Tomorrow this blog will be silent and dark in honor of the victims of violence at Virginia Tech and around the world. It will sit quietly in memory and prayer for their pain and suffering.
Today, however, I’d like to quibble with words. It bothers me that the incident has been coined a “massacre.” I have issues on a number of different levels with this. First and foremost is that Virginia Tech has and will continue to contribute many stars to the galaxy of engineering universe. It is a top school for engineering in the country. Henceforth now though, it will be known as “that massascre” school.
Secondly, the incident was not, NOT, a massacre. Yes, a large number of people were killed by someone who was more heavily weaponed than they. Yes, he came upon them when they did not expect him. They had no defenses. However, the word massacre implies a certain sense that the forces of killing have the support of higher authority (government usually). A massacre usually occurs during a state of war. The MyLai massacre is a modern occurence. The Anfal Campaign was a several years long massacre undertaken by Sadaam Hussien to punish the Kurds in northern Iraq. The Battle of the Little Big Horn is another well known episode. In a wonderful turnabout the U.S. government is attempting to right the wrongs done in the Sandy Creek Massacre 142 years ago by establishing a memorial to the Cheyenne there. A massacre is also undertaken by many who have full control of their faculties. They are following the logical (if misguided) precepts upon which their way of life is based.
The incident at Virginia Tech ought more properly to be coined a tragedy (an event resulting in great loss or misfortune), or a catastrophe (a state of extreme -usually irredemediable- ruin and misfortune). Seung Hui Cho very clearly did not have full control of his faculties for quite some time before April 16 and likely for years previous to the event. This was no military campaign which was following the logical (if misguided) precepts based upon a way of life. This was anger, frustration, howling rage, fear, and evil personified and it ended with the taking of his own life, something that true massacres never end with.
When we call an event of this nature a massacre we separate the shooter from his community in such a way that the community is no longer responsible for him or to him in any fashion. He must exist outside of the community in order to wreak such destruction. And yet, Seung existed within his community. What can we learn from this about the nature of community? About the nature of this specific community? What must change within that system or other larger systems to prevent these sorts of brokenness from occurring in the future? This was no massacre because Seung was part of these people. This was a tragedy, a heartwrenching, gut twisting failure on the part of our whole system to help the Seung Cho’s of this world find their voice.
