i read both columbine by dave cullen and no easy answers by brooks brown one after the other about 3 years ago and enjoyed them both immensely. however i don’t think you can compare them to each other as they are complete different books. columbine is a book that has been taken on as a historical text from an objective view, rather than a personal text about someone’s own account of events, that has a subjective tone like no easy answers does, so i don’t agree with you that dave cullen’s book is ‘shit’ and ‘inaccurate’. i found it refreshing to read a book that dispelled the myths surrounding columbine and didn’t focus solely on the whole bullying and ‘trench coat mafia’ issues most books on columbine always seem to focus on. i particularly liked how dave cullen brought up the factors regarding what was going on in the boys minds during that time, through interviews with survivors and those close to the boys(including brooks brown, i might add), the boys personal journals and videos, police reports and eyewitness accounts.
but i don’t know. i guess maybe i just happened to enjoy the book and you didn’t, which is completely understandable as we’re all entitled to our own opinions. while they were both excellent, i personally found dave cullen’s book more interesting than brooks brown’s. this might be due to the details and research in cullen’s book as i like to know all the facts about something before i make up my mind about it, but hey thats just me.
also i did a little research just now and columbine has won numerous awards including the edgar allen poe award in 2010 for best fact crime book so i guess it’d have had to be factually accurate to have won the award? and it was on the new york times best selling list for 8 weeks in a row(if that really counts for something?). also the book has been adopted as a text in high schools and colleges around the world, so they are actually teaching it as a literary text.