This is a good discussion about which I am happy to engage. Vacuous posts don’t cut it. Why even post if that is all you got?
Book banning that suspiciously looks like what all the snowflakes are worried about
- Thread starter TheOriginalHappyGoat
- Start date
I don’t disagree with any of this. My point isn’t whether or not to teach the Holocaust, it is instead more about time and place. Jr High world history? Fine by me. Jr High language arts and lit? I’m not so sure. As I noted, my stoker taught this subject at this age and she thinks it is important to introduce kids to literature through material about where they are in life, coming of age, and experiences they can personally identify with. I’m not so sure teaching about Jew hate fills that purpose. Goat suggested that Maus did. If so, that’s great. But I still think the subject is more suited for history class.
I used to sympathize with the “so it won’t happen again” idea embedded in Holocaust teaching. Well, it did happen again, and it is now happening again. Our giant corporations even acquiesce in it and some directly benefit. Our public policy is to cozy up to some leaders who are deniers, hate Jews, and provide money and weapons to those who want to kill them. I like to think “so it doesn’t happen again, is effective, but I don’t think so.
As far as good and evil is concerned, we accept without question many rap artists who pound into the brains of Black young men ideas and fantasies of gun violence, drug use and domestic violence. Now kids in their teens live with all of that and shoot each other. Some of these “artists” have been invited to the White House. Teaching the Holocaust to these youngsters doesn’t mean squat.
Yeah, but realize that reality was probably drastically different 20 years from that point.
We got parental permission slips to watch Schindler's List in middle school, I wrote essays about MLK in 5th grade, we did not cover the Tulsa Race Riot but other high (low?) points of the civil rights era were covered. I had evolution covered from 6th grade biology up through AP biology my senior year. In Indiana. Not rural (suburban) and not southern (north east) Indiana, but still In Indiana.
And textbooks have been "banned" in my kids' school district. Everything is a pdf or handout these days.
Yeah, but admit it...way back when you were in high school, the history book was muuuuuuch thinner.Even when I was in school, US History was a one year course.
School started after Labor Day, and ran 15 weeks in first semester (until Christmas-NY break), and then ran 18-19 weeks (depending on the schools system) second semester - taking out Spring Break. Take out a few holidays, a few snow days, and you had basically 33 weeks tops.
5 days a week = 165 classes.
50. minutes per day.
To cover 350+ years.
No high school is gonna teach Tulsa in that time. Also aren't gonna teach a lot of other things. Lucky if all of WWI gets 2 days.
But I specifically remember pictures of Emmitt Till in my high school textbook. So was Rosa Parks and Bull Connor. Of course MLK. And even Marcus Garvey.
So was this picture:
Also, because of where I lived, when I fished Clover Creek or Deer Creek, I drove past the farm where the slaves fictionalized in Uncle Tom's Cabin had lived.
And I visited Lincoln's Indiana boyhood home in Spencer County too many times to count.
Virtually every Indiana river town has a monument where Lincoln allegedly boarded a flatboat to go to New Orleans, saw slave markets, and vowed to end slavery. So did mine.
So the idea that I was deprived of a look at the reality of slavery and/or post-war racism because I was a white guy is an insult to all intelligent people. It was taught. It. was memorialized. You couldn't escape it if you tried. Even the existence of Confederate statues in Southern towns made you face it.
And in our home, there was a copy of my great great grandfather's discharge from the Union army hanging on the wall. He lived in Kentucky and fought for the Union - as an unmounted cavalry - which meant he was too poor to own a horse.
And most of the stuff you mentioned was probably more current events.
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
I'm sure you are serious about evolution. As I said, my school didn't cover that either. And that is orders of magnitude worse than not teaching Maus.
I don’t know. It didn’t used to be controversial to teach about those things, especially in high school.
12 years also. Evolution was taught in high school biology, 1965. Christian Brothers taught bible as divinely inspired stories to be used for spiritual improvement. Not literal truth.
However there was no mention of the shit the Crusaders pulled in the Holy Land.
50% of elementary school nuns were psycho.
Last edited:
That is my question, I don't know this book but have read plenty related over the years and enough to understand the history. Is it teaching literature of history and banning something from having any access vs teaching it are two different things. As to someone mentioning the Civil War being spent more time on? More our direct US History and likely more interesting along withWestward expansion. My lit classes were more about Faulkner and Steinbeck , Hemingway,etc and their influence on Literature vs being taught real history in Lit class.
