themselves.

Even anti-christian Brooks doesn't agree. Also what little real insight we have into Rachel's ntimate journal entries suggests she felt depressed, angry and had both feelings of uniqueness, superiority and inferiority (remember the "I am nothing" poem?).

Gustopoet2 wrote:

Rachel. Dylan, and Eric all three felt they had been "chosen" to make a difference by leading humanity particularly those they viewed as "less" than themselves. That is what "messianic" means.

I don't think that the "leader" part was realy all that important. Eric wanted to be feared, be infamous, go down in history and "leave a lasting impression on the world". Infamy and making a mark is different from being a leader.

Rachel... I think we have too little significant information on her made availabel to guess with certainty. But her poems, being the few significant parts about her made public, show a very different person that what evangelicals were told about her.

[/quote]

Most of these comments have more to do with religion than with Columbine, proper. I know it doesn't seem that way, but I think the Scott's Christian -- ahem -- outspokenness has made it almost impossible to discuss Rachel in any objective way. It is like patriotism; once the issue is broached the intelligent aspect of the conversation is pretty much out the window.

Brooks was a boy when he wrote his admittedly candid and important book. I do not think he would be capable of seeing beyond the veil so to speak, despite being a professed agnostic.

I think you can see into the deeper aspects of the Scotts' backstory precisely because they so quintessentially represent a rampant (imho self delusional) mode of religious conviction that is very prevalent in America.

I actually agree with you on Rachel. What's happening is you are conflating my statement that she was sanctimonious due to her upbringing and culture with the idea that this means she was (or wanted to be) a genuine Christian. I'm saying she had a persona that may have been very much at odds with what she was feeling inside.

Gustopoet2 wrote:

Most of these comments have more to do with religion than with Columbine, proper. I know it doesn't seem that way, but I think the Scott's Christian -- ahem -- outspokenness has made it almost impossible to discuss Rachel in any objective way.

I would agee to a point. I think that's why they never realeased her full journal or even most of the journal with just the private love and intimacy parts censored out.
I think her poems are relaly the only substantial insight we have on her. And judging by those, I imagine most of her journals from late 1998 and 1999 would be pretty angry and depressed.
The "I am drowning" and "I am nothing" poems relaly feel like you could paste their text into Dylan's journal and they would feel entirely natural there.

Here's the "I am nothing" poem:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Somehow I'm less and less surprised that people reported Rachel and Dylan meeting togeather and spending time talking. I think they did in fact had a lot in common.

I think its odd and eerie that she was one of the killed people because in many ways she was so much like Dylan.

Sabratha wrote:

Gustopoet2 wrote:

Most of these comments have more to do with religion than with Columbine, proper. I know it doesn't seem that way, but I think the Scott's Christian -- ahem -- outspokenness has made it almost impossible to discuss Rachel in any objective way.

I would agee to a point. I think that's why they never realeased her full journal or even most of the journal with just the private love and intimacy parts censored out.
I think her poems are relaly the only substantial insight we have on her. And judging by those, I imagine most of her journals from late 1998 and 1999 would be pretty angry and depressed.
The "I am drowning" and "I am nothing" poems relaly feel like you could paste their text into Dylan's journal and they would feel entirely natural there.

Here's the "I am nothing" poem:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Somehow I'm less and less surprised that people reported Rachel and Dylan meeting togeather and spending time talking. I think they did in fact had a lot in common.

Both poetic and theatrical as well.

Gustopoet2 wrote:

Both poetic and theatrical as well.

Yep. Again, reminds me of someone. Not just Cho, also Dylan.

Sabratha wrote:

Rachel was clearly depressed, angry and suicidal before 4/20.

Eric was suicidal. Dylan was suicidal. Cassie had been suicidal (before becoming overly religious). Apparently, Rachel, too, was suicidal.

Dave Sanders seemed to be tired with his life and depressed.

Greg Barnes, Anne Marie Hochhalter's mother and Joe Stair all committed suicide.

I'm a European who finds the American culture - especially in the 1990s - really fascinating, and Columbine is a great look at that, so right now I can't help but wonder how bad life really was there, since so many people seemed suicidal.

Rachel also wrote in May of 1998: "This will be my last year, Lord. I have gotten what I can. Thank you." Her family twisted that to be prophetic, when to me it seems more suicidal. Do you think she would have committed suicide if Columbine never happened or if she would have lived past it? Would she have been capable of doing it?

John Denver wrote:

Dave Sanders seemed to be tired with his life and depressed.

Can you please indicate where you came across this very interesting wrinkle?

John Denver wrote:

Sabratha wrote:

Rachel was clearly depressed, angry and suicidal before 4/20.

