Main Page | Report this Page
 
   
Science Forum Index  »  Psychology - Theory Forum  »  School-shooter's play
Page 1 of 1    
Author Message
M Winther
Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2007 5:26 am
Guest
'Richard McBeef' by Cho Seung-Hui
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0417071vtech1.html

Analysis:

To my mind, 'Richard McBeef' by Cho Seung-Hui would not seem to
indicate that the author has been subject to sexual abuse. We always
tend to pussyfoot around our complexes, and not to speak openly about
the subject matter in explicit language. Had there existed such
experiences then, typically, the inner pain would have taken on a
different expression characteristic of unconscious imagery. Instead,
the author uses the image of sexual abuse as a tool of artistic
expression. He would not do this if it was a burning issue.

On the other hand, had he reached a stage where he could consciously
discuss the subject matter of an authentic case of sexual abuse, then
he had already successfully begun to confront the problem. He would
know the real name of the perpetrator, which he could relate to the
police. He would also be able to discuss his experiences with a
therapist, or at least record some of it in writing. A conscious
realization of this type would counteract a collective punishment of
innocent people. The problem always gets its correct dimensions in the
light of consciousness. So it is very unlikely that his problem was
due to childhood sexual abuse.

Much of his imagery is clearly consciously delineated. The
hamburger-eating, fat and sloppy McBeef, seems to signify America.
Korea, his mother country, has been "abused" by USA, who enforced its
partition, and suppressed the leftist movement. Clearly, he doesn't
like "rich brats" and accuses them of "orgies". We see a psychology
that bears resemblance to the Islamic terrorists, who oppose
fornication and indecent life, and want to found a state of idealistic
cleanliness. The son in the play is not McBeef's biological son.
Cho Seung-Hui came to America as an eight year old, and was "adopted"
by America-McBeef. The biological father, who was "murdered", could
signify the conscious lifestyle of his Korean forbears. The murder of
the boy's father, then, is the partition of Korea, and South-Korea's
affiliation with corruptible Western lifestyle. America-McBeef is
projected as once a rather successful person but now going downhill.
In the play McBeef says that he tried to help the biological father,
similar to how US politicians said that they "helped" Korea from leftists
and Communists. This is probably estimable, but not in the mind of Cho.

I haven't read his other play, but the narcissistic solution of
"splendid isolation" (Kernberg) is obvious, and it combines with the
typical compensatory megalomania, when he compares himself to Jesus
and other important persons. The wish to die is there, too. From the
little I know about this case, I see the typical signs of a standard
etiology. It's that same boring old imposition of guilt on an innocent
collective, etc. With Hannah Arendt, I yawn loudly and say how boring
and banal it is. It's that same old never-ending vulgarisms. This pattern
of thought ought to be taught in many different curriculums, not only in
psychoanalysis. In the patient, the conscious realization of an archetypal
pattern will give consciousness the upper hand and the complex is
devitalized.

Pathological narcissism (NPD) is associated with the borderline
conditions, although it is perhaps a category of its own. While it is much
more far-reaching than "neurosis", it does not belong to the psychotic
category. The anti-social category is a subgroup of pathological
narcissism, and reading Kernberg's description of it in Borderline
Conditions and Pathological Narcissism, and elsewhere, I find many
poignant points of concordance. Interestingly, in some cases, says
Kernberg, there is probably a hereditary factor, and there is a
certain likeness to symptoms of autism.

Comparatively, the psychotic personality is at times delusional, but the
reality-function with this person is such that he can pay his bills,
drive a car, carry out his study assignments, and submit them in time.
He seems amply controlled, but with the narcissistic rage just below
the surface. The very controlled and planned behaviour of the school
shooters; the total lack of empathy and extreme aggression, rhymes
perfectly with this etiological category. Nor is the 'Richard McBeef'
play particularly psychotic. It is the same old muck, boringly
predictable, full of that oral rage and paranoid accusations
characteristic of the anti-social NPD patient. Had it been a work of a
psychotic, then, clearly, it would have been more interesting. I
suppose it is possible to make a psychotic content analysis, but then
one would have to make an effort.

It's important to point out, however, that the perception of NPD
does not imply a reversion back to the "oldest issues and dogmas" of
good old Freudian psychoanalysis. Kernberg says that, generally, he
wouldn't recommend this group for psychoanalysis. Schwartz-Salant
says that the prognosis is bad, although, in the general category, he
has had some success. So it's not simply the question of lying on the
analyst's couch for a couple of months, dissolving a complex. We do
acknowledge factors of heredity, and factors of abuse, especially of
an emotional character deriving from the mother, and we do acknowledge
the relative inefficiency of psychoanalysis in many of these cases.
Also, these patients do have fantasies of grandiosity and of the
paranoid hue, alternatingly. But it's not the same as psychotic
delusions.