I have to strongly disagree with the idea that there are any topics that might be appropriate in history class, but not literature class. It's pretty hard to find classic literature that doesn't also touch on history. If the Holocaust isn't right for lit class what about the Civil War, or segregation? Do we stop reading Red Badge of Courage or To Kill a Mockingbird in English class, because those subjects belong in history class, instead? Do we remove all the Henry's from the curriculum because the Wars of the Roses belong in history?
Please note, I'm not suggesting you might actually go that far, I'm just highlighting why I have a problem with that line of thinking.
I saw a tweet which I can only hope isn’t true - that To Kill a Mockingbird was banned at a DC area school because Atticus was portrayed as a white savior
we’ve lost our national mind
We put nuanced information in the electronic hands of people who have fooled themselves into thinking they are smart because of Wikipedia and Twitter
we’ve lost our national mind
We put nuanced information in the electronic hands of people who have fooled themselves into thinking they are smart because of Wikipedia and Twitter
Yeah...it's a very common tactic for history and lit teachers to be working together over such subject matter to help students understand history from multiple lenses, different perspectives, and different thematic entry points.
Removing history from literature makes for very dull literature.
What you described is precisely what my wife, a language arts teacher for eighth graders, does with her social studies partner.
Exactly. And if you are really lucky you can get the music, media, and art teachers to work together to integrate it also. Our best units of study were done that way.
Of course history and lit cross. Studying literature is a way to learn more history. We even learn history from reading fiction. The point you take issue with is not the point I’m making. We study literature for a different reason than we study history. Reading about the cold war in a history book is not the same thing as reading Ike’s memoir about his presidency. The thrust of this thread was that we shouldn’t hide the Holocaust from jr. high kids. My response was that lit is one thing and history is different. Among the reasons literature is part of the curriculum is not to learn historic facts and time lines, it is to study characters, stories, situations and more all to stimulate the reader’s imagination, improve communication skills, and cultivate curiosity. You pointed out how Maus is more than learning about the inhumanity of the death camps and should be treated as lit. I have no reason to argue that point. But I stand by my point that studying literature about history is not the same as studying history. I have several baseball history books, those aren’t the same as reading stories about baseball.
You’re aging even quicker if you can’t retain fluids in your mouth
I saw an apt comparison to a line in Apocalypse Now, "We train young men to drop fire on people, but their commanders won't allow them to write "#@$#" on their airplanes because it's obscene."
The great obscenity in Maus is not 8 curse words or whatever the number is. It isn't the naked mouse. The great obscenity is what is being portrayed.
The great obscenity in Maus is not 8 curse words or whatever the number is. It isn't the naked mouse. The great obscenity is what is being portrayed.
Time, place and manner.
Why is this so hard?
Should a 5 year old get a vaccine?
Should a8 year old drive?
Should a 12 year old get married?
Why is this so hard?
Should a 5 year old get a vaccine?
Should a8 year old drive?
Should a 12 year old get married?
Time and place for what. There are two debates. The reasons given by the board were words like damn, the son asking the father when he lost his virginity, and a member mentioned the mouse nudity.
Or is the time and place on an intense portrayal of a horrible event? Since the school board never mentioned that, it really isn't the debate they engaged in.
Is damn too difficult for a 14 year old? That is the real world debate and not the portrayal of the Holocaust. If we want to engage in the philosophical debate on Maus I suggest we all need to have read it.
Your summary sounds great except for simplistic view Jews were victims and Nazis were inhumane. With the holocaust it seems to me you can only teach the Jews were victims and the Nazis were inhumane.
I am curious, how would you describe Nazi involvement in the Holocaust without using inhumane or any synonym? Same for the Jewish experience without using any synonym for victim.
Ha no. A million years ago the Jewish Fed was one of my agencies at United Way. I became good friends with the COO and became a member. It's open to anyone. They have great squash courts, a gym, all kinds of shit. It's a great campus/facility.
My best friend converted for his wife. He was no loss to us Catholics. We went +1 with the Jews on that move. I will say the process of what he went through was incredible. Very difficult. Tho I still am not sure if he had a ceremony where they pricked his pecker. I told him I'd host that event and have everyone over. We did get him a Blues jersey with his Jewish name tho. So if you see a guy looking lost wandering around Lincoln Park wearing a Blues sweater with a Jewish name on the back that's him
Wait. I'm confused. I understand that circumcision is a very important ritual in the Jewish faith. But, if you convert as an adult, do you have to go through that procedure (or something similar)? Even if you're already circumcised? And what if you can prove that the doctor who circumcised you 30+ years ago was Jewish?
