Is Cullen's book even worth reading?

I know the general feeling of Cullen around here and I know that his book is not factual but his book is the last Columbine book that I haven't read yet. I was going to at one point but it was checked out of my local library and I had to wait. By the time it came in I had read all this stuff that his book was crap and tells false things etc and decided to not read it.

Since I have read all of the other books that I could get my hands on, I have come back to Cullen's book. Just wondering if there is anything that makes his book worth a read at all or is it a waste of time?

I'd read it. Despite a number of inaccuracies in there and Cullen being a wanker (plus who whole Eric being psycho/ Dylan depressive slant), there is some decent stuff you can take out of it.

I would suggest still reading it. He doesn't just talk about the shooting, he talks about some of the survivors and how it was for them recovering afterwards. That was pretty interesting but just keep in mind when you're reading it that a lot of what is said is not the truth. And that is mostly the stuff about Dylan and Eric and of course the Brenda Parker story.

There may be a few kernels of good info about the victims and survivors, but if for no other reason, it's worth reading at the very least to know what many of us are talking about when the Cullen-bashing starts up.

I read it and wrote a review on it back when I was studying Journalism at university. I liked his writing style and it seemed like a well-researched book. I also liked how here were no pictures, an unique choice especially for a true crime novel.
But I didn't know back then how wrong he was (mark of a good journalist is to do your research!) and how biased he is. However I'm happy to post my review if anyone wants to read it. He actually commented on the review and thanked me but for some reason the comment has since been deleted. This was back in 2009.

I think the book is worthless and useless and a waste of time but you will have to make up your own mind whether to read it or not.

Personally, I found the book to be very enjoyable. If I weren't aware of the many inaccuracies, I would highly recommend it. I say read it, but take everything with a grain of salt.

Lizpuff wrote:

I know the general feeling of Cullen around here and I know that his book is not factual but his book is the last Columbine book that I haven't read yet.  I was going to at one point but it was checked out of my local library and I had to wait.  By the time it came in I had read all this stuff that his book was crap and tells false things etc and decided to not read it.

Since I have read all of the other books that I could get my hands on, I have come back to Cullen's book.  Just wondering if there is anything that makes his book worth a read at all or is it a waste of time?

You can read some of the book for free online:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

(You can read all of it if you download a pirated copy.)

Take a gander and see what you think. If you can't get past the first page without gagging, then stop and drink a tall glass of water.

To Cullen's credit, he did admit that he was wrong about the Brenda Parker story and deleted it from the newest edition of the book.

Undyne wrote:

To Cullen's credit, he did admit that he was wrong about the Brenda Parker story and deleted it from the newest edition of the book.

And it only took him seven years!

Good for you, Dave.

I think I may give it a try. I just wanted to know if there was something in it that I couldn't get out of another source. I do remember reading here that LPorter stated there was a good bit about Patrick Ireland in it. I am interested to read that.

It's the best book on the shooting. So yes, it's worth reading.

LPorter101 wrote:

Undyne wrote:

To Cullen's credit, he did admit that he was wrong about the Brenda Parker story and deleted it from the newest edition of the book.

And it only took him seven years!

Good for you, Dave.

Hahahaha, indeed. If he corrected everything else he's wrong about in the book, there wouldn't be much left to read.

Short answer?

No

my answer: for entertainment yes, for research no.

Consider that the primary utility of Mr.Cullen's work is to maintain the original sociological framing of the incident in popular memory by using the content of the incident to highlight the perennial problem of mental health and its isolating effects. What makes Mr.Cullen's ideas plausible to the wider, general milieu (regardless of accuracy) has more to do with how we've changed than anything revelatory within the book. So I believe that Mr.Cullen's book is important if you wish to understand Columbine as it is in popular memory over a decade out; and I'd suggest taking note of all the times he deviates (and how he deviates) from earlier narratives and literature that jump out at you, and research those points if you wish.

I personally think it kind of fascinating how in a very short timespan, the original media account of it being a commentary on a sociological issue- the perennial problem of bullying- had lost almost all of its explanatory power it initially held (again accuracy or inaccuracy aside.) And how much of that was due to the major social changes which were already in motion, but still transitional, nationwide when the event took place- so that by 2009, some of the assumptions made about high schoolers in 1999 look like they were from a different country. Since then, we've had generational changes in newsrooms and publishing and who is now consuming the media. The majority of us, living in a "social media" world, no longer would imagine it self explanatory that kids really into computers or socially interacting through technology was somehow "weird" or unusual and abnormal. Now, we have had a whole generation of adults who grew up taking psychiatric medications and while the wisdom of that may still be contested, it is no longer a heated controversy. We also now are more apt to categorize things in terms of personal "health" and "safety." Then there are all the other little mundane things, such as the fashions of the time and how people selfsorted, which all add up. Perhaps most crucially, there has been a reaction, post-Columbine, to the perennial problem of bullying. While however insightful or effective it has been is questionable; we are more aware of it and of the avenues they can take to alleviate a problem. In short, the relevancy of the Columbine event for the wider world demanded a context relating more to today (and today's "teen" specifically) so that it didn't suffer the consequences of becoming merely an issue of history and placed down the memory hole as just another distant, historical problem.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

My thoughts on the book.

