<p>This all had been broiling for plenty of time and influenced the migration south, decades earlier. The question remains: can all kids handle what is deemed literary art or a needed hit of reality? </p>
<p>Somewhere in the talk, we have to recognize that we bemoan teaching to the lowest levels of kids. But that there will be some who are emotionally unprepared. There’s a difference between the violence kids are exposed to and the way lit can hit home. </p>
<p>It throws off this point to focus on those kids who should be ready for the material. CC abounds with examples of kids still seeking their way through challenges and confusion. The potency of the material has to be respected.</p>
<p>My kids read a variety. Hemingway was reprensented by Old Man and the Sea. The year they did UPUSH they also read American novels of the same time period as much as possible. I’m pretty sure they read The Grapes of Wrath in that curriculum. They read Tale of Two Cities for Dickens - I love it, but it didn’t seem representative of his work to me. One of them might have read Great Expectations too. Austen was on summer reading lists, but I don’t remember it ever being covered in their school. (I don’t think we read any when I was in school either, but since we were all Georgette Heyer addicts we discovered her on our own.) </p>
<p>My older son read a whole passel of myths and epic poems as part of his senior year elective English, my younger son read classic mysteries for his.</p>
<p>They definitely read some minority authors in all of this, though I really don’t remember which ones any more.</p>
<p>If this had been my child, I would have intervened. Since I never found myself in this scenario, I have no idea what the intervention would have involved.</p>
<p>My daughter’s current junior year English course:
This course offers an exploration through literature of three deeply rooted themes in American culture. In the first semester, we examine all sides of the American Dream and what it means for the many diverse segments of the American population, from the Dream’s gleaming potential to its dark underbelly. In addition to F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby, we read works from authors such as T.C. Bambara, Toni Morrison, James Baldwin, Andre Dubus, Amy Tan, Denis Lehane, Rudolfo Anaya, Langston Hughes, Arthur Miller and Sherman Alexie. In the second semester, we study Americans’ fascination with exploring this vast continent, starting with Mark Twain and The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, then diving into works from authors like William Least Heat-Moon, Jack Kerouac, William Faulkner, Zora Neale Hurston, Annie Proulx, John Steinbeck, Gloria Naylor and John Howard Griffin. We conclude the year by looking forward, as a culture with such a short collective history is wont to do. Works from writers such as Thomas More, Jennifer Egan, Gary Shteyngart, Edward Bellamy, Cormac McCarthy, Margaret Atwood, Ayn Rand, Tocqueville, Ray Bradbury, Kurt Vonnegut and others present a variety of views about America’s possible utopian or dystopian futures. Throughout the year, students engage with multiple genres – fiction, poetry, non-fiction and drama – as well as the different movements in American literature, and with a diverse and multicultural panorama of authors.</p>
<p>Re apprenticeprof #138: QMP is female. Gender no doubt influences a student’s reaction to a rape scene in a book. Actually, I don’t think the scene with the “rape by Santa Claus” was actually a rape scene, even though the word “rape” occurred several times in it.</p>
<p>Incidentally, the “rape by Santa Claus” section was assigned in late December, before the break. This meant that every time QMP saw a Santa figure, or the words “Santa Claus,” or even heard jingle bells, this section of the book replayed itself for her. And a very Merry Christmas to you, too, Ms. LitTeacher . . .</p>
<p>I am curious about the viewpoints of other participants in this forum on a set of events, one real, one hypothetical.</p>
<p>The real one involves the members of DKE fraternity at Yale, whose pledge class went through Old Campus, where the freshman residence halls are located, chanting, “No means Yes! Yes means . . .” (Well let me stop there, if you haven’t seen the story before you can easily find it on the internet.) In the spirit of the SAT, which some students are about to take in October, this chant is:</p>
<p>a) necessary information, from which women first-year students at Yale should not be shielded
b) a humorous parody of the “Consent” discussions that are required during freshman orientation
c) despicable, really, but within the bounds of free speech
d) a cause for disciplinary action</p>
<p>My answer is c. Yale’s answer is d. I am curious about how opinions divide.</p>
<p>Then let me pose a hypothetical, that a high school teacher decides for some reason to have a group of male students come into the lit class to repeat the DKE chant. The high school is public, and the students are not permitted to just walk out of the classroom. What is your feeling about this?</p>