Eric was suicidal. Dylan was suicidal. Cassie had been suicidal (before becoming overly religious). Apparently, Rachel, too, was suicidal.

Dave Sanders seemed to be tired with his life and depressed.

Greg Barnes, Anne Marie Hochhalter's mother and Joe Stair all committed suicide.

I'm a European who finds the American culture - especially in the 1990s - really fascinating, and Columbine is a great look at that, so right now I can't help but wonder how bad life really was there, since so many people seemed suicidal.

Rachel also wrote in May of 1998: "This will be my last year, Lord. I have gotten what I can. Thank you." Her family twisted that to be prophetic, when to me it seems more suicidal. Do you think she would have committed suicide if Columbine never happened or if she would have lived past it? Would she have been capable of doing it?

Hardn to say many suicidal people write several goodbye letters, never go through with any actual suicide attempt and then get over the whole thing.
Rachel... not sure. As a psychologist, I would clearly take all of her writing as a very big warning sign, sufficient enough to have a talk with her and the parents and discuss therapy.

Rachel had a different background than either Eric or Dylan, but she came to a somewhat similar position - blaming the world as a whole. So does Eric ("I hate the m-inf world"). "The world that you created" - sounds really like a thinly veiled attack on her own society.

Rachel is being poetic, never blunt or vulgar and never goes into precise details (at least as far as the journal entries the fmaily made public and I read).I t makes me wonder - imagine she had a frank talk with Eric (with both of them dropping the social facades they put up)... its possible they would actually agree a lot as far as their views on society go.

And so happens its Eric who killed her. Weird.

Take the lyrics from Dylan's favorite KMFDM song "Godlike" and compare them to the spiritual "mission" that Rachel saw herself fulfilling.

I'LL PRAY
AND PRAY
THAT YOUR COUNTRY
UNDERGOES RECOVERY

USE THE POWER
TASTE THE BLISS
HARVEST SALVATION

NOW IS THE TIME
GET ON THE RIGHT (LEFT) SIDE
AND YOU'LL BE GODLIKE

ESCAPE YOUR OLD LIFE
OF BONDAGE AND SIN

RAISE YOUR HEAD FROM THE ASHES
FROM THE FIRE

Simply change the word "Godlike" to "Saved" and -- presto! -- you have an evangelical sermon.

Why do people have such a negative view on Rachel?

Falcolus wrote:

Why do people have such a negative view on Rachel?

I don't have a negative view on her, quite the contrary. I think she was an interesting, critically-thinking and intelligent young woman, regardless of the fact that she was depressed.

I do however believe that Rachel's message was hijacked after her death and that people have skipped over or outright manipulated her words to cover her depression and her deeply negative view of the world and the society around her.

But if you go to the source itself, read Rachel's words and poems as they are - you can see the real Rachel. And its the Rachel taht seems to ahev had more common beliefs with people like Eric tahn with people like Rocky. That's my stand on this.

I don't have a negative view of Rachel at all. I have a negative view of the martyr myth that sprang up around her.

Sabratha wrote:

Falcolus wrote:

Why do people have such a negative view on Rachel?

I don't have a negative view on her, quite the contrary. I think she was an interesting, critically-thinking and intelligent young woman, regardless of the fact that she was depressed.

I do however believe that Rachel's message was hijacked after her death and that people have skipped over or outright manipulated her words to cover her depression and her deeply negative view of the world and the society around her.

But if you go to the source itself, read Rachel's words and poems as they are - you can see the real Rachel. And its the Rachel taht seems to ahev had more common beliefs with people like Eric tahn with people like Rocky. That's my stand on this.

Mine too.

Gustopoet2 wrote:

John Denver wrote:

Dave Sanders seemed to be tired with his life and depressed.

Can you please indicate where you came across this very interesting wrinkle?

I hate to say this, but I got my understanding of it from Dave Cullen's book (ugh). I glimbsed through it again, and "depressed" may have been a too powerful word to use by me. But Dave's family says in the book that Dave regretted how much he had put his time into coaching. He had put coaching before his own family. He had also said the same to Mr. DeAngelis. So he was going to quit coaching (at least most of it) after the school year of 1998-1999.

In the book, Mr. Sanders is portrayed as a bit of a sad man (yet truly a good-hearted man) who is getting old in a dull suburb and is let down with his gray life. There is also a mentioning of how he finally got new glasses in spring of 1999 (after wearing dated wire-rimmed glasses for ages), and was really excited to have "finally made it to 1999" (sounds kind of funny now, in 2015), but no one in the great family gathering noticed that he had got new glasses. "Alone with Linda (his wife) that evening, he confessed how badly it hurt."

