The thesis of the op-ed article from The New York Times, called “Don’t Blame
the Movie, but Don’t Ignore It Either”, is basically what the title makes it
out to be. The article by Stephan Marche was about the shooting at the theater
in Aurora Colorado, and how it was not the movie’s fault, but it was a factor.
The
evidence that Marche used was loose references to media going after rap songs and
video games in the 90s’ saying they had caused a rise in murders, these debates
finally had come to a close as to not blame the media/medium. He also compared
this shooting to the assassination of President Lincoln, and that John Wilkes
Booth was, “clearly imitating Brutus from Shakespeare’s “Julius Caesar.” He
also listed facts about the shooting, and that Christian Bale visited the victims,
still comparing this to the assassination.
So
I went to Google, and looked up the things Marche had used as evidence. As for
the rap music and video game evidence, I did not find that much on rap music,
but I did find evidence that supports the video games causing violence. The
video games have been linked to violence, but it is only a factor, which
supports Marche’s thesis.
He
also stated many facts about the Aurora Colorado shooting, about what the
shooter, James E. Holmes, said before he opened fire on the audience, and what
he had said to the guard after he had been arrested, and how many were killed. I
had an easy time finding the information of how many where killed, and that he
told the police that he was the Joker.
He
also talks about the assassination of Lincoln; it is true that Booth killed the
president during “Our American Cousin”, but it is unclear if Booth was copying
Brutus, the only thing I could find is a book called, American Brutus: John Wilkes Booth and the Lincoln Conspiracies, by
Michael W. Kauffman. So I am not really if that is what he is talking about. He
also talked about how Christian Bale went to see the victims of the shooting in
the hospital. He said that, “Edwin Booth took the opposite approach after his
brother assassinated Lincoln. He hid from publicity and resigned from the
stage. He believed his career was over, that the stain of his brother’s crime
would overwhelm any future performance he could give.” I did find this to be
true, I found it on answers.com, and it was a Britannica Concise Encyclopedia excerpt.
As
upsetting as the topic is, Marche did a very good job supporting his thesis
with evidence, and still was respectful of the victims and families. I do agree
with his thesis, and I think that like with almost everything, you can’t single
one single event out to make a decision, no matter what emotional drive is
behind it. It is easy to say that a movie caused this, but it is not completely
correct.
I would say that it's important to remember that the Lincoln assasination was during war time, and was actually a conspiracy by more people than just booth. the vice president as well as the secretary of state were supposed to be assasinated that night as well. but booth's fellow conspirators thankfully failed their respective missions. So as I can see the authors loose reference to the presidential assasination of lincoln in a respect as it was shocking to the nation as a whole, I can't agree that his premise holds up upon closer inspection of the relevant facts...well done though !
ReplyDelete