Mats Winther
M Winther
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 11:42 am
Guest
Den 2007-04-21 12:26:27 skrev M Winther <mlwi@swipnet.se>:

Quote:
'Richard McBeef' by Cho Seung-Hui
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0417071vtech1.html

Analysis:

To my mind, 'Richard McBeef' by Cho Seung-Hui would not seem to
indicate that the author has been subject to sexual abuse. We always
tend to pussyfoot around our complexes, and not to speak openly about
the subject matter in explicit language. Had there existed such
experiences then, typically, the inner pain would have taken on a
different expression characteristic of unconscious imagery. Instead,
the author uses the image of sexual abuse as a tool of artistic
expression. He would not do this if it was a burning issue.

On the other hand, had he reached a stage where he could consciously
discuss the subject matter of an authentic case of sexual abuse, then
he had already successfully begun to confront the problem. He would
know the real name of the perpetrator, which he could relate to the
police. He would also be able to discuss his experiences with a
therapist, or at least record some of it in writing. A conscious
realization of this type would counteract a collective punishment of
innocent people. The problem always gets its correct dimensions in the
light of consciousness. So it is very unlikely that his problem was
due to childhood sexual abuse.

Much of his imagery is clearly consciously delineated. The
hamburger-eating, fat and sloppy McBeef, seems to signify America.
Korea, his mother country, has been "abused" by USA, who enforced its
partition, and suppressed the leftist movement. Clearly, he doesn't
like "rich brats" and accuses them of "orgies". We see a psychology
that bears resemblance to the Islamic terrorists, who oppose
fornication and indecent life, and want to found a state of idealistic
cleanliness. The son in the play is not McBeef's biological son.
Cho Seung-Hui came to America as an eight year old, and was "adopted"
by America-McBeef. The biological father, who was "murdered", could
signify the conscious lifestyle of his Korean forbears. The murder of
the boy's father, then, is the partition of Korea, and South-Korea's
affiliation with corruptible Western lifestyle. America-McBeef is
projected as once a rather successful person but now going downhill.
In the play McBeef says that he tried to help the biological father,
similar to how US politicians said that they "helped" Korea from leftists
and Communists. This is probably estimable, but not in the mind of Cho.

I haven't read his other play, but the narcissistic solution of
"splendid isolation" (Kernberg) is obvious, and it combines with the
typical compensatory megalomania, when he compares himself to Jesus
and other important persons. The wish to die is there, too. From the
little I know about this case, I see the typical signs of a standard
etiology. It's that same boring old imposition of guilt on an innocent
collective, etc. With Hannah Arendt, I yawn loudly and say how boring
and banal it is. It's that same old never-ending vulgarisms. This pattern
of thought ought to be taught in many different curriculums, not only in
psychoanalysis. In the patient, the conscious realization of an
archetypal
pattern will give consciousness the upper hand and the complex is
devitalized.

Pathological narcissism (NPD) is associated with the borderline
conditions, although it is perhaps a category of its own. While it is
much
more far-reaching than "neurosis", it does not belong to the psychotic
category. The anti-social category is a subgroup of pathological
narcissism, and reading Kernberg's description of it in Borderline
Conditions and Pathological Narcissism, and elsewhere, I find many
poignant points of concordance. Interestingly, in some cases, says
Kernberg, there is probably a hereditary factor, and there is a
certain likeness to symptoms of autism.

Comparatively, the psychotic personality is at times delusional, but the
reality-function with this person is such that he can pay his bills,
drive a car, carry out his study assignments, and submit them in time.
He seems amply controlled, but with the narcissistic rage just below
the surface. The very controlled and planned behaviour of the school
shooters; the total lack of empathy and extreme aggression, rhymes
perfectly with this etiological category. Nor is the 'Richard McBeef'
play particularly psychotic. It is the same old muck, boringly
predictable, full of that oral rage and paranoid accusations
characteristic of the anti-social NPD patient. Had it been a work of a
psychotic, then, clearly, it would have been more interesting. I
suppose it is possible to make a psychotic content analysis, but then
one would have to make an effort.

