Posted on 05/22/2006 12:11:31 PM PDT by Borges
A northwest suburban high school board member seeks to ban seven books from classroom use because she thinks the profanity, depiction of graphic sex, and drug and abortion references in the literature are inappropriate for teenagers.
Leslie Pinney admits she only read passages of the controversial selections, including Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five and Toni Morrison's Beloved, which were on the American Library Association's 100 most challenged books list between 1990 and 2000.
But Pinney said perusing the questionable parts of the books made it clear they weren't suitable for children and should be taken off Township High School District 214's proposed required reading list next year. The district is based in Arlington Heights.
Pinney was particularly offended by the explicit tales of masturbation and teen sex in Stephen Chbosky's The Perks of Being a Wallflower. The popular novel, often described as a modern-day Catcher in the Rye, was among the ALA's top 10 most challenged books two years ago.
'Isn't there ... a higher level?'
"We talk about the steady diet of trans fat and sugar, and we know the result is obesity and diabetes. But what are we feeding the minds of our students? They're getting a steady diet of foul language, violence and sexuality outside the classroom by the media. But when it comes to the classroom, isn't there something of a higher level to feed the minds of our children?" Pinney asked.
Other books Pinney wants replaced are The Things They Carried by Tim O'Brien; The Awakening by Kate Chopin; Freakonomics by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner, and Michael Pollan's The Botany of Desire: A Plant's-Eye View of the World.
Many of the texts have been used in the district's six main high schools before and were reviewed by the department heads before the lists were sent to the board for consideration.
"These aren't books someone just picked out of a bookstore one Saturday morning and said, 'Hey let's put them on the reading list.' These are books that have gone through the process and were selected for their educational value," Board President William Dussling said.
'It cannot hurt to be informed'
Dussling is willing to listen to Pinney's concerns when the board meets Thursday, but he doubts the books will be removed from the curriculum. The district has an "opt out" policy if parents don't want students to participate in an activity or read a certain book, he said.
Levitt, a University of Chicago economics professor, can understand why some people may be uncomfortable with his nonfiction best seller, which correlates legalized abortion with lower crime rates. However, he said banning it for ideological reasons does not make sense.
"The book does deal with controversial topics like abortion, crime, guns and race. But we aren't making moral statements in the book about whether abortion should or shouldn't be legal, or guns should or should not be regulated. Instead, we try to look at the data and understand what impact legalized abortion or gun control has had on crime. I would think that whatever conclusion one comes to on the morality of an issue like abortion, it cannot hurt to be informed about the facts," Levitt said.
There were 404 challenges or written requests to have a book removed from a school or library filed with the ALA last year. There were 11 challenges in Illinois in 2005, compared with 10 the year before, spokeswoman Larra Clark said.
Thanks for the corroboration.
I guess not all of them. And why would someone say, "the decision is final because some say so". It's an ongoing process and should be.
Aw....man....not this nonsense again.
But, she only read the "good" parts, I see.
I can't believe we're still banning books. You think these book banners realize there's an internet out there? lol
It was a joke.
It was a commentary on how historical figures are "outed" as gay, whether they are or not.
So you don't believe in judging a work as a whole, and reading for context before making a decision? Guess not, takes too much time and too many brain cells. I wouldn't hesitate to assign Slaughterhouse-Five; I have not read the others.... so I can't pass judgment on them, unlike this ever-so-knowledgeable school board member. Perhaps she's omniscient.
I see, YOU get to choose what the criteria is. Pardon me for not understanding that.
(You won't be choosing it for my children, I will.)
No, I have read Freakonomics; what's objectionable in that??
It was extremely mild compared to some of the junk out there today.
In addition, Shakespeare is worth reading and is considered great literature because of the impact he had on society and culture. Cheap pulp fiction which is momentarily on someone's 21st "great literature" list is a far cry from Shakespeare.
Nothing wrong with a board members voicing an opinion about what she considered trash is there?
"The Song of Songs is absolute filth."
Well, it involves markers, poster paint, string, double sided tape, gummed stars, poster board, a ruler, cardboard tubes, and, uh, I think I've gone far enough. I don't want to be banned.
My reaction exactly. I'm halfway through the book, and was amazed to find it on this list.
They forgot the koran.
a. No, sex isn't filth.
b. Danielle Steele doesn't write that well either.
It only seems mild because we do not tend to recognize the slang terms of his day that he frequently uses. The language has changed a great deal.
And fruit.
It's just not always necessary to read a whole book or see a whole movie to know it's crap.
If there's one gratuitous or graphic sex scene, that may be enough for responsible poeple to know kids don't need to read it in school.
Ummmmmmmmm...Edward II, WAS a homosexual.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.