Random Acts of Violence . . .

I've had some time now to reflect on the Virginia Tech shootings and one thought swirls around in my mind again and again. Why were the officials of Virginia Tech surprised? In a recent news article, the former English department chairperson said that "the anger Cho expressed was palpable if not explicit." And the writing was so disturbing that she approached university police and officials for help. What happened after that? What interventions were done? According to CNN, Cho was reported several times to the police for stalking or harassing women. Later a former roommate reported to authorities that Cho might be suicidal.

In 2005 police asked Cho to see a counselor after speaking with him at length, and a temporary detention order was obtained. At that time, Cho was declared mentally ill by a Virginia special justice, who declared that Cho was "an imminent danger" to himself. Also included in this temporary detention was confirmation that Cho "presents an imminent danger to himself as a result of mental illness;" however, a box indicating that the subject "Presents an imminent danger to others as a result of mental illness" was not checked.

In another part of the form, Cho was described as "mentally ill and in need of hospitalization, and presents an imminent danger to self or others as a result of mental illness, or is so seriously mentally ill as to be substantially unable to care for self, and is incapable of volunteering or unwilling to volunteer for treatment." So how does a person who is incapable of taking care of himself and incompetent enough to recognize his serious mental health problems only stay in a mental health facility for two days? A two-day stint at the local mental health unit? That's all? Was he medicated? Why was a person so disturbed allowed to leave a clinic on his own volition? Was he THAT good at either lying or covering his feelings that he was able to convince the mental health staff he was well enough to go? I'm baffled.

Obviously acts of violence are NEVER random. Cho's creative writing samples clearly show that he fantasized about killing people and getting back at people for past grievances. It appears that Cho wanted to be a black sheep--to be seen as different. And as much as he tried to hide from society with his demeanor he also wanted to be noticed. He was crying out so loudly but nobody really heard him. They saw him as a weirdo--which he probably was--but with good reason. His enigmatic personality and strange classroom antics (taking pictures of students in class), ultimately drew attention to himself in a powerful way. By freaking out his peers HE was now the one in control. So as long as people ignored him and wrote him off as crazy, the more agitated he became, and the higher the ante became. In the end, he memorialized himself by committing a horrific violent act--one that could have been prevented. He had the last say, he chose who was to die and live, his voice was heard, his life was analyzed from every angle and standpoint possible from every major network in the US and outside the US. But a random suicide would not get him noticed--a seemingly random, large scale act of violence would. It would touch all of us in some way. He was finally noticed.

Mr. Vonnegut, We'll Miss You

Novelist Kurt Vonnegut Dies at Age 84
Apr 12, 11:55 AM EST

The Associated Press

NEW YORK -- In books such as "Slaughterhouse-Five ," "Cat's Cradle," and "Hocus Pocus," Kurt Vonnegut mixed the bitter and funny with a touch of the profound. Vonnegut, regarded by many critics as a key influence in shaping 20th-century American literature, died Wednesday at 84. He had suffered brain injuries after a recent fall at his Manhattan home, said his wife, photographer Jill Krementz.

Vonnegut's more than a dozen books, short stories, essays and plays contained elements of social commentary, science fiction and autobiography.

In a statement, Norman Mailer hailed Vonnegut as "a marvelous writer with a style that remained undeniably and imperturbably his own. ... I would salute him our own Mark Twain."

"He was sort of like nobody else," said another fellow author, Gore Vidal. "Kurt was never dull."

A self-described religious skeptic and freethinking humanist, Vonnegut used protagonists such as Billy Pilgrim ("Slaughterhouse-Fiv e") and Eliot Rosewater ("God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater") as transparent vehicles for his points of view.

Like "Catch-22," by Vonnegut's friend, Joseph Heller, "Slaughterhouse-Five " was a World War II novel embraced by opponents of the Vietnam War, linking a so-called "good war" to the unpopular conflict of the 1960s and '70s.

Vonnegut lectured regularly, exhorting audiences to think for themselves and delighting in barbed commentary against the institutions he felt were dehumanizing people.