It's important to point out, however, that the perception of NPD
does not imply a reversion back to the "oldest issues and dogmas" of
good old Freudian psychoanalysis. Kernberg says that, generally, he
wouldn't recommend this group for psychoanalysis. Schwartz-Salant
says that the prognosis is bad, although, in the general category, he
has had some success. So it's not simply the question of lying on the
analyst's couch for a couple of months, dissolving a complex. We do
acknowledge factors of heredity, and factors of abuse, especially of
an emotional character deriving from the mother, and we do acknowledge
the relative inefficiency of psychoanalysis in many of these cases.
Also, these patients do have fantasies of grandiosity and of the
paranoid hue, alternatingly. But it's not the same as psychotic
delusions.

Mats Winther

The longing after a good father is evident in Cho's play. The real
father had drowned. Researchers in pathological homosexuality have
found that the absence of a good and loving father is, in itself, a
pathogen. There is a connection between NPD and the etiology of
homosexuality. In homosexuals, according to Kernberg, we see many
cases of different grades of pathological narcissism.[1] Aardweg,[2]
Bieber,[3] Kronemeyer,[4] West[5], Westwood[6] find that, due to an
absent or negative father, the boys have developed an unnaturally
strong emotional bond to the mother, which is causative of
identification, and therefore an identification with the father is
locked out. In Cho's case we see that the leading character is unable
to identify with America-McBeef.

A paradoxical aspect, then, is that a mother needn't be particularly
neurotic, or emotionally stifling, in order to cause damage to the
boy. Women are always narcissistic and binding to a moderate degree.
The very absence of a good father, or strong fatherly principle, is
often the relevant problem. Corneau says that the physical presence of
a loving father is central, in that he will create in the boy an
acceptance of his own body as beautiful, something that he will wear
with pride. Homosexuality, then, is a ritual by which the bodily
feelings are won back.[7]

In Cho's play we see the expression of homosexual fantasies that are
being rejected by Cho's alter ego. The sexual innuendo would not hint
at earlier abuse. It harks back to an age where the physical and
emotional contact between father and son have an important and
wholesome psychological function. But the homosexual solution of
ritual reclamation of manhood is not open to Cho. Clearly, an
identification with the father in the form of America is locked out.
Cho, torn from his Korean context, knows that his looks and mentality
is far from the general ideal.

In the Eastern cultures the presence of the fatherly principle is
traditionally very conspicuous: in China Confucianism, and in Japan
the strong emphasis on civil conduct. This phenomenon is evident also
in the Arabic civilization. It goes together with the relative level
of psychological maturity. A deterioration in the respect of a strict
fatherly society will also threaten the personality with regression,
which necessitates the narcissistic solution and homosexuality.

In Cho's play the father will simply not suffice. It's another father
that he needs. We see in this drama what underlies the revolt against
the democratic society, occurring in Islamism, Communism, and
elsewhere, namely the reaction against the weakening of the impersonal
and overarching fatherly principle. The psychological weakness of the
personal father on that particular level of cultural maturity, needs a
compensation in the form of one-sided collective ideals. The
individual discriminative capacity mustn't be counted on in the same
measure as in the Western societies.

The conclusion is that far-reaching pathology with the consequences of
mass-murder, belongs in the modern world where laws governing a sound
conduct of life are dissolved, and where people of different cultural
maturity are disseminated. The ability to identify with a group, and
the feeling of belonging in a society, is being sundered in this way.
It goes together with a depletion of the role of the personal father
as a role model, but also as a source of loving kindness.

Mats Winther

----------------------------

References

1. Otto F. Kernberg, Borderline Conditions and Pathological Narcissism
(1975).

2. Gerard J.M. van den Aardweg, On the Origins and Treatment
of Homosexuality (1986).

3. Irving Bieber m.fl., Homosexuality - a
psychoanalytic study of male homosexuals (1962).

4. Robert Kronemeyer,
Understanding homosexuality, (1985).

5. D. J. West, Parental Figures
in the Genesis of Male Homosexuality. Int. J. Soc. Psych., 5:85-97
(1959).

6. Gordon Westwood, A minority - A Report on the Life of the
Male Homosexual in Great Britain (1960). 7. Guy Corneau, Frånvarande
Fäder, Förlorade Söner (1995).
M Winther
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 12:23 am
Guest
Den 2007-04-24 18:42:24 skrev M Winther <mlwi@swipnet.se>:

Quote:
Den 2007-04-21 12:26:27 skrev M Winther <mlwi@swipnet.se>:

'Richard McBeef' by Cho Seung-Hui
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0417071vtech1.html

Analysis:

To my mind, 'Richard McBeef' by Cho Seung-Hui would not seem to
indicate that the author has been subject to sexual abuse. We always
tend to pussyfoot around our complexes, and not to speak openly about
the subject matter in explicit language. Had there existed such
experiences then, typically, the inner pain would have taken on a
different expression characteristic of unconscious imagery. Instead,
the author uses the image of sexual abuse as a tool of artistic
expression. He would not do this if it was a burning issue.

