Update: Norwood Superintendent Defends Decision To Ban Book

[the_leander]

I wasn't quite sure where to put this article, so if you feel its in the wrong place, say something to one of the modderators....

"The Catcher in the Rye."

"Of Mice and Men."

"Lord of the Flies."

A chorus of student voices rang out Friday at Norwood High School, to apprise R2 School District Superintendent Bob Condor of books deemed "objectionable" that were nonetheless required reading.

And now, it's "Bless Me, Ultima," the book Condor pulled from curriculum after one parent objected to its content.

Condor said at a Friday morning assembly that he wasn't trying to censor anyone's reading material, but to protect them from being forcibly subjected to profanity by a "mandatory assignment."

Condor flatly denied previous reports that the book's "pagan" elements had factored in to his decision, though more than one person present at the assembly said they felt otherwise.

Full story here.

Not sure what to make of this story, part of me fumes at the very notion of book burning, another at censoring or even doctoring books to make them child friendly.. But I don't know, I can understand the principles point of view, but that he slandered another teacher in open assembly over this issue, to me sounds like there was much more to this then whats written (isn't there always)...

[Cymric]

To be very honest, I really don't understand the hubbub. Some teacher requires students to read a rather hazy book (which by the looks of things would leave me stranded on page 1), which is then overruled by the headmaster on grounds that it contains profanity (and not pagan elements, although that is of course another, if unspoken and denied, reason). And students can't be made to read profanity by requirement.

Is that it?

That's quite a double-edged sword, because we are dealing with Art (notice the capital A) here, and then profanity is no longer profanity, although there are boundaries you should not cross. One Dutch artist, living in Kenia, openly talked about screwing his models, all of whom were well below 18 years of age. That that made him a paedophile was something he always denied: it was Art (or, in his case, après-Art). The Keniese police did little (imagine that), but (Dutch) readers of his interviews were not so forgiving. The monster is now safely behind bars.

I remember that while in high school, I had to read a Dutch homo-erotic 'masterpiece', and there is another memory about our teacher reading out a short story about a young guy hiding a dead grasshopper in the Easter lunch, and doing it with a chicken, all in response to his dads religious ways which were written in stone. A few months ago I glanced over an interview with (I think) a Persian writer, who was doing similar things but then from an islamic point of view: the nearly-adult son of a mullah was secretly smelling used tampons, and so forth. All were heralded as 'shockingly brilliant', 'stunning' and 'questioning our established values' at the time. Quite frankly, I think all are sick {bleep}s who should be regarded as such. Mind, I do not object to people being gay, if it makes them happy, fine, bless them, but don't force me to read about their sexual fantasies, because that will have me running for the nearest toilet at an appreciable fraction of the speed of light.

All in all, I don't think the decision to ban the book was a good one. Students need to learn about the utter nonsense which goes on in other people's minds, and learn how to guard themselves against it. And if the literature teacher is worth her salary, she would accept the excuse of a student who did not read the book on grounds it was utter crap, provided said student could bolster his arguments. That is the main reason you are made to read: saying that you dislike or like something is one thing, but can you say why?

[the_leander]

I understand what you are saying, I haven't myself read the book in question, but I've read two of the three others that were listed as being banned, Of Mice and Men, which I did for my GCSE, and Lord of the Flies, which I read because I was bored.

Both of these books are increadibly powerful in their own ways, also on this list not of banned books (but is in some other places) but then there are books that have been... ahem sanitised and, include books such as to kill a mocking bird, and by sanitised, I mean the book has been altered from its original form to avoid parts that someone somewhere found upsetting. I've read PDF's of these sanitised books, and they are a travesty, whats left is meaningless dribble.

You want to know why Of Mice and Men was banned? Because it described the segrigation of a black man in the USA (which is also where to kill a mocking bird fell foul and had bits edited out so it wasn't apparent what colour the defendant was).

The problem with book banning is that someone somewhere, for whatever reason will demand any book ever writtens banning because of something or other, to me its just a slipperly slope that society should not go down.

By all accounts, those that had objections to the books use of profanity had the option of reading something else that didn't... Something that the principle lied in a public forum about.

[Vincent]

We did Of Mice and Men in 3rd year (in 1991/2) and I can't see why it's been bannedby idiots.

It is a book that can teach a lot about the mentally unstable if you're reading it at the right time.