Valid point but still that title was considered worthy by a committee of people entrusted with the very duty of determining what was worth reading for in-coming freshman.
That is good enough for me. Yes, I am being simplistic. I’m not or would not get my kickers in a wad over something like this. I’d read what was on the list 100 times over compared to that other college’s borefest list. I’d also be thrilled I was going to Duke because of lists like this. It wouldn’t cause me one second of concern.
College should be a time of awakening and testing of one’s beliefs and a greta way to to do that is to step out of one’s insulted little world.
@Momzie That may have been me you are referring to asking about TV/movies. Oddly enough I am from the same area you live. Growing up, there were kids in my high school that scoffed at things they were offended by such as evolution/literature/etc, but would go the the latest “Jason hacks up a bunch of teenagers movie”. I was just curious about the balance of this kids life. Granted, I also knew (and still know) folks that sincerely avoided material they found objectionable and stuck to TV reruns and Disney. More power to them. But I am enough of a libertarian to tell them to stop telling me what to be offended by, and I will give them the same courtesy.
One does not attend a secular university with the expectation of having all material you are exposed to not being potentially offensive to your moral or religious beliefs. Frankly, until you get to heaven, as long as you live among others you are bound to be offended by something. His choices are to not read the book and assume he is offended or to read it and understand why. Either way, he’ll need to get over it or leave the school. There are going to be many other decisions in college that he will have control over that will better demonstrate his Christian convictions, his morality and commitment to his faith than refusing to read this book and making an issue of it. His actions regarding those decisions will provide a better example of his convictions than labeling himself “offended”.
A student attending Hillsdale or St Johns College or other “Great Books” schools may well want/expect to read something more weighty over the summer. For many other students or schools, the intent is more along the lines of a book club, where you are looking for something that will provoke discussion. There used to be an annual thread on CC where people would post the “incoming freshman” read of the year for their child’s school. There was always a range, always a few books of the moment. Example: http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/949188-required-summer-reading-for-incoming-college-freshmen.html
You may be upset at Duke’s choice; I’m upset with your dismissive characterization of graphic novels as “comic book(s)* or whatever you call it”. Have you read “Maus”, Art Spiegelman’s graphic novel describing his Holocaust survivor father’s life? Or last years’ “Can’t We Talk About Something More Pleasant?”, cartoonist Roz Chast’s description of end of life issues with her parents? They may not end up in the pantheon of all-time greats which will be read a few centuries from now, but most books won’t.
*CC won’t allow me to use the more proper square brackets to indicate an edit from the original.
@LOUKYDAD: Feel free to be dismissive of an entire genre of writing, but please don’t expect everyone—or even many!—to agree with you. I mean, are we to dismiss something out of hand simply because it has pictures in it? That simply sounds like the reverse side of the unthinking dismissal Alice makes of her sister’s book in the opening paragraph of Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland,* and the reader is supposed to rightly find that a bit childish and silly. Going to the opposite extreme does not make one either non-childish or non-silly, however.
Alice was beginning to get very tired of sitting by her sister on the bank and of having nothing to do: once or twice she had peeped into the book her sister was reading, but it had no pictures or conversations in it, “and what is the use of a book”, thought Alice, “without pictures or conversations?”
Fun Home was my first experience with a graphic novel. It’s not a slow read but still takes a few hours–I’d say 2-5 hours. I found it educational for exactly the reasons stated above…to challenge the idea of what is a novel, what is a “comic,” and how this medium does some things novels can’t very effectively (the pictures essentially give a 3rd party POV whereas the text is first person). .
These sorts of threads have the ability to pull me out of my comfort zone to reconsider some preconceptions from different points of view. Frequently I learn something new. Sometimes I change my mind. That is why I hang around.
“I’m saying this topic differs as it is a current political issue that pits this changing cultural belief against traditional religious long-established beliefs/truths. For that reason, it differs in kind than the other examples given.”
I’m not quite sure what you mean. I think you are presupposing that all religions are “like yours” insofar as they object to homosexuality.
Should I assume that a serious novel that talks about divorce should also be off the list, because traditionally Catholics objected to divorce? How about assigning the Scarlet Letter - isn’t that “shoving this changing cultural belief” against objections to adultery?
Any good book is going to have some element of controversy, somewhere. Why, just look at To Kill a Mockingbird and the new one (I forget the name) that just came out. Would those be inappropriate to assign over the summer?
After trying with great difficulty to restrain myself, I am compelled to say that now gay marriage is legal, it is normalized. It is incorporated into daily life.
@GoNoles85 You say you’re not intolerant but in you blithely call someone who makes a choice of conscience a cry baby. If that’s not irony to you, I don’t know what.