On the other hand, had he reached a stage where he could consciously
discuss the subject matter of an authentic case of sexual abuse, then
he had already successfully begun to confront the problem. He would
know the real name of the perpetrator, which he could relate to the
police. He would also be able to discuss his experiences with a
therapist, or at least record some of it in writing. A conscious
realization of this type would counteract a collective punishment of
innocent people. The problem always gets its correct dimensions in the
light of consciousness. So it is very unlikely that his problem was
due to childhood sexual abuse.

Much of his imagery is clearly consciously delineated. The
hamburger-eating, fat and sloppy McBeef, seems to signify America.
Korea, his mother country, has been "abused" by USA, who enforced its
partition, and suppressed the leftist movement. Clearly, he doesn't
like "rich brats" and accuses them of "orgies". We see a psychology
that bears resemblance to the Islamic terrorists, who oppose
fornication and indecent life, and want to found a state of idealistic
cleanliness. The son in the play is not McBeef's biological son.
Cho Seung-Hui came to America as an eight year old, and was "adopted"
by America-McBeef. The biological father, who was "murdered", could
signify the conscious lifestyle of his Korean forbears. The murder of
the boy's father, then, is the partition of Korea, and South-Korea's
affiliation with corruptible Western lifestyle. America-McBeef is
projected as once a rather successful person but now going downhill.
In the play McBeef says that he tried to help the biological father,
similar to how US politicians said that they "helped" Korea from
leftists
and Communists. This is probably estimable, but not in the mind of Cho.

I haven't read his other play, but the narcissistic solution of
"splendid isolation" (Kernberg) is obvious, and it combines with the
typical compensatory megalomania, when he compares himself to Jesus
and other important persons. The wish to die is there, too. From the
little I know about this case, I see the typical signs of a standard
etiology. It's that same boring old imposition of guilt on an innocent
collective, etc. With Hannah Arendt, I yawn loudly and say how boring
and banal it is. It's that same old never-ending vulgarisms. This
pattern
of thought ought to be taught in many different curriculums, not only in
psychoanalysis. In the patient, the conscious realization of an
archetypal
pattern will give consciousness the upper hand and the complex is
devitalized.

Pathological narcissism (NPD) is associated with the borderline
conditions, although it is perhaps a category of its own. While it is
much
more far-reaching than "neurosis", it does not belong to the psychotic
category. The anti-social category is a subgroup of pathological
narcissism, and reading Kernberg's description of it in Borderline
Conditions and Pathological Narcissism, and elsewhere, I find many
poignant points of concordance. Interestingly, in some cases, says
Kernberg, there is probably a hereditary factor, and there is a
certain likeness to symptoms of autism.

Comparatively, the psychotic personality is at times delusional, but the
reality-function with this person is such that he can pay his bills,
drive a car, carry out his study assignments, and submit them in time.
He seems amply controlled, but with the narcissistic rage just below
the surface. The very controlled and planned behaviour of the school
shooters; the total lack of empathy and extreme aggression, rhymes
perfectly with this etiological category. Nor is the 'Richard McBeef'
play particularly psychotic. It is the same old muck, boringly
predictable, full of that oral rage and paranoid accusations
characteristic of the anti-social NPD patient. Had it been a work of a
psychotic, then, clearly, it would have been more interesting. I
suppose it is possible to make a psychotic content analysis, but then
one would have to make an effort.

It's important to point out, however, that the perception of NPD
does not imply a reversion back to the "oldest issues and dogmas" of
good old Freudian psychoanalysis. Kernberg says that, generally, he
wouldn't recommend this group for psychoanalysis. Schwartz-Salant
says that the prognosis is bad, although, in the general category, he
has had some success. So it's not simply the question of lying on the
analyst's couch for a couple of months, dissolving a complex. We do
acknowledge factors of heredity, and factors of abuse, especially of
an emotional character deriving from the mother, and we do acknowledge
the relative inefficiency of psychoanalysis in many of these cases.
Also, these patients do have fantasies of grandiosity and of the
paranoid hue, alternatingly. But it's not the same as psychotic
delusions.

