High School Parents Trying to Ban Book

[Rex Kickass]

That would be Lorax. Lomax was the guy that recorded George Harrison's song Sour Milk Sea.

 

Wasn't Lomax also the guy from Death of a Salesman?

[FlaSoxxJim]

These are public schools, and there needs to be public involvement. There should be mechanisms and procedures to make certain what is being taught is what the masses want, not one teacher. Likewise, one citizen, without broad support should not make the decision.

 

From your own personal experience, as you have posted here, your better educational experiences seem to often involve non-traditional teachers and non-traditional class structure. It's an odd contrast that you're advocating a cookie-cutter, teach-what-the-public-wants position here.

 

These are literary works, not pornography or gratuitous snuff, and I don't see why parental consent to let their kids read the material in an elective class doesn't satisfy all parties. We both agree that one citizen without broad support shouldn't be able to effect broad change, and that at least is good common ground.

 

As a tangent, haven't you in previous threads supported the idea of elective, non-denominational high school classes on the Bible as literature? (I support that as well, btw.) Well, certainly there's a whole lot more discussion of sodomy. . . as well as rape, incest, adultery, murder, beastiality, etc., in that work than in anything Pat Conroy ever penned. On the principle of preserving the innocent minds of students, you've apparently rethought the appropriateness of bteaching that literary work as well, yes?

[FlaSoxxJim]

Again... the book is not about anal sex. This is what I was getting at earlier. High school students in advanced, elective classes should be exposed to challenging material. That material may contain plot devices covering matters that happen in real life but which are not pretty - war, murder, hate, violence, etc. That doesn't mean the books are about those things. It means the books use real life situations to more effective get their points across.

 

You're spot on here. Literary works that reflect societal realities are quickly singled out in the little censorship wars, but the best of these can be immensely powerful. And we are talking about mature upperclass highschoolers here, not secondf graders or fifth graders.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Wasn't Lomax also the guy from Death of a Salesman?

 

That was Loman I believe, not Lomax.

 

Not to be confused with Lo mein, which I had the other night for dinner and enjoyed quite a bit.

[NorthSideSox72]

That was Loman I believe, not Lomax.

 

Not to be confused with Lo mein, which I had the other night for dinner and enjoyed quite a bit.

I thought Lomax was that car theft deterrent system the advertise during the Sox games.

 

Oh wait, that's Lojack.

 

[kapkomet]

*rimshot*

 

 

[FlaSoxxJim]

I thought Lomax was that car theft deterrent system the advertise during the Sox games.

 

Oh wait, that's Lojack.

 

I thought Lojack was the bald detective who sucked lollypops and hustled Players Club cards on tv. . .

[NorthSideSox72]

I thought Lojack was the bald detective who sucked lollypops and hustled Players Club cards on tv. . .

I though Kojak made cameras...

 

[Steff]

Wasn't Lomax also the guy from Death of a Salesman?

 

Wasn't Lomax Bernie's last name also?

 

 

[Texsox]

From your own personal experience, as you have posted here, your better educational experiences seem to often involve non-traditional teachers and non-traditional class structure. It's an odd contrast that you're advocating a cookie-cutter, teach-what-the-public-wants position here.

 

These are literary works, not pornography or gratuitous snuff, and I don't see why parental consent to let their kids read the material in an elective class doesn't satisfy all parties. We both agree that one citizen without broad support shouldn't be able to effect broad change, and that at least is good common ground.

 

As a tangent, haven't you in previous threads supported the idea of elective, non-denominational high school classes on the Bible as literature? (I support that as well, btw.) Well, certainly there's a whole lot more discussion of sodomy. . . as well as rape, incest, adultery, murder, beastiality, etc., in that work than in anything Pat Conroy ever penned. On the principle of preserving the innocent minds of students, you've apparently rethought the appropriateness of bteaching that literary work as well, yes?

