Parker 1

Karina Parker

Dr. Fox

ENG 440

22 November 2022

The Reading Bystander: Examining & Humanizing Gun Violence in Long Way Down

Discussing gun violence in the world today often lacks clarity. It focuses on the

aftermath, the losses, the killer, and the factual circumstances of the act of violence. In the year

2020, Patrick, a classmate from high school, was shot and murdered at nineteen years old by a

boy the same age. When I learned of his death, the news reported on the when, the where, the

who, but never did I learn of the why. I could not understand why Patrick, someone who I saw

daily in class just a year or two prior, became a victim and how a teenager could be driven to

commit such a crime.

Jason Reynold’s Long Way Down presents an alternative to the statistical presentation of

gun violence the news reports on. The novel follows young William “Will” Holleman, a teenage

boy living in an urban community affected by the tragedy of gun violence through the death of

his brother Shawn. Though all that happens in the novel is an aftermath of his brother’s death,

Will’s story explains a potential causation the repetitive gun violence found in urban

communities, answering the why question that lingers in the aftermath. This is not a simple novel

discussing violence, but one that presents the opportunity to engage with the social issue it

intends to examine. In Long Way Down, Reynolds situates the reader as a bystander to examine

and humanize the complex issues of gun violence through literary voices and structure while also

allowing them to decide on what is next in its conversation.

 Parker 2

Reynolds’ ability to situate the reader is framed by the concept of reader-response theory.

Developed by Louise M. Rosenblatt, reader-response theory suggests reading is a transaction

between the reader and the text (268). Rosenblatt explains this further in her work, “The Literary

Transaction: Evocation and Response”, saying that the “stance” of the reader determines the

product of reading (269). This concept of reader-response reasons each individual reader

witnesses the work of an author, and their responses vary under the influence of their own

cultural identity and personal experiences. Long Way Down’s intended audience is young adults,

but readers of all backgrounds may approach the novel and interpret its intended content

differently. Reynolds confirms his intention in an interview with Julia Walton, saying “’Even

though this book is an obvious warning against gun violence, it is also meant to humanize young

people in the midst of all of this.’” To ensure this intended message resonates in some capacity,

Reynolds acknowledges he must provide that “stance” for the reader.

Reynolds cannot change what experiences a reader brings to the table, but he can position

them to have a broad view of the conversation to bring awareness to his message. He situates the

reader as a bystander through the narration of the novel. William, a fifteen-year-old boy, acts as

the voice behind the narration and plays an important role in this positioning. The first poem of

the novel includes Will directly addressing the reader as he expresses his intentions to tell an

unbelievable story (1). This initial interaction is crucial, as it limits the ability of the reader to be

a simple spectator. Readers must interact with the story as an extension of Will; they are his

confidant, his witness, and, of course, the bystander to the matters ahead. They are a part of the

cycle of gun violence through a direct link, rather than looking from the outside in.

Once in position, the transaction between reader and text begins. As quoted by Spirovska,

Harding in a work by Thomson, explains that as the reader assumes the role of “on-looker”, three
 Parker 3

reader-text transaction processes develop: “1. Empathizing (with the experience of other people)

2. Evaluating characters 3. Accepting or rejecting the values of an author” (25). Reynolds

intends to capitalize on at least the first process, using a combination of powerful literary such as

victim/perpetrator voices and poetic structure to humanize what it means to be affected by these

cycles of gun violence.

There are eight voices, including the narrator, Will, that Reynolds includes. These voices

are not Reynolds makes the choice not to only include the victims of gun violence, but the

perpetrators as well. The character Dani represents solely a victim in this cycle. The reader

witnesses Will recalling how Dani died when he meets her ghost; she was eight years old and an

innocent casualty of a drive by shooting (Reynolds 129,130). The conversation around gun

violence often focuses on victims like Dani, emphasizing what a tragedy it is to lose such a

young life. Dani’s ghostly voice works on this level, intending to trigger that empathetic

response to recognize the evils of these cycles, but it also goes a step further. Karen Coates

concludes that Dani’s victim voice from beyond the grave works to “expose systemic injustices”

(8). Dani’s voice and the addition of other ghostly victims do not simply allow the reader to hear

about the tragedy of gun violence but view them as a part of continuing pattern at the result of

the structure of their place.

Will takes on a differing role of victim as he survives many community members who die

from this cycle, including his brother, Sean, whose death triggers the conflict of the novel.

Unlike Dani, though, Will does not assume only a victim voice; the systemic structure of his

place requires him to shift into another. In the wake of his grief, Will understands, under the

combination of societal Rules No. 1 and No. 3, the only thing allowed is not crying, but to take

revenge against the one that killed his loved one (Reynolds 31, 33). Will’s evolution into a
 Parker 4

perpetrator, expanding upon the systemic injustices that Dani’s ghostly victim voice exposes.

