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.
I don't know.
Maybe you can read both, interview this lady and report back to us.
Banned from where? This is a reading list.
I oppose censorship. I support schools deciding what they should recommend for reading and also what they have in their libraries.
The Bible can be found in just about any Public library.
THIS IS ONE BOARD MEMBER AT ONE HIGH SCHOOL SAYING SHE DOES NOT LIKE THE BOOKS IN THE CURRICULUM. VOICING OPINIONS ABOUT THIS IS HER JOB.
DO NOT KNEE-JERK. THIS IS NOT GOVERNMENT BANNING OR CENSORSHIP.
Billy Pilgrim and Tralfamadorian bump
But did any of the other board members read any at all? I think the only one on that list I've even started was Slaughterhouse-5, and I didn't finish it.
You must be one of those perverts who doesn't think sex is evil.
I think we are wasting our time, Protagoras.
Some people see "removed from reading list" and have the Pavlovian response: "CENSORSHIP! CENSORSHIP! They'll ban Huck Finn next! And then The Wizard of Oz! Then, they'll control everything we read! Book burners! Naziiiiiiiiiiiiss!!"
well its nowhere in my city for the same reasons cited.
So can these books.
Richard the Lionhearted was supposedly at least "bi", so it goes back far beyond James I.
The line should be drawn at government schools. Abolish them and the problem disappears.
Edward II.
Richard I.
Unfortunately, that is not the topic.
Suitability for reading lists in high schools is the subject.
So it is. However, I fail to see why the book is inappropriate for classroom use. If the ideas contained within make someone uncomfortable, what will we say when that principle is extended to science class, to rule out uncomfortable theories? Or history class, to omit uncomfortable events or the interpretations thereof?
the article states that these books have been approved by the teachers and department chairs.
So you'd let her read pornography, just because God says it's ok? What kind of parent are you?
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.