 

Perhaps I was not clear. I support the publics' efforts to be part of the education process. I object to making a High School English teacher omnipotent in the subject material covered. I see good reasons to review this material and the appropriate venue. Of all the thousands of High School English teachers out there, will we agree that there is the potential that maybe one or two aren't the best at choosing representative works? I think it is entirely appropriate that there be some mechanism for review. Any required reading list should involve conscious selections and that process should be open. Just like I would support the public questioning a book that I happened to think was appropriate.

 

My support of the Bible being taught centers on placing it in historical context with other major religious works. Wars have been fought over religion, history has been altered based on individual's religious beliefs. If there is a new round of crusades over The Prince of Tides, I would probably alter my opinion as to the historical nature of that book. Again, I cannot make the leap from saying if you dissect a pig or read Genesis, we therefor must allow anything and everything. I also believe there are works that are appropriate for College students, High School students, and Middle School.

 

While AP English is an elective, it allows High School Seniors an opportunity to test out of college work. Factoring in the loss of that opportunity when a teacher chooses a controversial works should also be factored in.

 

In the end, the public may or may not support using a certain book in the program. I am more comfortable with checks and balances when controversy erupts, not making a High School teacher the only public employee in America above scrutiny.

 

As far as the cookie cutter approach, based on the outcry here where this book is so important to teach and children should not be kept in the dark, it would seem you would advocate for it being required reading nationwide. Wouldn't that be cookie cutter? By recognizing support for local review wouldn't that assure a wider variety?

 

We support a teacher's right to not teach the book on whatever criterion they choose, but why not allow the public that same input?

[Mplssoxfan]

Tex, it's tough for me to tell what it is you're trying to get at here. If a parent wants to take their concerns to the School Board, that is fine. I would hope the School Board had the good sense to allow the teacher to teach.

 

Are you advocating that a School Board should accede to the wishes of anyone with an axe to grind? If a history or lit teacher wanted to present Uncle Tom's Cabin and someone objected to that, should it not be used? Should Of Mice and Men be thrown out? Where do you propose we draw the line?

 

Should every teacher in a school system submit their lesson plans to the electorate every year to be voted on yea or nay? Or to the School Board?

[Rex Kickass]

While AP English is an elective, it allows High School Seniors an opportunity to test out of college work. Factoring in the loss of that opportunity when a teacher chooses a controversial works should also be factored in.

 

In the end, the public may or may not support using a certain book in the program. I am more comfortable with checks and balances when controversy erupts, not making a High School teacher the only public employee in America above scrutiny.

 

As far as the cookie cutter approach, based on the outcry here where this book is so important to teach and children should not be kept in the dark, it would seem you would advocate for it being required reading nationwide. Wouldn't that be cookie cutter? By recognizing support for local review wouldn't that assure a wider variety?

 

We support a teacher's right to not teach the book on whatever criterion they choose, but why not allow the public that same input?

 

I absolutely don't support the public to offer input in a teacher's curriculum for an elective class. If a parent doesn't want to expose their children to the coursework for an elective class, they shouldn't be able to reap the benefits that this class can offer.

[Texsox]

Tex, it's tough for me to tell what it is you're trying to get at here. If a parent wants to take their concerns to the School Board, that is fine. I would hope the School Board had the good sense to allow the teacher to teach.

 

Are you advocating that a School Board should accede to the wishes of anyone with an axe to grind? If a history or lit teacher wanted to present Uncle Tom's Cabin and someone objected to that, should it not be used? Should Of Mice and Men be thrown out? Where do you propose we draw the line?

 

Should every teacher in a school system submit their lesson plans to the electorate every year to be voted on yea or nay? Or to the School Board?

 

I think there are two separate and distinct issues and they were too closely linked. Not that it matters, but I really liked Prince of Tides. I am working towards a double major, Psychology and English, so this fits right in with two of my favorite subjects. I happen to prefer The Picture of Dorian Gray as the best example of a Psychological novel, but that is off topic. I recommended PoT to my 18 year old son and will recommend it to my daughter as soon as she finishes her Intro to Psy course this semester. But just because I like the book, believe it is suitable for my children, doesn't mean it is appropriate for any High School classroom, or that it is the best book to be used. One of the reasons I would like to see something else has nothing to do with the content, but I prefer a reading list that cannot be circumvented by heading to Blockbuster. And as movies of this vein go, I preferred Ordinary People.