Mats Winther

The longing after a good father is evident in Cho's play. The real
father had drowned. Researchers in pathological homosexuality have
found that the absence of a good and loving father is, in itself, a
pathogen. There is a connection between NPD and the etiology of
homosexuality. In homosexuals, according to Kernberg, we see many
cases of different grades of pathological narcissism.[1] Aardweg,[2]
Bieber,[3] Kronemeyer,[4] West[5], Westwood[6] find that, due to an
absent or negative father, the boys have developed an unnaturally
strong emotional bond to the mother, which is causative of
identification, and therefore an identification with the father is
locked out. In Cho's case we see that the leading character is unable
to identify with America-McBeef.

A paradoxical aspect, then, is that a mother needn't be particularly
neurotic, or emotionally stifling, in order to cause damage to the
boy. Women are always narcissistic and binding to a moderate degree.
The very absence of a good father, or strong fatherly principle, is
often the relevant problem. Corneau says that the physical presence of
a loving father is central, in that he will create in the boy an
acceptance of his own body as beautiful, something that he will wear
with pride. Homosexuality, then, is a ritual by which the bodily
feelings are won back.[7]

In Cho's play we see the expression of homosexual fantasies that are
being rejected by Cho's alter ego. The sexual innuendo would not hint
at earlier abuse. It harks back to an age where the physical and
emotional contact between father and son have an important and
wholesome psychological function. But the homosexual solution of
ritual reclamation of manhood is not open to Cho. Clearly, an
identification with the father in the form of America is locked out.
Cho, torn from his Korean context, knows that his looks and mentality
is far from the general ideal.

In the Eastern cultures the presence of the fatherly principle is
traditionally very conspicuous: in China Confucianism, and in Japan
the strong emphasis on civil conduct. This phenomenon is evident also
in the Arabic civilization. It goes together with the relative level
of psychological maturity. A deterioration in the respect of a strict
fatherly society will also threaten the personality with regression,
which necessitates the narcissistic solution and homosexuality.

In Cho's play the father will simply not suffice. It's another father
that he needs. We see in this drama what underlies the revolt against
the democratic society, occurring in Islamism, Communism, and
elsewhere, namely the reaction against the weakening of the impersonal
and overarching fatherly principle. The psychological weakness of the
personal father on that particular level of cultural maturity, needs a
compensation in the form of one-sided collective ideals. The
individual discriminative capacity mustn't be counted on in the same
measure as in the Western societies.

The conclusion is that far-reaching pathology with the consequences of
mass-murder, belongs in the modern world where laws governing a sound
conduct of life are dissolved, and where people of different cultural
maturity are disseminated. The ability to identify with a group, and
the feeling of belonging in a society, is being sundered in this way.
It goes together with a depletion of the role of the personal father
as a role model, but also as a source of loving kindness.

Mats Winther

----------------------------

References

1. Otto F. Kernberg, Borderline Conditions and Pathological Narcissism
(1975).

2. Gerard J.M. van den Aardweg, On the Origins and Treatment
of Homosexuality (1986).

3. Irving Bieber m.fl., Homosexuality - a
psychoanalytic study of male homosexuals (1962).

4. Robert Kronemeyer,
Understanding homosexuality, (1985).

5. D. J. West, Parental Figures
in the Genesis of Male Homosexuality. Int. J. Soc. Psych., 5:85-97
(1959).

6. Gordon Westwood, A minority - A Report on the Life of the
Male Homosexual in Great Britain (1960). 7. Guy Corneau, Frånvarande
Fäder, Förlorade Söner (1995).


Nota bene: when I said that "the physical and emotional contact
between father and son have an important and wholesome psychological
function" then I did *NOT* mean sexual contact. Some pedophiliac in
another group made such associations.

Mats WInther
The_Sage
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 9:45 pm
Guest
Quote:
Reply to article by: "M Winther" <mlwi@swipnet.se
Date written: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 12:26:27 +0200
MsgID:<optq4pydic3bzrao@d213-101-30-160.swipnet.se

'Richard McBeef' by Cho Seung-Hui
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0417071vtech1.html

Analysis:

To my mind, 'Richard McBeef' by Cho Seung-Hui would not seem to
indicate that the author has been subject to sexual abuse. We always
tend to pussyfoot around our complexes, and not to speak openly about
the subject matter in explicit language. Had there existed such
experiences then, typically, the inner pain would have taken on a
different expression characteristic of unconscious imagery.

You are assuming without evidence or logic that all sexually abused people
always will always repress their sexual abuse. Your conclusion is therefore
invalid.

