There was another school shooting last week. Another loss of life, students and teachers cut down to satisfy some young man's need for power and control. These shootings have become all too regular these days. It seems as though every other day I am getting a news alert that students and teachers are in danger, somewhere in the United States. I say United States, because this is the only developed nation where mass shootings are common enough occurences that eventually they plend together in my mind. Columbine, Newtown, Orlando, Las Vegas, and now Parkland. We're having the usual debates right now about gun control and mental health, and I suspect when the next shooting happens (and it has become depressingly obvious that one will), we'll start all over again. Lather, rinse, repeat, over and over.

(I do have hope that the youth who are standing up and demanding change will be the catalyst for real conversation and real solutions. Political statement: The NRA has got to get out of our political system, our society needs to stop fetishizing guns, and toxic masculinity has to be replaced with a kinder, gentler way to "be a man".)

Other than the weapon of choice (AR-15) and the location (institutions of learning), the school Rage, these types of shootings were almost unheard of. Sadly, this is a novel that feels more relevant today than it probably did when it was originally published. The main character, Charlie Decker, is a kid who just can't catch a break. Living with an abusive father, watching his mother be repressed daily by her husband's machismo and derision, and being the outcast at school has Charlie to be filled with a rage so powerful that he cannot express it with words. After beating up a teacher at school, Charlie is assigned daily counseling sessions with the school psychologist, but nothing helps. So one day, he enters his English classroom, shoots his teacher, and holds the rest of the class hostage for several hours. During that time, you learn more about his life, as well as his classmates.
shooters seem to have something else in common-rage. Regardless of where the rage comes from (abuse, an inflated sense of entitlement, or real mental illness), these young men are filled with a rage so powerful that it overrides their conscience and reason, causing them to do horrific things in order to express it. In 1978, when King (writing as Richard Bachman) wrote

I think that King really tapped into the intense emotions of adolescence with Charlie's character. Teenagers tend to feel all of their emotions more intensely than adults, especially strong emotions like love or anger or shame.Charlie was so up in his own feelings that no consequence, no threat, and no appeal was going to talk him down until he had done what he needed to do. Charlie's actions are dark enough, but what takes this story to another level is that in a Stockholm Syndrome-type of phenomenon, the other students in the room start to express their own secrets, their own rage. It's as though Charlie's extreme action has given them permission to admit things that they would otherwise keep hidden deep down in their private thoughts.

The book is really novella length (149 pages), so it's good that the scope is only a few hours of one day. It does mean, though, that King had to be economical with his character development, and while Charlie is certainly a fully-fleshed out protagonist (antagonist? King is so good at writing characters that are both), the events that have led to this particular act are not as developed, weakening the reader's understanding of the connection between what happened then and what is happening now.

I almost didn't finish reading this book, after the Parkland shooting happened. I wasn't sure I could stand for my mind to continue to occupy that sad, horrified place. But I'm glad I did. It is still good storytelling, and the themes should not be something we forget-that our young people are vulnerable to rage and despair, and we must provide them with the tools they need to manage their feelings and survive their childhoods.

Ethical Dilemmas for 1000, Alex

When stuck on a plane for several hours, it is generally a good idea to have something thought-provoking to read.  Heaven knows that there is nothing else of interest going on.  With that in mind, I picked up Testimony, by Anita Shreve.  While I can run hot and cold with her as an author, I was not disappointed.  The story revolved around a sex scandal at a prestigious boarding school in Vermont, but there was more to this story than meets the eye.

Mike Bordwin is the headmaster at Avery Academy, a co-ed boarding school in Vermont.  He comes into possession of a video that will blow his world, and the world of the school, completely apart. Before it is over, the scandal will destroy the futures of three students, as well as Mike's career.  The book is an easy read, but presents major issues to think about.  The characters are all flawed, but all sympathetic-though the least sympathetic to me was the "victim" of the scandal, which I found interesting from a reader's perspective.  Clearly Ms. Shreve wants us to examine our knee-jerk reactions to certain situations involving teens, and making the "victim" unappealing is certainly one way to do it.  It could also be seen, however, as a repetition of the "blame the victim" mentality that has persisted in our society for so long.  It's been 20 years since Jodi Foster brought us her heartwrenching performance in The Accused, but despite years of gains made in the feminist movement I still hear comments saying "She asked for it" or "What was she thinking, going/being there".  Shouldn't we all be able to be in any situation and be safe?  Why should women have a different set of rules?

But I digress...The issues presented here have no easy answers.  This book has given me something to chew on for a while-and I am thankful! 

SPOILER ALERT-there is no way for me to talk about the main theme of the book without revealing some of the content.  If you want to read the book, stop reading now or parts of it will likely be ruined for you.  You have been warned!


The main issue presented in this book is whether teenagers, male or female, can be truly held accountable for their bad decisions, and to what extent they should be punished.  The "victim", a 14 year old named Sienna, is clearly troubled.  Her ultra-rich family has moved her from school to school as she has gotten in more and more trouble.  She is beautiful,  pushes the edge of the dress code, and parties with the older students.  The three "perpetrators"-Rob, J. Dot, and Silas-are upperclassmen; 18, 19, and 18 respectively; two rich kids from out of town, Silas a local who was recruited for the basketball team and is there on scholarship.  After a night of heavy drinking, the four end up back in the boy's dorm, where a strange three way ensues.  The sex acts that end up in the tape are clearly consensual, but because the girl is 14 and the boys are of age, major repercussions rain down on all of them.  The boys are expelled, two of them losing their early admissions to prestigious universities after being arrested for sexual assualt, and the other eventually losing his life as he struggles to come to grips with the hurt his actions will cause his 17 year old girlfriend, with whom he is very much in love.

Shreve's portrayal of Sienna is clearly meant to show that even as young as 14 girls will willingly give their consent to engage in sex.  This should not shock anyone-statistics on teen sexuality and pregnancy have shown this trend clearly.  The fact that Sienna actually appears to have sought out sex with older boys, and then lied about it being non-consensual once she got caught, makes me wonder if Shreve is in fact buying into the "blame the vistim" mentality.  According to the powers that be in the story, even if Sienna sought out the boys for sex, as "adults" defined by their age, they had a responsibility to resist and say no.  Regardless of the whole "blame the victim" argument, this is the point I have trouble with.  Is it fair, or even realistic, to expect 18 and 19 year old boys to stay out of sexual relationships with younger girls?  And if society says it is, then what is an acceptable consequence for that action?  Had the three boys in the book ever made it to trial it was entirely possible that they would have had to register as sex offenders for life.  Does engaging in consensual sex acts with younger teenagers when still a teen yourself really put you in the same league as child molesters and rapists?  Until fairly recently, girls were routinely getting married at 17, 18 or 19 years old.  I myself dated a junior in college when I was a junior in high school.  Would the fairly innocent acts we engaged in then earn him a sex offender label today?

As a feminist I have long believed that men in our society need to be less cavalier in their attitudes towards women and their "right" to use us for sexual gratification.  The objectification of women and sexuality troubles me because I believe it can lead to the same kind of behavior that Sienna engaged in.  She obviously learned somewhere along the way that sex is power, and that as a young, attractive girl she could use it to her advantage.  Is this not what a lot of modern media teaches us?  But when it comes to teens-and 18 and 19 year old boys are still teens, I think that a little bit of compassion and understanding go a long way.  Suspend the boys, expel them if you must, but sex offenders...in this case, I don't think so.