Sanctuary in the Desert II

Reflecting on the tragedy at Virginia Tech and wondering, after having read the alleged gunman's two plays, why all of the red flags and the concern seemingly felt by just about everyone Cho Seung-Hui came into contact with at University failed to address what was clearly deep-seated rage and alienation with his peers and with the society at large.  Two themes that scream out from the writings are those of feeling extremely threatened by the older generation, in the form of step-father and teacher, both of whom Cho's characters accuse of sexually assaulting them, and powerlessness in the face of these threats.  In the plays, the victimized characters do NOT harm or kill their assailants, though they clearly wish to do so.  As this is a central theme in both of the plays, why was nothing apparently done to address the feelings and provide healing and support for a person who so clearly felt besieged and with nowhere to turn?

In my school days, which were not that long ago, we had something called the Rap Room, where students could go to rap -- the word had the same meaning as it does these days, but we weren't doing it to make money or record songs, we were expressing ourselves among our peers and with a counsellor, in unstructured and completely free style, in a nonthreatening, nonjudgmental atmosphere, getting things off our chests and sharing them.  No one dissed us, and no one told us what to do or  what not to do; it was simply a forum for our feelings.  It has been stated repeatedly during the aftermath of this tragedy that no such outlet exists at Virginia Tech, or indeed, in most schools and universities. 

Why not?

|  Add to del.icio.us |  digg this