The Massacre at El Mozote

One of the questions that inevitably arises when discussing journalism is where and how authorial bias becomes a factor. Does Danner seem to have an agenda in writing this book? If so, where do you see evidence of this agenda? Do you feel Danner is acting in good faith? Pointing to specific passages, explain why or why not.

One of the book’s major themes is that of credibility. Choosing a few of the accounts that Danner includes in the book, discuss what affects the credibility of each and compare and contrast them. Which account holds the most weight to you as a reader and why? What makes some of the other accounts and sources less trustworthy? Be sure to point to specific textual evidence.

The subtitle of the book is “A Parable of the Cold War,” and at least once in the text itself, there is a direct reference to Major Azmitia speaking in “what can only be called a parable” (120). Using this section of the book as a jumping-off point, discuss the meaning of “parable” in the context of this book. What parts of the story particularly lend themselves to being parable-like? Are there arguments to be made that this book does not fit the definition of a parable? Why do you think Danner chose this subtitle?

One of the first things readers may notice about this book is it includes not only words, but also photographs printed side-by-side the narrative. What effects do these images have on your understanding of what happened? Choose at least a couple of images to discuss at length, considering their relationship with the surrounding text: how is each image used?

In Chapter 7, Danner suggests that even if the US Congress had been convinced that there were human rights abuses at the time, not much would have changed: “Aid might have been reduced, true, but, at most, Congress might have managed to cut off aid temporarily, only to restore it again in a panic—as Carter had done—at the first new guerrilla onslaught” (133). If that is the case, discuss what can be gained from rehashing these events? Be sure to use textual evidence to back up your claims.

As a book that began as a series of articles, think about the overall structure of the book. Why do you think Danner arranged the chapters as he did? Which chapter seems to constitute the book’s climactic moment and why? Why do you think Danner chose to place this chapter where he did? What effects do its placement have on the narrative?

The book proper ends with the destroyed remains of Monterrosa’s helicopter in a museum, describing it as “the most cherished monument in all Morazán” (161). Why do you think Danner decides to end on this image? What effect does this ending have on the preceding chapters, and for the book’s meaning as a whole?

Throughout the book, there are several different important figures that recur (for instance Lieutenant Colonel Moterrosa, Rufina Amaya Márquez, and Todd Greentree, as just a few examples). Using specific evidence from the text to support your claim, make a case for one of these characters being the most important figure in the text. Who do you think had the most impact on the narrative, and why?