 

From my time as President of the PTO and PTAs, and being a very active parent, I have watched as school administrators wanted parental involvement if it meant making photocopies, baking cookies, and working on fund raising. As soon as a parent stood up and said, I think we need to look at what is being taught here, the reaction was exactly like LCR's. Scoffing, mocking, etc. I think that is very wrong.

 

I do not want every lesson plan checked, that is way to burdensome, I think when a parent sees something in the homework (which is almost never at the high school level) and questions the inclusion, there should be a method of review that is respectful of everyone. And I certainly believe there is at least enough there to warrant a review. It clearly is a controversial subject and the school should be called to task to answer why this and not, for example, Dorian Gray.

[Rex Kickass]

Isn't Dorian Gray all about being gay in the 1800's?

[BobDylan]

By the way, not to be missed here... I actually read Prince of Tides, it was required reading for me in high school for some class or another. I know exactly what scenes these people are referring to as obscene.

 

 

***WARNING _ SPOLIERS FROM BOOK***

 

 

The scenes in question are about a brutal attack, where a house is broken into, people are assaulted, and a young boy is sodomozied. The young boy is a main character, the main character really, in the book.

 

But that's just it - the scene is not meant to be some glorification. Its about how bad that was. Similar to this, for example, I would rather have my 12-year-old kid watch Saving Private Ryan than some Schwartzenegger bullet fest. Why? They are both violent, but one puts violence in its proper context. The other glorifies it.

 

I just wish parents would try to be a little more intelligent, and see past the surface of things. Kind of like the idiots from the Christian Brothers who banned their parishoners from reading the Potter books because they encouraged sorcery. YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT. The device is not important - its meaning is important.

 

Oh, and, one other thing... an ELECTIVE, COLLEGE course???? And they want a book banned? Come on.

 

Thank you.

[Texsox]

I absolutely don't support the public to offer input in a teacher's curriculum for an elective class. If a parent doesn't want to expose their children to the coursework for an elective class, they shouldn't be able to reap the benefits that this class can offer.

 

Sorry your opinion is not valid. You are not a High School English teacher, so you do not have the necessary skills to offer even an opinion. So please, do not respond anymore*.

 

Not even the administration? The Department head? What does the public lack that a High School English teacher has to review this decision? I think a poor teacher was hired if they can only teach using one book.

 

AP History is basically the tract that most major Universities want their applicants to take so the choice may become take the class or forget about a major University.

 

And all honors classes are electives, there are very few mandatories so you are basically telling the best and brightest to just sit back and accept whatever the school decides is best and that their parents are idiots and cannot be trusted with an opinion on what you are taught?

 

Can the public decide how the money they are paying in taxes is spent? Remember that no taxation without representation thing? Public schools should have public oversight, which is why we elect a school board. Don't like their decision, vote them out.

 

*just making a point, you know I respect your opinion which is why I argue that you should have a voice in what is taught in your schools.

[Texsox]

Isn't Dorian Gray all about being gay in the 1800's?

 

Not exactly, but there are homosexual overtones in a couple of scenes. The author, Oscar Wilde, was convicted and spent time in jail for what he presumably did in the privacy of his own home. There were any number of authors that were screwed over for being gay during that time. Ezra Pound comes to mind. The book is easily in my top ten list, perhaps top three of all time.

 

And that is kind of my point. Take that to one or the other extreme and I think the teacher should be reigned in.

[YASNY]

I absolutely don't support the public to offer input in a teacher's curriculum for an elective class. If a parent doesn't want to expose their children to the coursework for an elective class, they shouldn't be able to reap the benefits that this class can offer.

 

I absolutely completely disagree with you. When a class is taught in a public school, supported by the taxpayers of that community, then that community should absolutely have input into what is being presented to their children, elective or not. Of course, the input should be expressed through the proper channels, like the elected school board officials, and if the community doesn't agree with the decisions of the board they replace it come the next election.