This reveals place drives gun violence; the social system of Will’s urban community includes a

set of rules that, under societal pressure, he must abide by. The reader witnesses how Will must

additionally become a perpetrator in this cycle, as in the wake of trauma, he cannot properly

grieve as a victim, only act as a perpetrator. It is in this moment that the reader is fully a

bystander, as they might watch the murder of another person at Will’s hands.

Including a perpetrator voice, especially one that takes the central role of the narrator,

raises concern when discussing gun violence. In an interview, Dr. Shaffer, when speaking on

another young adult literature novel that discussed gun violence from a shooter’s point of view to

show the complexity of the issue, said “…a lot of people don’t want to humanize the shooter.”

(Sluiter 84). With Reynolds’ desire to not only discuss gun violence but humanize all of those

affected by it, he must include all perspectives.

In another attempt to trigger the empathetic process of reader-response, Reynolds draws

attention to the psyche of these victims made perpetrators through the structure of Will’s

narration. The reader engages with more than just what Will is seeing through his narration, but

the pattern of his thoughts. Reynolds manipulates the structure to develop both the tension and

chaos of a traumatized mind. For example, when Will repeats over and over that Shawn is dead,

the lines are scattered among the page, forcing readers to acknowledge a pause or break

(Reynolds 8). The structure reveals that, at the result of traumatic loss, victims struggle in

processing coherent thoughts. This extends as Will journeys down the elevator to kill his

brother’s potential killer. The reader reads what Will thinks about the gun as he says, “I HAVE

NEVER HELD A GUN./Never even/touched one” (59). The usage of line breaks in the middle

of sentences suggests hesitancy with the gun. Readers can interpret that Will is uneasy with even
 Parker 5

holding one; he is not an experienced killer and never set out to be one until the Rules decided he

must.

Structure continues to affect the reading of this novel into its final act, as blank space and

shape hints to the trauma caused by pressure of the Rules. As Will ultimately must make the

choice to join the cycles of violence, readers are figuratively as his side, watching his struggle to

accept the reality of the situation. Reynolds shows Will’s breaking point to the reader in a poem

titled “THE RULES ARE THE RULES”, where it is the question “Right?” repeated over and

over (296). He uses the concept of a concrete poem to emphasize this moment of questioning

what the structure Will always knew. It is another opportunity for the reader to see Will and

these young perpetrators as human as the pressure to kill under the Rules extends the trauma they

felt in their initial victim role.

Situating the reader as a bystander provides the opportunity for them to collect evidence

on what causes gun violence and who truly are the people affected by it. Though Reynolds hopes

to humanize those affected by these cycles of gun violence through exposing the systemic

injustice through all perspectives, he understands it is up to the reader to decide what to do with

it all. The novel ends with a final question posed by Will’s brother, Shawn, who asks, “YOU

COMING?” (Reynolds 306). This line is alone and in bold, capitalized font, jumping out not

only as a question for Will, but for the reader. The reader must decide for Will and, by extension,

decide what they have taken away from the content. Some readers, such as Coates, find the novel

able to ask them to either choose between following along with the deathly values of society or

embracing the freedom of choice to create reform (Coates 9). Readers can choose to decide one

or the other, depending on what experiences and cultural identity they bring to their reading.

Readers may choose to defy the systemic structure of this urban place, while others may see it as
 Parker 6

something that cannot change. As a reader who has experienced loss due to gun violence, I leave

this novel seeing the ultimate question as potential for social reform as its ability to demonstrate

gun violence’s potential cause could be the way to break the cycle. This is only one reader-

response as the nature of the reader-response theory Reynolds’ novel abides by suggests the

possibilities for interpretation are endless with diverse audience.

 Parker 7

Works Cited

Coats, Karen. "From ‘Death Be Not Proud’ to Death Be Not Permanent: Shifting Attitudes

Towards Death in Contemporary Young Adult Literature.” International Journal of

Young Adult Literature, vol 1, no. 1, 2020. DOI: http://doi.org/10.24877/ijyal.31

Reynolds, Jason. Long Way Down. New York, Simon & Schuster, 2017.

Rosenblatt, Louise M. “The Literary Transaction: Evocation and Response.” Theory Into

Practice, vol. 21, no. 4, Sept. 1982, p. 268. Academic Search Complete, https://doi-

org.libproxy.eku.edu/10.1080/00405848209543018.

Sluiter, Katie. “Contending with Gun Violence: An Interview.” Study and Scrutiny: Research on

Young Adult Literature, vol. 4, no. 1, 2020, pp. 77–89., doi:10.15763/issn.2376-

5275.2020.4.1.77-89.

Spirovska, Elena. “Reader-Response Theory and Approach: Application, Values and

Significance for Students in Literature Courses.” SEEU Review, vol. 14, no. 1, July 2019,

pp. 20–35. Academic Search Ultimate, https://doi-org.libproxy.eku.edu/10.2478/seeur-

2019-0003.

Walton, Julia. “The Ghosts of Gun Violence: Jason Reynold's ‘Long Way Down.’” Los Angeles

Review of Books, 16 Dec. 2017, lareviewofbooks.org/article/the-ghosts-of-gun-violence-

jason-reynolds-long-way-down/.