The Sage

=============================================================
http://members.cox.net/the.sage/index.htm

"...I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in
one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you
dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why
I dismiss yours" (Stephen F. Roberts)
=============================================================
Guest
Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 5:37 pm
As mentioned by the media Cho wasn't the greatest writer, but I see
quite a bit of symbolism in this play. This play is the closest
allegory we have to Cho's life experience. First of all, the story if
of a 13 year old boy whose father reportedly dies in a boating
accident and gets a new ex-football player stepfather, Richard
McBeef. The boating accident is symbolic of Cho's family's journey
from Korea to America. In that voyage, Cho feels cutoff from his
roots, culture, and heritage, and hence symbolically his true
biological father (easy to make this connection with the male-centric
Korean culture). Further, this strained relationship and Cho's
accusation that Richard McBeef killed his father so he could "get into
[his] mom's pant" may also symbolize what Cho views as America's
imperialistic conspiracy, as this next section discusses the symbolism
behind "Richard McBeef."

Cho is all of a sudden thrown into a new and unfamiliar American
culture, symbolized by Richard McBeef. We've seen his criticism of
"hedonism" and "debauchery", showing his purposeful intent of the
choice of the name "Dick" to symbolize the high emphasis on sex in
America. Richard McBeef also personifies what Cho views as America's
imperialistic tendencies, since Richard "knew [John/Cho's] mom was too
good for [John/Cho's] father. So you took him out and stole her." In
this light, whereas his father symbolized his Korean culture and
heritage that was destroyed, his mother symbolizes the attempts by
Koreans to assimilate to American culture. The fact that Richard
McBeef is an ex-football player says a lot too, as we all know what
football players were like in high school; the handsome athlete all
the girls love [which he also sought after], but also the source of
ridicule and bullying. The choice of McBeef as a last name is also
quite intentional, symbolizing the excess of McDonald's and bovines
symbolizing fat, lazy, and ready for slaughter. He also accuses this
character of murdering his father. Since we could entertain that
Richard McBeef the football player is something that Cho may have
aspired to be but knew he could never achieve, another possible
dimension is that Richard McBeef may also symbolize Cho's sexual
frustration he encounters here in the US. As we have discovered, many
of Cho's advances towards American women were rebuffed. Realizing his
aspirations for having a love relationship with an American woman are
futile, he resigns to the "Must Kill Dick" mentality to put an end to
his frustration. I'll admit this might be a bit of my psychoanalysis
creeping in and so might be a stretch...and finally to state the
obvious, he probably also felt that Americans were "dicks" to him.

The ending of Richard McBeef also speaks volumes. Up to this point,
Richard has been quite passive, and outside of his accusations we
actually have no reason to believe he even actually molested John.
Perhaps Cho realizes that as much as the Americans in his life have
taunted and ridiculed him, no one has actually caused any real
physical harm. Or perhaps Richard's passiveness is Cho's view of
American's "politically correct" culture that is too scared to say
anything out of fear. But in perhaps his final foreshadowing, as Cho
attempts to kill Richard McBeef by shoving a candy bar down his
throat, deep down he knows that the true America will fight back and
not tolerate such unacceptable behavior. At this point, perhaps he
already had devised his macabre plan and envisioned he would be killed
by law enforcement when he finally decides to fight back against
American society/Richard McBeef.

The boy's name "John" is quite generic, even glaringly generic, for
such a disturbing piece. Cho uses the name John and other generic
western names in other writings, perhaps this is a manifestation of
his desire to have just a normal name to fit in with his peers.
Again, might be a bit of a stretch.

I recently came across one blogger mention the strangely odd choice
for
John/Cho's attempted (but failed) murder weapon in Richard McBeef, a
half-eaten breakfast cereal bar. The blogger postulates that perhaps
"the
half-eaten cereal bar may represent unfinished business, a morning
frozen in
time, a day un-begun, an unfulfilled desire." When is a cereal bar
just a
cereal bar? Did he eat these regularly, and we are just seeking for
meaning
in something that just isn't there? Or perhaps this was also a
symbolic
foreshadowing of his plan for that day? Considering the interruption
he
made that morning to go to the post office. He also mentions Richard
McBeef
being fat--what was his intent of attacking the character with food?
If
Richard McBeef symbolizes America, did he think in his own mind that
he was
just giving our country a mouth-load of what it feeds itself with on a
daily
basis anyway?

I also perhaps overlooked some symbolism in his mother Sue. Perhaps
she
symbolizes Korean culture, so willing to achieve success in America,
that
they are hysterically unaware and naive of the deeper problems faced
by
Korean Americans caught inbetween cultures, and only pre-occupied
with
outward appearances? Since it doesn't seem like she truly understands
John
and the source of his anger.

