Censorship in YA literature, LA/English classes, etc.
I'd like you to extend our discussion on censorship by posting some reflective comments. Of the four books we've read so far, do you think censorship issues are inherent in all of them, or just the two we focused on in class? Do you buy the "rationale writing" argument? Honestly, are you one of those people who is still thinking, "This will never happen to me," or are you of the "Lazy teachers! They get what they deserve" sort? Somewhere in the middle? Somewhere else entirely?
What did you think about the argument that teachers still have to "politico" things, treading cautiously even when they're dealing with parents, organizations, or even other teachers who are obviously ignorant about a text they are challenging?
These are just some of the topics you can explore, or you may diverge. Do not only post your own unique message, but post a reply/reflection to at least one other person's comments as well.
What did you think about the argument that teachers still have to "politico" things, treading cautiously even when they're dealing with parents, organizations, or even other teachers who are obviously ignorant about a text they are challenging?
These are just some of the topics you can explore, or you may diverge. Do not only post your own unique message, but post a reply/reflection to at least one other person's comments as well.
posted by Bucky C. at 4:24 PM
13 Comments:
I think that honestly any book could be brought of for censorship if someone wants to try hard enough. "Curious Dog" had animal brutality, divorce, adultery, and swearing. Stargirl had violence, no parents present, and kissing. (I was stretching for this book, I will admit.) Then Chocolate War had violence, cursing, "gang" mentality, and lack of morals. Maus has the Holocaust, Hitler, violence, and tons of other things to complain about. Basically, if you are close minded enough, you can make an argument for any book. So as teachers we have to be creative enough to counteract that argument. Rationales seem to be a very logical and acceptable way to handle the censorship issue. If you want to teach something bad enough, I am of the opinion that you may have to fight for it or at least compromise. Find a way to tie your favorite YA book with a classic! Argue the past to present comparison. I would personally have a defense game plan for every book that I teach before I teach it because its not only the parents and administration who will be questioning you but your students too. They want to know why they are reading this or that book - give them a good reason! Make it applicable and important to them.
~Cara~
Aside from The Chocolate War and Maus, the only other book we've read so far that deems censorship is The Curious Incident, and that's only because of language issues. I would absolutely write rationales for these books and I wouldn't hesitate to write them for other books. I would rather cover my tail than get reprimanded.
Another issues I think we all need to look at is the community where we'll be teaching. Public, private, rural, suburban, urban - wherever. The types of books we choose will be partly influenced by location. Plus, when you bring liberal or conservative parents, administrators, and colleagues into the picture, they too dictate (both directly and indirectly) what will be found in the classroom. While I don't see a problem with these books, I can see where some others would. If you write a rationale, maybe you'll have an easier time convincing your dissenters that the book is worthwhile.
Today, my 488 teacher and I were talking about the students and a project they're working on, and he was complaining about how the students are so closed-minded about things, and he wishes he could do something to snap them out of it, get them to open their eyes. Even though we weren't talking about literature, I think his comment fits this discussion. I don't have a problem with using books outside the canon or books that need censored providing they serve an academic purpose. But, if you're using them to advance your own agenda of pushing the envelope, then you're using them for the wrong purpose.
Censorship... seems like such a commonplace within school systems yet before taking this class, I didnt think about it much. I have always heard about the "banned books" but never really knew the process, never understood what the parameters were in getting a book banned, and never thought it was as absurd as some of the stories i am now reading and hearing about. Censorship is serious and without the proper preparation and knowledge, teachers, including myself will find themselves in tough situations fighting a brick wall. I am happy that this has become a topic we will endulge in during this class as it is something I do not know enough about. After class last wednesday, I have realized that YES we must cover ourselves and protect ourselves with proper research and documentation. It will all lead to giving ourselves and our students more flexibility in the classroom. Lets fight for ourselves in order to teach successfully!
In response to Colleen's blog, I would have to agree with her that every school system is political and that there will always be something or someone creating havoc on your plans and your beliefs on "censorship". Its unfortunate but realistic and I am thankful she brought up this issue. I have not had the teaching experience she has had and I look forward to learning from her and others as to how we as new teachers can avoid the politics and try hard to do not just the "right" thing but the BEST thing for our students.
