Bowling for Columbine: White Men with Guns

A Film by Michael Moore

Written, Directed, Produced by Michael Moore

2002

Essay by Rose Pacatte, FSP

November 9, 2002

The massacre of April 20, 1999 at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado affected our national psyche very deeply. Eric Harris' and Dylan Klebold's actions that day remain mysteriously or at best unsatisfactorily unexplained by a hodgepodge of accusations and ideas. I found Michael Moore's haunting, ironic, and pseudo- documentary as a means to explore and examine the culture that would allow the killing of one's fellow students, teachers and themselves to make sense.

"Men with guns" is a phrase that occurs often in movies, such as A Few Good Men, The Magnificent Seven and of course, John Sayle's 1997 thoughtful film of the same title: Men with Guns. Each of these Hollywood films asks viewers to think about the power dynamic in a society where men have guns just because they can. Bowling for Columbine is an in-your-face analysis that suggests a frightening scenario of symptoms about the United States' dubious gift of the Second Amendment letting men, women and children have all the guns they want.

Moore's introspective smorgasbord approach suggests at least subliminal, unconscious and obvious but ignored links between Michigan as the point of departure for our nonchalant and irresponsible privileged gun culture and what's wrong with it. He gives us the Michigan of his youth, the "militia" (including some women, too), the fact that Eric Harris once lived there, that Oklahoma City bomber Terry Nichols was a Michigander and Timothy McVey visited Terry and his brother James Nichols' farm there several times, the connection of these men to the military, a whole range of masculine intelligence or lack thereof for men who have guns, the role of the media in creating the state of fear Americans live in, the U.S. military machine, the war industry, poverty, K-Mart, the NRA, racism, Marilyn Manson, South Park, Dick Clark, Charlton Heston and more.

Media literacy educators take note: Trey Parker of South Park and Marilyn Manson are two of the most forthright, honest and best interviews in the whole movie and provide excellent media education insights. The interview with Heston is probably not as effective as Moore intended it, but it has its place in this anti-gun arsenal of a movie.

Moore is a scruffy and untidy big man who appears in most of the film, yet he does not dominate it visually. What stands out, instead, are the collective questions, suggestions and connections he makes. Right or wrong, they are provocative and interesting.

A critique of nihilism, though not articulated per se, certainly underpins the argument that the Second Amendment is no longer a politically and/or objectively valid "principle," or "freedom" despite the fact that our great white forefathers crafted it to defend us from subversion and attack. What a sad and tragic indictment it is on our society that nihilism has replaced virtue, and might for right.

The sociologist Anthony Giddens gives us four consequences of modernity (that the dictionary defines as "a self-conscious break with the past and a search for new forms of expression"): capitalism, industrialism, government surveillance and control over the means of violence. Michael Moore gives us a very sobering look at our, and by extension, our elected government's involvement in these consequences and then some.

A serious discussion of Bowling for Columbine for the faith community invites an analysis through the lens of Catholic social teaching, principles that actually transcend adherence to any particular system of religious beliefs. Why? Because though they have Biblical roots, are unassailable standards for all seasons and all peoples: human dignity, the common good, a preferential option for the poor, collegiality and subsidiarity, equitable distribution of goods and care for the earth. Placing these face to face with the Second Amendment and its consequences as outlined by Moore would create an incredible conversation for relevant dialogue, reflection, action and social change.

I had a teacher once who used to tell us that when you point a finger at someone to accuse, you are pointing three back at yourself. Michael Moore is pointing one big chubby finger at the anomalies of present-day gun huggers who do not seem to be able to balance the basic building blocks of human existence: freedom and responsibility.

Here's how I would label the three fingers pointing back at Michael: 1) you are creating more of the very fear you say the media generate through what some would call a very manipulative and calculated film (I would never want to live in Michigan after this; if I had to choose I would take Canada!) 2) you are a card-carrying member of the NRA yet you never explain how you reconcile your view of the Second Amendment with those of the people you critique and 3) you done good because you made us think and ask questions.