And the ending of the play...I might add that Cho was well aware that
he is
too small to fight Richard McBeef/American culture and win, as
symbolized by
the swift death dealt by Richard McBeef in a single blow.

On Apr 21, 6:26 am, "M Winther" <m...@swipnet.se> wrote:
Quote:
'Richard McBeef' by Cho Seung-Huihttp://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0417071vtech1.html

Analysis:

To my mind, 'Richard McBeef' by Cho Seung-Hui would not seem to
indicate that the author has been subject to sexual abuse. We always
tend to pussyfoot around our complexes, and not to speak openly about
the subject matter in explicit language. Had there existed such
experiences then, typically, the inner pain would have taken on a
different expression characteristic of unconscious imagery. Instead,
the author uses the image of sexual abuse as a tool of artistic
expression. He would not do this if it was a burning issue.

On the other hand, had he reached a stage where he could consciously
discuss the subject matter of an authentic case of sexual abuse, then
he had already successfully begun to confront the problem. He would
know the real name of the perpetrator, which he could relate to the
police. He would also be able to discuss his experiences with a
therapist, or at least record some of it in writing. A conscious
realization of this type would counteract a collective punishment of
innocent people. The problem always gets its correct dimensions in the
light of consciousness. So it is very unlikely that his problem was
due to childhood sexual abuse.

Much of his imagery is clearly consciously delineated. The
hamburger-eating, fat and sloppy McBeef, seems to signify America.
Korea, his mother country, has been "abused" by USA, who enforced its
partition, and suppressed the leftist movement. Clearly, he doesn't
like "rich brats" and accuses them of "orgies". We see a psychology
that bears resemblance to the Islamic terrorists, who oppose
fornication and indecent life, and want to found a state of idealistic
cleanliness. The son in the play is not McBeef's biological son.
Cho Seung-Hui came to America as an eight year old, and was "adopted"
by America-McBeef. The biological father, who was "murdered", could
signify the conscious lifestyle of his Korean forbears. The murder of
the boy's father, then, is the partition of Korea, and South-Korea's
affiliation with corruptible Western lifestyle. America-McBeef is
projected as once a rather successful person but now going downhill.
In the play McBeef says that he tried to help the biological father,
similar to how US politicians said that they "helped" Korea from leftists
and Communists. This is probably estimable, but not in the mind of Cho.

I haven't read his other play, but the narcissistic solution of
"splendid isolation" (Kernberg) is obvious, and it combines with the
typical compensatory megalomania, when he compares himself to Jesus
and other important persons. The wish to die is there, too. From the
little I know about this case, I see the typical signs of a standard
etiology. It's that same boring old imposition of guilt on an innocent
collective, etc. With Hannah Arendt, I yawn loudly and say how boring
and banal it is. It's that same old never-ending vulgarisms. This pattern
of thought ought to be taught in many different curriculums, not only in
psychoanalysis. In the patient, the conscious realization of an archetypal
pattern will give consciousness the upper hand and the complex is
devitalized.

Pathological narcissism (NPD) is associated with the borderline
conditions, although it is perhaps a category of its own. While it is much
more far-reaching than "neurosis", it does not belong to the psychotic
category. The anti-social category is a subgroup of pathological
narcissism, and reading Kernberg's description of it in Borderline
Conditions and Pathological Narcissism, and elsewhere, I find many
poignant points of concordance. Interestingly, in some cases, says
Kernberg, there is probably a hereditary factor, and there is a
certain likeness to symptoms of autism.

Comparatively, the psychotic personality is at times delusional, but the
reality-function with this person is such that he can pay his bills,
drive a car, carry out his study assignments, and submit them in time.
He seems amply controlled, but with the narcissistic rage just below
the surface. The very controlled and planned behaviour of the school
shooters; the total lack of empathy and extreme aggression, rhymes
perfectly with this etiological category. Nor is the 'Richard McBeef'
play particularly psychotic. It is the same old muck, boringly
predictable, full of that oral rage and paranoid accusations
characteristic of the anti-social NPD patient. Had it been a work of a
psychotic, then, clearly, it would have been more interesting. I
suppose it is possible to make a psychotic content analysis, but then
one would have to make an effort.