I see points of contest for 3 of the 4 books we have already read (Maus, CW, and Dog) and if I teach those in the classroom, there will be rationals written... so Colleen the question is... How do we work with the politics to ensure we are able to teach these new, enlightening titles in our classroom?
I want to comment on Allison's idea of companion novels. I think it's a great idea to introduce students to even more literature or ideas that said novels can provide. And hopefully students will be able to make some connections between the books and their own lives.
As beginning teachers, we're going to have to do a lot our first year to "prove ourselves" to administrators, fellow teachers, students, and parents. The choices we make regarding students reading is definitely part of that. Maybe we should scrutinize our choices a little more while we're building parent trust. Once that is established, I think we would have an easier time introducing students to more controversial material.
I'm going to go ahead and agree with Cara in that any book has potential for run-ins with censorship. There is always going to be somebody out there who doesn't agree with you, and in the case that this somebody is a parent, we, as teachers are going to need to be able to address these issues... and that's where the rationales come in.
I think that a rationale is a great way to be prepared to face any opposition you may come into contact with when teaching a particular novel. It helps inform inform those who are concerned about the reasons why you want to teach the book, letting them know that you actually know what you are doing. It's also simply a convenient and professional looking way to organize your ideas so that you remember everything you wanted to say and so that it flows in a coherent manner.
As far as the books we've been reading in class go, obviously Maus might create some cencorship issues and would probably require a rationale. I don't see Star Girl creating too much of a stir. But the Curious Incident of the Dog and The Chocolate War could go either way. I, personally, would appreciate a rationale for the The Chocolate War, because I don't see the value of the book, but if somebody can convince me otherwise through a rationale, more power to him. And Curious Incident of the Dog has some potential because of its strong language, or even for complaints about the portrayal of someone with autism.
However, I think most issues of cencorship can be greatly avoided or remedied through the use of a well written rationale.
In response to Kate's blog, I never really thought of censorship much either and this really got me thinking about what I can and can't teach. I asked a teacher at MHS and she said that in order to teach a whole book/novel that it had to be on the approved reading list made up by the school board. You can teach excerpts of things though without any such permission. IF you want to get around the approved list option, you can teach books/novels on a trial basis if you get it approved by your principal and it is only taught in your school. After that you can right a rationale for the school board to review and approve your book. Basically my teacher said that there are always ways of getting around the red tape if you want to teach something that is important to you.
~Cara~
I wanted to respond to a comment Harrison made. While I agree that our society is gradually accepting more and more literature as viable means of teaching literature, I don't know that there will be less and less yellow sticky notes. Instead, I think it's more likely that the notes will be redirected toward different pages or different texts. It seems like for all the progress that is made in certain areas, there is always progress to be made in others, or more "yellow sticky tape" [? :)]to be cut through. I think immediately of Mark Twain where things that were likely not noted upon publication become more and more "stickeyed" the further we get away from constructs like the Jim Crow South and racist undercurrents that make certain moods and words commonplace. Or my favorite author, Ernest Hemingway: will some of his chauvinistic, bigoted perceptions of events and characters be cast aside, leaving us with less to understand the male condition during the World War eras?
To me, rationales will always be necessary for literature because we work in an education system controlled most often by non-educators. For all of the theory we want to impart, practice often dictates there are many interests to be protected, and those interests have only multiplied and grown in power. Certainly, it's a good thing, because our education should be for everyone, but in saying that, there will always be someone to object to something. Proving the overall worth is therefore our duty as educators.
I agree with Cara and Brooksie that almost any book can be brought up for censorship issues. Yes, “Stargirl” and “The Curious Incident…” seem innocent enough. However, some strict or close-minded parents/ school administrations automatically search for “inappropriate” features that their children may be exposed to. Thus, rationales come in to play. I personally don’t find any of the books we read to be inappropriate or warrant censorship, but I can see how some people would. I believe it is our responsibility as educators to defend the works we choose to teach and to explain why the messages and ideas that these books convey are vital to our students’ intellectual growth. As Bucky said in class, there’s no point in teaching something if you can’t explain the purpose of the assignment. And of course, rationales are also important because of the need to protect ourselves and our professional decisions. Most books contain at least a few aspects that can be considered controversial. Contrary to the views of many parents/conservative school systems, this is not a bad thing. Students want to read books that deal with REAL issues that affect their lives. These issues are often controversial and may be deemed “inappropriate.” Regardless, we should not shy away from them, as controversy inspires much thought and students are more likely to relate. For the reasons I mentioned above, I think rationale writing is a crucial tool that I will employ for many, if not all, books assigned in my classroom. After all, it’s better to be safe then sorry and an outline of the book’s benefits will prove helpful when students ask the age-old question: “WHY must we read this?!”
