Thanks for this, Chris.  As some one whose whole family went through the actual events, I’ve found this whole game particularly sickening ever since I heard about it, and I would never have really ever bothered to uncover its content without this.  Ledonne has, unsurprisingly, been in and out of the local news ever since this “game” surfaced, and I’ve always found his stated ambivalence to be an unsatisfactory answer.  Your essay helped drive that home, and it seems like it’s woven into his product.  That doesn’t give me any more reason to appreciate his effort, but it does help clear up his weak interview responses. 

However, I think far more disturbing than its confused attempts to walk a fine line is the fact that this kind of glorification really only serves to give the actual perpetrators some taste of the glory they saw in their actions.  Maybe they’re dead an unable to appreciate it, but how does that translate into the wider questions of infamy?  How does that affect the angry, unbalanced kid in the next state over who sees the empathy with the killers and not the victims?

No matter how upsetting the game-play may be, it’s only the conscience of the person at the controls that determines whether the game itself is disturbing or merely fun.  And maybe Ledonne is right about the moral ambiguities, or the need to place blame, or his own confused need to relate, but what about the ethical responsibilities in not perpetrating this event as a piece of media celebrity?

I still think Ledonne is an ass for creating this mess and releasing it—nor do I accept his attempt to distance himself from ramifictions—but I appreciate what you’ve done in tackling some of the bigger questions.

Comment by Patrick Schabe — September 20, 2007 @ 9:23 am

Let me begin by saying that I appreciate this article very much and thank you for adding some much needed context to the discussion of this game. Having read this article there were a few parts I wanted to comment on; not to add to the noise of outrage usually invoked when discussing a subject of this matter, but hopefully to contribute to the thoughtful discussion being done.

First of all, I was intrigued by the moments of reflection, guilt, and empathy you had stated this game attempted to invoke in you. Those feelings are no doubt because you are a caring empathetic person and not completely morally bankrupt and playing this game because it is shocking (I know people who want to play this game for that very reason). However, I do not believe that these moments were added in order to inspire the player to reflect on the underlying realities that create tragedies like Columbine, instead I think it is exploitation of a national tragedy of the worst kind; the kind that attempts to wrap itself in an altruistic flag right before it begins profiting off the pain and suffering of others. The creator wanted to make a game that would be shocking and controversial, so he knows that there will be an outcry (but hey, who doesn’t like free publicity). So who adds these moments of reflection and empathy to add some legitimacy to his actions. Now whenever anyone protests the game, the creator is able to point to these moments and claim that his detractors are just as blind as the people who blamed Marilyn Manson for Columbine, and that they just don’t get it.
The next aspect that I take issue with is the idea that by playing the game as the killers, you somehow gain a better understanding of their perspective and become more holistically understanding of the event. This is completely false for several reasons. The first is that you are not getting the real motivations and the real experience necessary to explain why two alienated kids decided to cross a threshold that thousands of other alienated kids do not. Furthermore, the game deconstructs the “crazy super-villain” image of the killers that the media created when they dropped the ball on the story, but it doesn’t replace them with anything real or of fundamental value, it just makes them the Mario and Luigi of school shootings. This game does the same thing parent’s groups, religious organizations, and the media did only in the other directions: two disturbed kids are no longer THE EVIL TRENCHCOAT MAFIA!, they are now just silly cartoons.
The final issue that I take with this game is its glorification of the killers in a watered-down, diluted manner, that completely muddies that waters of discourse by validating their own self-image that prompted the massacre in the first place. These kids were picked on and abused, so they created identities for themselves to cope. These identities reflected their attempts to be tough and violent; two things the alienated always confuse with self-actualization because they believe that violence is the only way for them to be left alone. These identities are then what gave them the courage to kill their classmates, teachers, and then themselves. They knew that rather then being seen as sad, sick kids, they would be vilified as evil monsters, thus validating their fake persona. This game helps achieve their objectives by making them the “badasses” who kick the shit out of the devil at the end of the game.
Ultimately, everyone ignore the problems represented by Columbine and other school shootings, because the issues we are forced to confront are too entrenched and difficult. So we create scapegoats, and find clever ways to cope with the tragedy. This game is just another mechanism for people to ignore the realities and pretend like the problem is not there. Moreover, it is exploitative under the guise of being true dialogue.

Comment by Shawn — September 20, 2007 @ 11:20 am

Does this article chatter or actually say anything?

There are always going to be people who bitch and complain about things like these.  The game was made, people need to it over it already.  This is old news.

Perhaps someday someone will release a 9/11 “simulator” or a Jean Benet-Ramsey “game.” There are far worse things in the world to be investigating than some guy who decided to turn a tragedy into a video game experience.  But that’s the problem with today’s American society.  We’re too caught up in policing completely marginal fluff when we could be using our time getting more important things done.

As I said: old news. Hardly worth reporting about again and so long after the fact.  Maybe your next big article should be about the violence in Mortal Kombat.  Kudos for being on that “savvy” pop culture bubble, PoopMatters.

Viva ambivalence.

Comment by Captain Beefheart — September 20, 2007 @ 11:25 am