Lou Cannon's Analysis Of The L.A. Riots Is One Of The Most Important Books To Hit The Shelves In Years.
By Christopher Weir
Official Negligence: How Rodney King and the Riots Changed
Los Angeles and the L.A.P.D., by Lou Cannon (Times Books/Random
House). Cloth, $30.
FROM THE UNNERVING videotape to the maddening trial to
the subsequent riots, the Rodney King case was projected as a
matter of black and white. With Official Negligence, veteran
journalist Lou Cannon delivers long-overdue shades of gray. Armed
with superior analysis and rock-solid research, Cannon navigates
the Los Angeles Police Department's simmering institutional dysfunction,
ultimately exposing the Rodney King incident as an inevitability.
Along the way, he depicts the sad evolution of political and social
forces destined for implosion. In so doing, he deconstructs the
jarring events that have, to date, inspired a puzzling dearth
of book-length investigation.
From the outset, Official Negligence establishes Cannon's
refusal to engage the politically correct sophistry in which the
Rodney King incident has largely been mired. He explores the King
beating and surrounding events with a sharp eye for subtleties
and complexities. The usual demonization--whether of King or the
arresting officers, of Chief Daryl Gates or the rioters--is mercifully
absent.
While Cannon flirts with interpretations that will strike many
as excessively conservative or establishmentarian, he also sketches
a sympathetic portrait of an embattled South Central Los Angeles
community where justice had become increasingly elusive in the
years preceding the riots. Particularly compelling is his exploration
of the Soon Ja Du trial, in which a Korean shopkeeper was granted
probation for fatally shooting 15-year-old Latasha Harlins in
the back after a brief skirmish over a bottle of orange juice.
Rodney King may have been a spark, Cannon demonstrates, but the
fuse was already primed.
Cannon also convincingly indicts the mass media as unwitting
conspirators in the dangerous oversimplification--from selective
editing of the videotaped beating to deficient trial analyses--of
issues surrounding the King case. (To his immense credit, he doesn't
shy away from calling into question his own reports for the Washington
Post.) Through their natural limitations--and inclinations--the
media fueled what was to become the South Central tinderbox. And
media influence, Cannon argues, also hastened the subsequent conflagration:
"The televised scenes of violence advertised to criminals
that the L.A.P.D. would not stand in their way, and almost certainly
fanned the spread of the riots."
Official Negligence is especially adept at illustrating
the L.A.P.D.'s breathtaking impotence during the first hours of
the riots, revealing a police force paralyzed by ill-preparedness
followed by ineffectual execution.
But strangely, Cannon's treatment of the riots falls short. Instead
of a street-level chronological approach that would have palpably
communicated the uprising's desperation and violence, Cannon opts
for a reportorial style, frequently jumping from perspective to
perspective while continually citing post-riot reports to justify
his narration. Such allegiance to the daily-newspaper conception
of objectivity sacrifices clarity, atmosphere and narrative intensity,
and reveals his outsider status to the community which he aims
to explain.
Most egregiously, Cannon leaves out the rioters. We learn what
it was like to be a police officer and a victim amid the mayhem,
but what was it like to join the fury, to torch a grocery or beat
innocent bystanders? Aren't there participants willing to express--beyond
courtroom claptrap--the allegedly justified rage that commenced
and sustained the terror? Such crucial perspectives are essentially
absent.
Despite its few shortcomings, however, Official Negligence
is perhaps one of the most important books to hit the shelves
in years. Its scope is sweeping, its message clear: Both the Rodney
King incident and the riots could have been averted. And by delivering
this message, Official Negligence testifies that if warning
signs are heeded rather than ignored, history isn't necessarily
doomed to repeat itself in Los Angeles.
|