In response to Harrison's entry...
I too hope that parents/school administrations will become more open-minded regarding literature selection. However, many of us will be teaching in the state of Virginia, or somewhere in the South, where school systems and parents are often extremely conservative. I totally agree with Harrison that parents and administrations should open their minds to new and valuable ideas. Of course, administrations should not abort good ideas to “shut parents up.” However, I don’t think rationale writing is merely a matter of avoiding conflict. Rather, I view it as a matter of enlightenment- explaining to parents and administration the benefits of the specific book. As Aaron said in his response, “proving the overall worth is our duty as educators.” To an ignorant person, almost every YA book can be viewed as inappropriate. If taken the time to teach this person the value of the literature, perhaps they will understand the purpose of it in the classroom.
Colleen brought up a point that I honestly hadn't considered before, but that I think will be important for me in the future when censorship issues arise. My students are, first and foremost, their parent's children, and I should respect that. As much as I'd like to be able to, however, I know that I'm not going to be able to cater to everybody's needs, and I know that I can be stubborn about things when I legitimately feel that I am doing the right thing. I think in a scenario like that, I would need to have an alternate assignment available to students whose parents may object to the material that I am teaching. Of course... then I fall into a sticky situation where I'm not sure how I would go over the readings in class without talking about the offensive material in front of the students who are not supposed to be learning it. Any ideas from the experienced teachers out there?
Censorship, for me, is just too subjective. I’d venture to say that there is no way to say something that will not offend somebody. You could be the most politically correct, considerate person in the world, but someone is bound to be offended purely by your over-awareness of political correctness. I would say that there are more censorship issues in Curious Incident and Maus than in Stargirl or The Chocolate War; but, that said, I am sure one could find something by which to be offended in any of these books (or any other, for that matter). Potentially offensive content, however, does not make a book un-teachable, or one that ought not be read. Is Catcher in the Rye off-limits for the capital “FUCK YOU” that Holden Caulfield laments over? (Okay, bad example, I know, because Catcher has a history of bannededness). But Shakespeare can be downright lascivious, and he is 100% canonical. Shakespeare, Salinger, and authors whose names begin with many letters other than S are all worth reading and teaching.
I think that rationales seem a fine way to go about proving these books worth reading. Transparency seems to be a pretty powerful way to keep people off your back. They may not agree with what you’re doing, but they at least have a very concrete way of seeing your reasons behind it. But I think having a rationale available is not enough. Like I already said, I think transparency is a very important element of being able to back up your curriculum, and so if you feel the need to write a rationale for a book you will be teaching, I think it should be incumbent upon you as the teacher to actively put that in the hands of parents. Tell them, “this is what I’m teaching, and this is why I’m teaching it. Hopefully this written rationale will explain all the reasoning behind this, but if you have any further questions or concerns, feel free to make an appointment to see me, or to call or email.” No one can argue with that. And you need parents to at least see your side, if not be on it.
This is part and parcel with the job of teaching. You have to be able to communicate with teachers; you have to be able to explain yourself—to parents, students, and administrators. It’s worth it to be prepared.
I would like to respond to Heather's comment that "most issues of cencorship can be greatly avoided or remedied through the use of a well written rationale." I think it's true that a well written rationale is a good defense, but also, most of us won't be teaching books that "rational" people would oppose too too too strongly. Rob mentioned Catch-22, which some people certainly might oppose, but it's still, at the very least, fringe-canoncial. Edgy, yes. Off the deep end, no. Someone who couldn't reasonably see the value of Catch-22 as a work of literature to be studied, or Curious Incident just because it has some profane language, will be unlikely, in my opinion, to be moved by a well written rationale. It's a good start, and totally necessary to do, but I don't think it will solve all the issues of censorship.
Post a Comment
<< Home