[FlaSoxxJim]

I absolutely completely disagree with you. When a class is taught in a public school, supported by the taxpayers of that community, then that community should absolutely have input into what is being presented to their children, elective or not. Of course, the input should be expressed through the proper channels, like the elected school board officials, and if the community doesn't agree with the decisions of the board they replace it come the next election.

 

I essentially side with Rex here, but more than anything it is that public input needs to go through the proper channels which is whet you're saying as well. The thing is, the notion that the public school teachers - even in AP classes – are lone wolf rebels assigning the most extreme material they can is a fallacy, and a lot of the perceived controversy stems from there. Counties and school boards have approved text and book lists, and teachers have to jump through major hoops to stray from those lists. As mush as you want to support the public right to input, you also have to have some faith in the system that is already in place.

 

And you do, of course. Within a few degrees we all agree that lone parents with no broad support should not hold much sway no matter how bent out of shape they are about course programming.

 

Likewise, you have to have some faith that the system has hired competent AP instructors who are better equipped to select level-appropriate, context-appropriate, and content-appropriate reading for their classes than the average parent.

 

I'll finish by introducing everybody to the elephant in the room. Embarking on a crusade to protect your public school child from a couple of pages of dark, unglamorized human brutality within a literary work is screaming into the wind when you consider the reality of what is discussed on the bus, in the halls, lunchroom, and scholyard at every public high school in the country every day. If a parent has made the decision to toss their kids into a system that would rate an NC-17 for the everyday language and themes discussed, I think efforts to ban a book because a few pages of it descend to that level are misguided and unproductive.

[YASNY]

I essentially side with Rex here, but more than anything it is that public input needs to go through the proper channels which is whet you're saying as well. The thing is, the notion that the public school teachers - even in AP classes – are lone wolf rebels assigning the most extreme material they can is a fallacy, and a lot of the perceived controversy stems from there. Counties and school boards have approved text and book lists, and teachers have to jump through major hoops to stray from those lists. As mush as you want to support the public right to input, you also have to have some faith in the system that is already in place.

 

And you do, of course. Within a few degrees we all agree that lone parents with no broad support should not hold much sway no matter how bent out of shape they are about course programming.

 

Likewise, you have to have some faith that the system has hired competent AP instructors who are better equipped to select level-appropriate, context-appropriate, and content-appropriate reading for their classes than the average parent.

 

I'll finish by introducing everybody to the elephant in the room. Embarking on a crusade to protect your public school child from a couple of pages of dark, unglamorized human brutality within a literary work is screaming into the wind when you consider the reality of what is discussed on the bus, in the halls, lunchroom, and scholyard at every public high school in the country every day. If a parent has made the decision to toss their kids into a system that would rate an NC-17 for the everyday language and themes discussed, I think efforts to ban a book because a few pages of it descend to that level are misguided and unproductive.

 

Referencing your elephant in the room. I still think that people who pay the freight, ie the taxpayers, should have some say on what is actually loaded on to the truck.

Edited November 10, 2007 by YASNY

[Texsox]

I essentially side with Rex here, but more than anything it is that public input needs to go through the proper channels which is whet you're saying as well. The thing is, the notion that the public school teachers - even in AP classes – are lone wolf rebels assigning the most extreme material they can is a fallacy, and a lot of the perceived controversy stems from there. Counties and school boards have approved text and book lists, and teachers have to jump through major hoops to stray from those lists. As mush as you want to support the public right to input, you also have to have some faith in the system that is already in place.

 

And you do, of course. Within a few degrees we all agree that lone parents with no broad support should not hold much sway no matter how bent out of shape they are about course programming.

 

Likewise, you have to have some faith that the system has hired competent AP instructors who are better equipped to select level-appropriate, context-appropriate, and content-appropriate reading for their classes than the average parent.