Unlike some here who are slagging Duke, I’m not. Like I said, since it was an optional read, Duke is 100% fine to insert whatever they want. But why is it “cry baby” behavior if someone choose not to read a certain book or see a certain movie? Don’t you see in your blanket demand that everything be made available to everyone, that an individual has an equal right to decline and not be berated for that choice? If I happened to post onto Facebook that I chose to avoid the gory/crazy violent/over sexual movie choice when I went with my wife on date night – am I being a cry baby or should I take your advice to “grow up”?
But people who make decisions of conscience should not be generalized as brainwashed zealots. Your quick derision and arrogance towards people like that is noisome.
I guess my personal approach if I were a student in that situation would be to just not read the book and move on with my life, as opposed to announcing it - because after all, it wasn’t mandated, it was optional.
At my D’s graduation, the speaker, Chimimanda Adichie, handed out copies of one of her books (I think it was Americanah). Her writings touch on race and can be seen as controversial - not everyone is going to agree with every point she makes. TBH, my D just wasn’t interested in any of it and had had enough of the uber-PC environment there. So she took the book, and then donated it or gave it away or whatever - not really sure. It just wasn’t necessary to make a statement about not doing something.
Because I trust the committee that chose the titles in the suggested read list. That simple. Secondly, the title isn’t gory, crazy, violent or gratuitously sexual. If it was you might have a shred of a case. But it wasn’t so why the need to contrive the example to make your point? I guess I answered my own question, the only way you can find ground to stand on is to contrive the example. There is no need for that. There is no need for hypotheticals in this case.
It is not like they were asked to join the military and possibly kill people. It is not like they were asked to perform in an adult movie. They were asked to read a book. They refused because they were offended or whatever. That makes them insulated cry babies in my book. I wouldn’t dismiss being friends with them out of hand, if I were at Duke, but we’d be off to a rocky start and, whether I said it or not, I’d think they were pretty lame and not the kinds of people I’d want to spend time with anyway.
I’d probably keep that to myself. Extend a small chance to them. I’d expect them to mess it up and I’d move on but maybe they’d surprise me we would end up being friends. They want to cry a river over something this trivial? I can think of dozens of things off the top of my head more worthy of concern.
@GoNoles85 If the dude quietly opted out and told no one – would that be more palatable to you? Is it the avoidance of the book or his announcement? As I’ve consistently said, I don’t know the guy’s motivation for announcing it. Maybe he is an over the top zealot – I really don’t know
The problem I’m trying to address among some of the posts here (like yours) is that there have been some blanket condemnation for any act of conscience. My point about avoiding a movie is to highlight your simplistic and intolerant view. My reason would not be
I don’t understand why you and others quickly insult or denigrate people who make decisions of conscience – and you don’t even recognize you’re doing it. I’m no snowflake. I wouldn’t cry and have my faith shaken seeing something risque or gory or violent. I choose NOT to for myself
Question back at you. Why are you defending the crybabies? Is being called a crybaby an insult? Am I denigrating them? This is the real world. If you walk like a duck and act like a duck and quack like a duck and someone calls you a duck don’t act all offended. I hope that makes sense.
Why am I am referring to them as crybabies? Mostly because they are crybabies. Now you are going to claim I am attacking/insulting/denigrating them and then we can have a long conversation about what an insult is and if it is deserved or not. All a colossal waste of energy.
There is no problem here with blanket condemnations or insults. To me, to answer your question, it doesn’t matter if they opted out and told no one or just opted out. The fact that they felt offended enough to refuse to even give the book a chance is all I need to know. But there is no problem, If you act like a crybaby you are a crybaby. Like I said, if they were asked to join the military or something and opted out I would not refer to them as crybabies.
They were asked to read a book as in-coming freshman to an elite university and they refused to do so because of personal reasons. It is fair game to call them crybabies don’t you think? Apparently not.
This. One thousand times, this. I don’t care what you do or what you believe, so long as it is legal and you don’t force it into my face. If you are protesting with signs, for example, let me walk on by peacefully, k? Just extend the same courtesy to others for their disparate beliefs as you wish for yourself.
Those who are quoting people, it would be greatly appreciated if you please block apart their words and identify the speaker. It appears some were quoted without attribution, so it is difficult to pick out who is saying what to whom.
Please clearly identify the person whom you are quoting. Thanks.
Why is deciding not to read a book a decision of conscience? It doesn’t hurt anyone or yourself to read a book. Reading, in and of itself, doesn’t advance an objectionable cause. It’s just reading. All the better to refute the book’s themes if you’d like to.
The only possible reason I can think of that this might be a “decision of conscience”—and even this is a stretch—is if the student didn’t want to buy the book and therefore put money in the author’s pocket. Even then, he could borrow it from the library or from someone who owns it.
I was assigned and read The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx. I am not a communist, nor was I afraid of becoming one or having my faith in capitalism shaken.
I hope the objectors to Fun Home don’t plan on taking Biology 101.
I can’t articulate this well, but there is a nuance between “my moral conscience prevents me from viewing materials that are x” and “I’m offended by x.” Perhaps someone else can explain better.