It's important to point out, however, that the perception of NPD
does not imply a reversion back to the "oldest issues and dogmas" of
good old Freudian psychoanalysis. Kernberg says that, generally, he
wouldn't recommend this group for psychoanalysis. Schwartz-Salant
says that the prognosis is bad, although, in the general category, he
has had some success. So it's not simply the question of lying on the
analyst's couch for a couple of months, dissolving a complex. We do
acknowledge factors of heredity, and factors of abuse, especially of
an emotional character deriving from the mother, and we do acknowledge
the relative inefficiency of psychoanalysis in many of these cases.
Also, these patients do have fantasies of grandiosity and of the
paranoid hue, alternatingly. But it's not the same as psychotic
delusions.

Mats Winther
The_Sage
Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 8:38 pm
Guest
Quote:
Reply to article by: albert.yang@gmail.com
Date written: 4 May 2007 15:37:41 -0700
MsgID:<1178318261.951297.278680@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com

The ending of Richard McBeef also speaks volumes. Up to this point,
Richard has been quite passive, and outside of his accusations we
actually have no reason to believe he even actually molested John.
Perhaps Cho realizes that as much as the Americans in his life have
taunted and ridiculed him, no one has actually caused any real
physical harm. Or perhaps Richard's passiveness is Cho's view of
American's "politically correct" culture that is too scared to say
anything out of fear. But in perhaps his final foreshadowing, as Cho
attempts to kill Richard McBeef by shoving a candy bar down his
throat, deep down he knows that the true America will fight back and
not tolerate such unacceptable behavior. At this point, perhaps he
already had devised his macabre plan and envisioned he would be killed
by law enforcement when he finally decides to fight back against
American society/Richard McBeef.

In psychology, mental harm is everybit as harmful and real as physical harm. But
Cho is Korean and so doesn't have his character seek revenge when his mother is
murdered in cold blood and he remains passive instead. In Korean culture, that
would get a different response than in American culture, so when Cho realizes
that Americans don't respond to passivity, but over-aggression, Cho explodes
with aggression in the end. Cho doesn't like being aggressive so he goes into
the situation knowing that it is a suicide mission with a symbolic meaning of
cramming their own hatred and aggression back down their own throats.

Quote:
The boy's name "John" is quite generic, even glaringly generic, for
such a disturbing piece. Cho uses the name John and other generic
western names in other writings, perhaps this is a manifestation of
his desire to have just a normal name to fit in with his peers.
Again, might be a bit of a stretch.

A generic and simple name is indicative of someone who wants to live simply and
not stand out from the crowd.

Quote:
I recently came across one blogger mention the strangely odd choice for
John/Cho's attempted (but failed) murder weapon in Richard McBeef, a
half-eaten breakfast cereal bar. The blogger postulates that perhaps "the
half-eaten cereal bar may represent unfinished business, a morning frozen in
time, a day un-begun, an unfulfilled desire." When is a cereal bar just a
cereal bar? Did he eat these regularly, and we are just seeking for meaning
in something that just isn't there? Or perhaps this was also a symbolic
foreshadowing of his plan for that day? Considering the interruption he
made that morning to go to the post office. He also mentions Richard McBeef
being fat--what was his intent of attacking the character with food? If
Richard McBeef symbolizes America, did he think in his own mind that he was
just giving our country a mouth-load of what it feeds itself with on a daily
basis anyway?

It has become the breakfast of wannabee champions, champions who in reality have
great sounding names but physically are cruel and fugly.

Quote:
I also perhaps overlooked some symbolism in his mother Sue. Perhaps she
symbolizes Korean culture, so willing to achieve success in America, that
they are hysterically unaware and naive of the deeper problems faced by
Korean Americans caught inbetween cultures, and only pre-occupied with
outward appearances? Since it doesn't seem like she truly understands John
and the source of his anger.

This isn't about cultures, although culture played a role. This is about a
naive, small person who didn't speak english well, wasn't tall, and didn't have
rich parents, and comes to a country that divides everyone into "winners and
losers" where naive, small, short, and not-so-rich people are losers.

Quote:
And the ending of the play...I might add that Cho was well aware that he is
too small to fight Richard McBeef/American culture and win, as symbolized by
the swift death dealt by Richard McBeef in a single blow.

What it is saying is that Cho didn't want to live in a world that allows people
like McBeef to exist. The act of shoving the breakfast bar down McBeef's throat
wasn't to kill him, it was to publically humiliate him for being McBeef.

The Sage

=============================================================
http://members.cox.net/the.sage/index.htm

"...I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in
one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you
dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why
I dismiss yours" (Stephen F. Roberts)
=============================================================
 
Page 1 of 1       All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:07 pm