"He was a man who combined a wicked sense of humor and sort of steady moral compass, who was always sort of looking at the big picture of the things that were most important," said Joel Bleifuss, editor of In These Times, a liberal magazine based in Chicago that featured Vonnegut articles.

Some of Vonnegut's books were banned and burned for alleged obscenity. He took on censorship as an active member of the PEN writers' aid group and the American Civil Liberties Union.

The American Humanist Association, which promotes individual freedom, rational thought and scientific skepticism, made him its honorary president.

Vonnegut said the villains in his books were never individuals, but culture, society and history, which he said were making a mess of the planet.

"I like to say that the 51st state is the state of denial," he told The Associated Press in 2005.

continued http://entertainment.msn.com/news/article.aspx?news=258339>1=9246&mpc=2

Works by Kurt Vonnegut
"Player Piano," 1951
"The Sirens of Titan," 1959
"Canary in a Cat House," 1961 (short works)
"Mother Night," 1961
"Cat's Cradle," 1963
"God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater," 1965
"Welcome to the Monkey House," 1968 (short works)
"Slaughterhouse-F ive," 1969
"Happy Birthday, Wanda June," 1971 (play)
"Between Time and Timbuktu," 1972 (TV script)
"Breakfast of Champions," 1973
"Wampeters, Foma & Granfalloons," 1974 (opinions)
"Slapstick," 1976
"Jailbird," 1979
"Palm Sunday: An Autobiographical Collage," 1981 (essays)
"Deadeye Dick," 1982
"Galapagos," 1985
"Bluebeard," 1987
"Hocus Pocus," 1990
"Fates Worse than Death: An Autobiographical Collage of the 1980s," 1991 (essays)
"Timequake," 1997
"A Man Without a Country," 2005 (essays)

The Grouchies

With winter finally behind us (I hope), and more sunshine in front of us I hope that the weather can eliminate some of the grouchies. I have dealt with some of the rudest people in the past few months, and I often wonder if they are getting enough vitamin D and calcium which stave off depression or seasonal affective disorder. Some of the grouchiest people I have dealt with are service workers who act as though you are impinging on their very, very important work, or that they are doing you a huge favor by answering the phone and speaking to you. Blah. If they're in a funk and feel grouchy I suggest they don't answer the phone. Don't talk to me. Or anybody.

As a teacher, I usually can handle such annoying people by making a calming statement, cracking a joke to ease the tension, or privately (but nicely) putting that person in his or her place. However I have found that when dealing with people in the service profession, it works best to end the conversation quickly and say "thank you" for their help without missing a beat. They usually sound puzzled. Good. Getting off the phone saves my sanity, prevents them from doing any more damage, and prevents me from reaching into my tool box of extremely biting zingers to blast into the phone. And I really don't want to use those gems too frequently--particularly if I have to deal with those people on a regular basis.

I guess I expect my day to be filled with issues. If a day goes considerably well without too many problems I consider it a gift--not a right. And when I have a grouchy day (which is rare), I just let people know that "it's not a four star day" for me, but I don't take it out on them (at least knowingly!)

All I can say is . . . get over it.

Work . . .

Why do we work so hard in the US? In most European countries, people have around six weeks of vacation time, but, here, we feel guilty if we take one. I feel guilty if I take a vacation day or a personal day because I know that it stresses everyone out who has to cover for me.

Shortly before the day(s) off, I make sure everything is perfectly organized, lesson plans are impeccably designed, and I actually clean off my desk. Then I try to avoid the "coverees" because it’s agonizing to see their forced smiles and pained looks as they say, "Everything will be okay. I’m fine. Really." HA. I don’t believe them!

I always get a nagging feeling when I return back to my classroom that the previous day was sheer pandemonium. It’s as though a big cloud of bad karma is still hovering in the air. After my guilt-ridden day off, I see the "coverees" in the halls looking slightly rumpled and exhausted, nodding their heads saying, "I don’t know how you do it." Neither do I. I need a vacation.

Thank goodness for understanding, but slightly tortured coworkers.

This is my dream vacation . . .

http://www.terragalleria.com/europe/italy/amalfi-coast/amalfi-coast.html

Ahh . . . where I'd like to be right now . . .