In light of the novel’s treatment of school shooting and violence, it is interesting to look at the data around the motivations of school shooters. Simon Kelleher is portrayed as upper-middle-class, smart, and entrepreneurial: he builds a popular and influential app that becomes central to his classmates’ lives. He is also a young, straight white male who feels frustrated that he is not popular. Does he really fit the profile for someone who would sympathize with school shooters, commit a violent crime, and take down his classmates?
According to Psychology Today, 90% of school shooters are males who felt “bullied or harassed.” They sometimes feel as if they have been “treated unfairly.” They are often described as “strange.” They often have dysfunctional families, and are motivated by other killings. They rarely have specific targets. However, their histories on social media often suggest a fascination with violence and an active fantasy life.
Does Simon fit this profile? One critique of the novel may be that Simon is not so much a victim of his classmates as a victimizer: his gossip hurts others on a daily basis. Perhaps, then, it is fitting that his mode of revenge is not to kill others, but to continue on this path, not destroying literal lives, but simply reputations. However, his affluence, seemingly happy family life, and his specific targeting of other students for small slights might lend some unreality to this portrayal.
The novel also may be seen to have some plot holes related to this portrayal: why did the school’s faculty and administration let About That go on for so long, unchecked? Why wasn’t Simon already under police and/or school surveillance when his actions had driven other students to suicide and/or mental breakdown? However, perhaps these seeming holes ultimately are part of the novels’ critique: if authority structures truly did their jobs, teenagers would suffer less.