 

I'll finish by introducing everybody to the elephant in the room. Embarking on a crusade to protect your public school child from a couple of pages of dark, unglamorized human brutality within a literary work is screaming into the wind when you consider the reality of what is discussed on the bus, in the halls, lunchroom, and scholyard at every public high school in the country every day. If a parent has made the decision to toss their kids into a system that would rate an NC-17 for the everyday language and themes discussed, I think efforts to ban a book because a few pages of it descend to that level are misguided and unproductive.

 

I agree with 99% of what you write. I still object to saying "banning". If someone decided to teach this same class by using Jugghead and Archie comic books, we may question if it is the most suitable work to use. If the class is in classic literature and a teacher decides to use the latest Clive Custer novel, again the public should have a process to question. It is not banning the book, it is questioning which is an appropriate work to study. It could be said that by picking "Prince of Tides" the teacher "banned" tens of thousands of books.

 

My greatest concern about using this work is the easy availability of the movie. Anyone can drop down to Blockbuster, watch the movie, and probably pass any test the teacher may assign. In this case, the book did remain fairly true to the novel.

 

Screaming into the wind? I think parents have an obligation to talk with there kids and explain that just because some kids may do something, does not mean it is the smart thing, the safe thing, etc. By telling your kids, go ahead, have sex at 14, there is nothing we can do, besides everyone does it, here are your condoms, sends one message. Telling your kids that yes some kids do this, but here are some reasons why you should wait, and these are the values in our house, sends another. They may have to live in that world, but they do not have to descend to the lowest common denominator.

 

As a parent if you are with your kids and see a homeless person passed out in a doorway you have a few options.

 

You can pretend not to see him. Which sadly is what most parents do.

 

You can tell your kids how much you pray that they don't end up that way, discuss why school, staying away from drugs, respecting themselves, etc. will help avoid that. You might also discuss ways your family can help the homeless. Discuss the causes of homelessness.

 

Or you can say cool, let's look at the bum. See, he wet his pants, I'll bet he crapped his pants as well. Maybe we can get him to appear in bum fights. Hey, ask him to tell us how you got sodomized. Sometimes I think we rush to the third choice in our schools. Am I advocating banning discussions about homelessness because I don't want to discuss how he was sodomized? Perhaps there are other more fruitful areas to discuss first.

 

Would you consider making that portion of the material alternate reading only, without any potential testing? I would prefer not to redact it, but I could really see a solution to make certain chapters required, the same as they do in many survey course in college.

[Texsox]

Referencing your elephant in the room. I still think that people who pay the freight, ie the taxpayers, should have some say on what is actually loaded on to the truck.

 

Well said.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Referencing your elephant in the room. I still think that people who pay the freight, ie the taxpayers, should have some say on what is actually loaded on to the truck.

 

I don't disagree, and there are procedures in place to insure that this can happen.

[vandy125]

One thing that I have noticed with this discussion is that there is a lot of pointing at this class being an "Elective College-level" class. They do not have to take the class if they do not want to. Is that really true though? With the competition that there is for getting into different colleges, in many cases, you have to take these college-level courses. It is not really an option. So, the question becomes, were there other options to this course?

[LowerCaseRepublican]

One thing that I have noticed with this discussion is that there is a lot of pointing at this class being an "Elective College-level" class. They do not have to take the class if they do not want to. Is that really true though? With the competition that there is for getting into different colleges, in many cases, you have to take these college-level courses. It is not really an option. So, the question becomes, were there other options to this course?

It is a voluntary AP class in literature.

 

We had them in high school too. A kid in my school thought a book was 'immoral' and refused to read it. He took his lumps and accepted the low quiz scores until we finished the book and his parents didn't raise a s*** fit about it. If you're going to choose not to read the book, then accept the consequences. Don't try to go on a moral crusade to stop every child from reading the book and using your parental authority to get the book banned and make the parental decisions for every family in that class.

 

Are this kid and his parents going to try to get college texts and supplementals banned because the child is offended by the subject matter within the books?

 

If the kid and parents don't like it, don't read it but don't dare try to make the parenting decisions for the other students in the class just because they're knee jerk reactionaries.