Honestly Noodle I don't remember. My thinking was they would prick your pecker and the blood letting was symbolic - enough lol. Then I think they abandoned it altogether - but again I'm really half-guessing
Hopefully I am not misunderstanding, but I think this is an important point. It seems like parents, in an effort to protect their kids from horrible things that have happened over history, desire an "easing in" of the information, which would entirely defeat the point. Not providing the same type of profound discomfort reduces the importance and would seem to diminish the likelihood of preventing these from happening again. Teachings of any genocides (Vikings, Native American massacres, Pol Pot, Stalin) should only be taught in a discomforting way.
How can you get your foreskin removed if it's already been removed?
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
I think Stoll agrees with you and is saying that he doesn't agree with Goat referring to it as "simplistic" because that word implies it should be more nuanced. Stoll is saying it is not more nuanced.
Bad News About Passover...and the Future of Your Penis
Yes, circumcision sounds like a deterrent to converting. But it's not all bad.
OK, I misread, my bad.
We really do not need nuanced Nazi debates. Not every German was a Nazi, but overall the Nazis were the baddies (look up Mitchell and Webb Look episode on Nazis as baddies).
There you have itBad News About Passover...and the Future of Your Penis
Yes, circumcision sounds like a deterrent to converting. But it's not all bad.www.esquire.com
Not to hijack this thread (which I've already done to a degree) - but check out The Devil Next Door on Netflix
OK. Scratch that off of my bucket list.Bad News About Passover...and the Future of Your Penis
Yes, circumcision sounds like a deterrent to converting. But it's not all bad.
Cool Story!Virtue signal? What in tarnation are you talking about? They voted to ban a Pulitzer Prize winning graphic novel (i.e., akin to a comic strip in book form, without the comedy) because a book about the Holocaust included a few bad words and a drawing of a naked mouse! Good Lord, are you that dense that you think this is somehow protecting 8th graders in Tennessee? It's about the f-u-c-k-i-n-g extermination of 6,000,000 Jews, yet a school board is worried about a few bad words and a naked mouse? The school board stated that the book was banned because “of its unnecessary use of profanity and nudity and its depiction of violence and suicide.” It's a book about the f-u-c-k-i-n-g Holocaust! How the hell do you have a book about the Holocaust without depicting violence, or suicide, or using a few "bad words"?
And you too think it's acceptable for a school board to only allow books that teach a nicer or more pleasant version of the Holocaust? What should they use, a book that depicts Auschwitz as a summer camp for families with not so good food? Or gas chambers as where kids went to shower, with all of their clothes on? Hey, that fits perfectly with the no cartoon nudity stance, and it even fits with actual history I suppose. Of course there was a reason the Nazis told them it was actually a shower. Ironic.
For f-u-c-k-s sake, the Holocaust should be taught exactly like it was.
Oh, and here's a naked mouse for you.
The next time the alleged 'holocaust' is taught 'exactly like it was, it will be the first time....ever..!
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
Just to be clear here: that school district is NOT going to stop teaching 8th graders that the Holocaust occurred or that it was brutal and inhumane. All it did was decide it didn't want to include a graphic novel that included curse words in its literature curriculum in 8th grade. (I agree that's too cautious if the only word they object to is "damn.")
They didn't "ban" the book per the article. They didn't forbid it from being read; they didn't say they would punish students found with the book in school; there is no evidence they even removed it from the school library.
ban1
/ban/
verb
- officially or legally prohibit.
"he was banned from driving for a year"
No one who has posted about this issue and is accusing this board of "banning" the book has yet tried to give a principled test for how you decide what is and is not appropriate for 8th graders to read or see. Let's set some limits: we can probably all agree that showing an uncut version of of an X rated (non-pornographic) movie to 13-14 year olds is inappropriate, while showing The Miracle Worker is appropriate. (I'm using movies because they come to mind easier--just substitute in books with profanity and sex laced discussions and benign ones if you wish).
There is a large area in between those two, obviously. But school boards and schools have to figure out what to teach out of thousands, maybe tens of thousands of potential choices, all that are good, all that can provide room for growth and teachable moments for the kids. Remember this is a public school where most kids have no choice but to attend and is being funded by tax dollars from the community. An administration that takes into account profanity and its own local district's population and their objections is not doing anything wrong, in my mind even if these aren't my standards or values, as I've already said earlier in this thread.