Salander1654 wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

My thoughts on the book.

I'd like to see this pic with Cullen's head popping out of the garbage can, ala Oscar the Grouch.

Id read it. Aside from the inaccuracies people posted, the most funny being Eric was this pussy monster, who was swimming it. It does have some interesting information, and goes into the background of the friends, family and victims of the boys.

Cullen makes a lot of outlandish claims in his book. The opening is the most revolting. There's a line that says Eric got more girls than the football team. Ugh...

If you put aside all of his personal inflections in the book, there is a lot of interesting evidence. He tends to drop interesting factoids about certain people, and rather obscure forensic stuff that sometimes gets forgotten.

Take it with a grain of salt. It sometimes reads like a crappy op ed piece from a community college newspaper, but it's still an enthralling read to some degree.

Cullen romanticizes the tragedy far too often.  I would say read it AFTER you have read other material first i.e. No easy Answers by Brooks Brown or A Mother's Reckoning by Sue Klebold.

Cullen's Columbine is not the place to start if you're new, it'll fill you with too much of Cullen's perspective which is irrelevant as the previous two books mentioned are written by people who were there and knew/lived with the boys.

This is true. Cullen's book was what brought me into the Columbine thing, but I found I had to toss out a lot of what I had read. There are some things in his book that are flat out fabrications solely for him to sell the whole "THINGS YOU DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT COLUMBINE" angle that made his book a success.

Brook's book is okay. I got the feeling around the end that it was something that every person does when they're in the media spotlight. While Cullen downplay bullying to the point it doesn't exist, I think Brooks puts it too far in the forefront.

What I would love to read is a full book from the perspective of the photojournalists who were there. I bet there are a lot of things that got said and done when everyone finally got used to the camera being all around them.

xmichaelmyersii wrote:

Cullen romanticizes the tragedy far too often.  I would say read it AFTER you have read other material first i.e. No easy Answers by Brooks Brown or A Mother's Reckoning by Sue Klebold.

Cullen's Columbine is not the place to start if you're new, it'll fill you with too much of Cullen's perspective which is irrelevant as the previous two books mentioned are written by people who were there and knew/lived with the boys.

Cullen's book is the last real Columbine book I have left to read. I did read Sue's and Brooks', I took Brooks with a grain of salt though because there were a few parts that didn't seem quite right with what I know.

And he brings up the same points over and over and over again.

Lizpuff wrote:

xmichaelmyersii wrote:

Cullen romanticizes the tragedy far too often.  I would say read it AFTER you have read other material first i.e. No easy Answers by Brooks Brown or A Mother's Reckoning by Sue Klebold.

Cullen's Columbine is not the place to start if you're new, it'll fill you with too much of Cullen's perspective which is irrelevant as the previous two books mentioned are written by people who were there and knew/lived with the boys.

Cullen's book is the last real Columbine book I have left to read.  I did read Sue's and Brooks',  I took Brooks with a grain of salt though because there were a few parts that didn't seem quite right with what I know.

And he brings up the same points over and over and over again.  

What did you think of Sue Klebold's book?

Brooks does tend to rerun the same stories over and over. It was one of the things that made me question how well he knew Eric and Dylan.

xmichaelmyersii wrote:

Lizpuff wrote:

xmichaelmyersii wrote:

Cullen romanticizes the tragedy far too often.  I would say read it AFTER you have read other material first i.e. No easy Answers by Brooks Brown or A Mother's Reckoning by Sue Klebold.

Cullen's Columbine is not the place to start if you're new, it'll fill you with too much of Cullen's perspective which is irrelevant as the previous two books mentioned are written by people who were there and knew/lived with the boys.

Cullen's book is the last real Columbine book I have left to read.  I did read Sue's and Brooks',  I took Brooks with a grain of salt though because there were a few parts that didn't seem quite right with what I know.

And he brings up the same points over and over and over again.  

What did you think of Sue Klebold's book?

I enjoyed it. I know a lot of people like to cut it down but I thought it was well written. The only part I felt sad about was the fact that his jr year and her career take up a lot of space but the last few months of his life were written in just a few pages. I know she didn't spend a lot of time with him at that point though.

I liked the more personal touch her book gave. The stories of Dylan as a child and some of the back info. I did get a different idea of Dylan after reading it. And I have a huge sympathy and respect for Sue

Only aspect Ive been critical of is the notion that they werent bullied and the sex life of Eric Harris. The reason why is that both the Columbine- documents and other sources such as the Columbine- report argues that they were bullied. But yes, do it. You learn much more from people you disagree with