One of the few credits I give to Cullen's book is that it taught me more about Dave Sanders. Made him more three-dimensional and real.

John Denver wrote:

Gustopoet2 wrote:

John Denver wrote:

Dave Sanders seemed to be tired with his life and depressed.

Can you please indicate where you came across this very interesting wrinkle?

I hate to say this, but I got my understanding of it from Dave Cullen's book (ugh). I glimbsed through it again, and "depressed" may have been a too powerful word to use by me. But Dave's family says in the book that Dave regretted how much he had put his time into coaching. He had put coaching before his own family. He had also said the same to Mr. DeAngelis. So he was going to quit coaching (at least most of it) after the school year of 1998-1999.

In the book, Mr. Sanders is portrayed as a bit of a sad man (yet truly a good-hearted man) who is getting old in a dull suburb and is let down with his gray life. There is also a mentioning of how he finally got new glasses in spring of 1999 (after wearing dated wire-rimmed glasses for ages), and was really excited to have "finally made it to 1999" (sounds kind of funny now, in 2015), but no one in the great family gathering noticed that he had got new glasses. "Alone with Linda (his wife) that evening, he confessed how badly it hurt."

One of the few credits I give to Cullen's book is that it taught me more about Dave Sanders. Made him from three-dimensional and real.

Thanks.  I didn't know this. It's very interesting. It may have some bearing on why Dave fearlessly charged into action that day. His "gray" life was suddenly filled with an urgent purpose. To his credit, he left this world as a hero; not as the dull, suburban dude he'd feared he'd become.

Kudos to Cullen for discovering this and making it part of his narrative.

Sad to think about those glasses, really. He got them before Easter, no one noticed in the great family gathering on Easter... Then on April 20, he was shot down and fell with those glasses - the glasses breaking.

Ps. On a lighter note, in Cullen's book there was also a mentioning of how Sanders used to go to a dive bar called Columbine Lounge (on Pierce Street, not far from the school) on Friday nights and just dance with the regulars and have a laugh.

John Denver wrote:

Sad to think about those glasses, really. He got them before Easter, no one noticed in the great family gathering on Easter... Then on April 20, he was shot down and fell with those glasses - the glasses breaking.

Ps. On a lighter note, in Cullen's book there was also a mentioning of how Sanders used to go to a dive bar called Columbine Lounge (on Pierce Street, not far from the school) on Friday nights and just dance with the regulars and have a laugh.

When I first saw his picture I assumed he was a much older man. That is a sad note about his glasses. I tend to read everything symbolically so maybe there is meaning in those glasses breaking the way they did.... I don't want to derail the thread by offering any suggestions!

I read Cullen book, and he had a lot of excellent information about the families of the victims, and the victims itself. As a matter of fact, I have to say I learned a few things from his book

But his view on the killers is just too vague, and his strange love for Dylan. I underlined the stuff that was wrong, and I believe almost all of it was about Eric and Dylan.

lol wrote:

I read Cullen book, and he had a lot of excellent information about the families of the victims, and the victims itself. As a matter of fact, I have to say I learned a few things from his book

But his view on the killers is just too vague, and his strange love for Dylan. I underlined the stuff that was wrong, and I believe almost all of it was about Eric and Dylan.

Off-topic, but did you have any feeling for why Cullen's take on the boys was so messed up? Does it feel deliberate to you like fabrication, or simply that Cullen is just... clueless?

Sabratha wrote:

Falcolus wrote:

Why do people have such a negative view on Rachel?

I don't have a negative view on her, quite the contrary. I think she was an interesting, critically-thinking and intelligent young woman, regardless of the fact that she was depressed.

I do however believe that Rachel's message was hijacked after her death and that people have skipped over or outright manipulated her words to cover her depression and her deeply negative view of the world and the society around her.

But if you go to the source itself, read Rachel's words and poems as they are - you can see the real Rachel. And its the Rachel taht seems to ahev had more common beliefs with people like Eric tahn with people like Rocky. That's my stand on this.

Oh ok that makes sense, I just thought it sounded as if people were thinking badly about her. But yes she was very interesting, and because of her publicity we have lots of information about her. If only this was the case for other victims, although I suppose its in the families best wishes to try and regain their privacy.

No I am not really thinking badly about her, unless you mean me stressign that fact that her writings come off as being  written by someone who is depressed and suicidal.

It just feels weird that of all people she was the first one to die and yet she was in many ways the one victim that was most similar to the people who shot her. In many ways she comes off as similar to Dylan. I think Eric would get along well with her if they actually met and had a chance to talk and argue seriously about things.