Brave New World being banned

[canard]

http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2010/11/brave_new_world_banned_from_cu.php

not a major deal when you consider the other iniquities in the world, but still......banning books always irks me

[wiesiek]

i`m not quite agree with you,
banning the books may be ,
no,
is major deal,
mayby not the banning itself
but
all what may follow ,
this is just sign...

wait...seattle? is it mormons state?

[Ron Panunto]

It wasn't "banned," but only removed from the student's "required" reading list. I would still like to get my hands on some soma.

[yusuf]

The student is the poorer for not reading that book...

[Teazer]

The article also misses the point when they say that the use of "savage" in the context of the book is a reflection on the other society. The problem was that that was not being conveyed in the teaching, leaving students with the impression that the natives were in fact savages. Kind of sad that they missed picking up on that bit of the book since from my recollection it was laid on with a trowel. At least they didn't complain about the sex, drugs and lack of religion this time.

[Steve James]

Ok, the book wasn't banned; it was removed from the required reading curriculum. So, students are still allowed to read the book on their own in the public library or at home. There is, imo, no single book that "must" be taught in a K-12 curriculum. However, if there were one, no matter what it is, it would have to be "taught": i.e., discussed thoroughly, critically and sensitively. Take "Huckleberry Finn" --where the characters throw the n-word around, etc. Great story, important book, but is it "necessary" to teach. When I teach 19th c. Am-lit, I think so. But, what happens if a student complains about the derogatory language? How I handle it becomes more important than any literary-historical value the book might have. Iow, I have to allow the student to express his or her feelings, and I have to acknowledge them. Sure, I could say "Well, that's the way they talked back then. Don't be so sensitive."

According to the article, a single student complained about the contents of a book she was required to read. The article says she "took issue", but I'd rather say that it affected the student. So, she discussed it with her mother and the mother defended the child. Given the general apathy of too many students and the lack of parental involvement in the children's education, there's no way I can see that either the mother or child did anything wrong. The school considered the issue, and the question is did they do the right thing. I don't know.

Personally, I'm not sure that it has solved the problem. If the student goes to college, and takes 19th c. American lit, she'll be sure to see plenty of unflattering images and derogatory language. Shucks, if she takes a film course and has to watch westerns, .... you get the idea. Yeah, I agree: it would be better to explain Huxley's use of the term "savage" in the book's context. But, that wouldn't be true of all authors in all their works. The idea, imo, would be to illustrate the error of considering some people 'savages,' what it demonstrates about the users of the term, how it has been used, and how it applies to the students' lives today. We don't learn anything --since this is about education-- if we just pretend to be sensitive without really trying to understand why we should be.

[Bhassler]

Steve,

You and I both know it's a book, so of course the way things are expressed in the book has to be viewed through the context in which it is written. This notion that a book written 80 years ago would or should express contemporary viewpoints seems pretty absurd to me. More concerning to me is not so much a question of how one deals with contextualizing the term for students, but that one is required to explicitly do so in the first place. To me, by the time someone knows enough to be offended by a term, they should also know enough to evaluate the context. It's a disturbing mix of disassociation and entitlement that appears to be endemic in US culture nowadays.

Thoughts?

P.S. I'm amazed that book was written 80 years ago. To me, that just underscores how brilliant it is.

[Steve James]

Like I said, no book is necessary. So, it's not a matter of this book's brilliance. I agree that people "should" be adult about things in books. However, I don't try to judge what people are offended by. In general, people are more important than books. But, that means that a book is worth teaching to the extent it improves the lives of the people who read it. I think, for example, that we can learn a lot from Mein Kampf; but, I wouldn't make it required reading for 5th graders; I would understand perfectly if some of the Jewish children complained; I wouldn't blame their parents for getting upset, and I wouldn't think that saying "it was written in 1925" was a sufficient response. Imo, a more in-depth discussion of the book and the issues would be its primary value. And, for those type of discussions, no particular books are required.