Now, if they came out and said they were banning the book from the school and punishing any child found in school with the book, it would be a different discussion. If the town said they wouldn't carry it in its library, that would be yet another discussion. And if they criminalized the book and said it could not be sold or owned in their town, that would be yet another debate. But the problem, here, for me at least, with what I see as lazy and unnuanced thought on this issue in these posts and in that initial article is that no one is grappling with the difficult questions because that's too hard or it doesn't fit a narrative.
Is someone calling for nuanced debates on the Nazis?
The author discussed the Board:
On a different note, Spiegelman himself appeared on CNN Thursday and pointed out that in the transcript, the school board members' opposition to Maus revolves around profanity (only the word "damn" is cited), nudity (the mouse version of Spiegelman's mother is depicted dying by suicide in the bathtub), and disturbing images (Jewish mice hanging from trees). But this is the Holocaust, after all.
The Guardian had some quotes from the board.
This all goes to the point I was making to MTIOTF, if we want to debate how the Holocaust should be taught, the school board should have THAT debate. But they elected to debate 8 swear words, it appears only damn was specifically mentioned, mouse nudity, a discussion on virginity, and mice hanging from trees.
It seems like we want to teach horrible events, "The Holocaust happened, it was really bad but there is no reason to go into it". That leads to the biggest idiot in the Kennedy clan suggesting not be let into a restaurant because they aren't vaccinated as the same thing as the Holocaust or slavery. The use of vaccinations=Holocaust happening today lends TREMENDOUS credence to us underselling the real Holocaust.
I am teaching something in my class, let me say Maus, and the board steps in and says I cannot teach Maus, is that not banning it? So I will say, Maus is banned as a teaching tool for 8th graders". Is that wrong.
My argument is not that the school board was wrong, my argument is they chose the wrong hill to die on. This is that Apocalypse Now quote, the horror of Maus is the Holocaust and not 8 swear words. Maybe there are better tools, but that IS the debate they should have had and not mention some naked mouse. What can be used to let people know being banned from a restaurant is not the same as being put in Dachau? I have no allegiance to Maus, but I have noted schools have also prevented Anne Frank from being used. So what is it they want? If the board is going to say Maus is wrong to the professional the board should give them guidance what IS accepted and be clear as to why not Maus. A naked mouse isn't the truth.
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
I guess I disagree with you that they aren't debating the proper tools to use; they are. They don't think Maus is the proper tool because of the issues you mentioned. You can teach about the Holocaust without those and they do.
No, I don't think you ban--officially prohibit--people from reading a book by saying a teacher won't teach that specific book in school. That's not "book banning" as I understand it. It's using a word with a certain political and historical baggage in a different context to evoke those historical evils when it's not appropriate. I think that term is being used to enrage people on one side (it happens to be my side in this debate) against another evil tribe for doing something forbidden--"banning" books or ideas.
How far you go into terrible and traumatic events like the Holocaust is a difficult and nuanced subject when teaching children. Educators have recognized that for decades. It's just not true that you have to show something in all its grisly gory reality to teach a concept, especially when you have a countervailing interest of age-appropriate content for children--which again, no one seems to want to address. To me, THAT is the real debate here, not which political topics are being "banned."
Last edited by a moderator:
If the use of damn is a bigger obscenity than mass slaughter, I rest my case.
I think history should use graphic novels more. Americans have crap knowledge of history and a huge reason is, "it's boring".
AS it is, let's just sum up the Holocaust as "fairly bad" and move on so we don't offend anyone's morality
For the record, I wasn't suggesting Nazi inhumanity was nuanced. I was simply pointing out that Maus portrays inhumanity among more than just the Nazis. The book is very unpopular in Poland, for example, because of how the Poles are portrayed.
War is brutal and inhumane.
60% of the names on the VN Wall represent victims killed at 18 years or younger. 33,000 age 18, 12 aged 17, and 5 aged 16...
Let these 14 year olds learn about the world. It is coming at them fast...
Don't ban books, posts, or memes...
I think the question the board was asking is “can the mass slaughter of the holocaust be taught effectively to 8th graders without the foul language and nudity?”
In my opinion, that’s not an objectionable thing for a community to ask, with regard to what their children are taught.
And it’s not “banning” the book. That’s just a soundbite to rile everyone up.
