Revisiting an old article

I recently came upon this old interview with Sue Klebold.

Something that struck me was the comment that I sometimes go back to about any kind of movies or books written about Columbine or anything related to school shootings. She said it’s like someone is talking about something they don’t know about and taking a piece of what is hers away.

She mentions elephant and we need to talk about Kevin. I don’t think we need to talk about Kevin is based on Eric or Dylan.

I wonder if she had a problem with 19 minutes because it is heavily based on Columbine and I think the main character is based loosely on Dylan. But she doesn’t seem to have a problem with Cullens book probably because the way it portrays Dylan is sympathetic

I absolutely sympathize with Sue. However if no one is publishing something completely false about Dylan she cannot take over every creative endeavor by someone. If someone wants to write something about a mass shooting or write a movie that has to do with columbine, I think they’re allowed to. What is your stance? Here is the article


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

I believe she is still in denial. As such, she is still subconsciously protecting her little boy. Both sets of parents (and siblings), have it far worse than the other victim’s families. And yes, I view the Klebolds and Harris’ as victims.

JayT wrote:

I believe she is still in denial. As such, she is still subconsciously protecting her little boy. Both sets of parents (and siblings), have it far worse than the other victim’s families. And yes, I view the Klebolds and Harris’ as victims.

I don't think its so much denial as just wanting to protect Dylan. Sue is well aware of what her son did, even if she sometimes seems to try to lessen his involvement.  

Also we are in agreement that E&D's parents were victims too. They suffered the loss of their child, also heaped on top of the guilt that came with being the parent of someone who had caused so much pain to others.

Screamingophelia wrote:

I wonder if she had a problem with 19 minutes because it is heavily based on Columbine and I think the main character is  based loosely on Dylan. But she doesn’t seem to have a problem with Cullens book probably because the way it portrays Dylan is sympathetic

I absolutely sympathize with Sue. However if no one is publishing something completely false about Dylan she cannot take over every creative endeavor by someone.

I understand she feels upset by movies because it is entertainment, not information, so it is more upsetting when people are entertained by your real suffering or by something inspired by it. But I guess she is aware that people still have the freedom to do what they want and she also have the right to complain about the result given that she is implied in the shooting, just like it would be normal for injured students of victims' families to complain.

About Cullen's book, the thing is that we know Dylan with our brain whereas she knows him with her heart. We know Dylan as the shooter and the teenager who suffered, she knew him as a depressed teenager and as her loving son but even if she was unaware of many things before the shooting, let's not forget that she still is the one who knows him the best. All Dylans are equal and should be taken into consideration, not only the son but also not only the shooter. If she stands Cullen's book it is probably that the overall image of Dylan is close enough to the one she knows, even if there are many serious wrong information.