<p>I’m female too. So is half of the population of the country. The fact remains that if you are willing to remove every novel that might reasonably be said to contain some disturbing material, you’re radically curtailing your options.</p>
<p>Frankly, I think there is something wrong if a 16 or 17 year old responds so strongly to that scene that hearing the word “Santa Claus” distresses her. If a student’s life experiences have made something a particular trigger (not saying that was going on here, and hoping it wasn’t), I think the student and/or parent have to have a discussion with the teacher, who would hopefully be sympathetic enough to exempt a student from certain materials and provide an alternative assignment. Yes, this may be awkward and painful, but the alternative of removing every potentially problematic text from the curriculum is not really viable. To Kill a Mockingbird, while it is not remotely as graphic as Invisible Man, could also trigger a rape victim.</p>
<p>ucbalumnus, re #137: I wrote (and you quoted me) that “a deplorable interest in the preservation of slavery was the cause of the Southern secession.” So why are you writing that “the seceding states were heaving motivated by the preservation of slavery,” with “But it does not change the fact . . .” ahead of it? Obviously, I agree that is why the South seceded. </p>
<p>mini added some interesting historical commentary to this discussion. It turns the usual “states’ rights” argument on its head–and based on earlier posts by mini, I have no doubt that he is right. I have been taught that the Southerners did fear Lincoln’s intervention in their affairs.</p>
<p>With regard to the South firing first, yes, absolutely true. Actually, Lincoln’s actions were interesting in that regard. As I understand it, the South laid siege to Ft. Sumter, which was running out of supplies. Lincoln sent ships containing only food and water (and other peaceable items), with no weapons or ammunition, and let the Southerners know that was what he was sending. This would face the Southerners with the issue of whether to interrupt the flow of humanitarian aid to the fort, when the ships arrived. They fired on the fort preemptively, before the ships came, to avoid the appearance of interrupting needed supplies. Lincoln was a good bit more canny than some give him credit for being.</p>
<p>Yet again, if Lincoln had been inclined to permit the dissolution of the Union, war would not have come.</p>
<p>Re sseamom, #136: Yes, I think that literature about cutting does increase the incidence of cutting. Similarly, I think that the discussion of anorexia increased the incidence of anorexia. There is probably some low, persistent level of these problems in the absence of publicity about it. However, it appears to me that anorexia has peaked and then declined slightly as a problem, just based on observations. Not to say that it does not continue as a problem, but I think the incidence is now a bit lower.</p>
<p>I don’t know why one would assume that a student would have to be a rape victim to respond with emotional intensity to the scenes in The Invisible Man. Isn’t it enough to be human?</p>
<p>And, for that matter, would one have to have been forced to participate in boxing, in order to recoil from the violence in that scene?</p>
<p>QM, the number of teens who read any one book is a fraction of the number who watch TV shows, movies or YouTube videos presenting cutting, anorexia or any other unpleasant topic. Do you suggest we ban all media?</p>
<p>I don’t think you give the average 16- or 17-year-old a lot of credit for either good judgment or the ability to seek help when they need it.</p>
<p>Also, I would very much like to thank lookingforward for the comment “The potency of the material has to be respected.”</p>
<p>I started a separate thread some time ago (which alh mentioned here), on the issue of grim literature in the schools.</p>
<p>My feeling is that a student will encounter many deeply troubling events, just reading a newspaper (any day) or listening to the news (any time).</p>
<p>I understand that much of great literature is deeply troubling, and that the reactions to it are subjective, and variable from person to person. On the “grim literature” thread, I just argued for a few hopeful literary works to be interspersed amongst the grimness. “Hopeful” is different from “feel good.” For example, I would classify King Lear as “hopeful,” though it is incontestably tragic.</p>
<p>QM you cannot hold the teacher, or anyone else for that matter, responsible for the way QMP reacted to that particular passage in the book or the association with Santa Clause.</p>
<p>I happened to read that book around the same time as QMP, and at the same time I was reading Pet Sematary for the first time. I was really upset for a few days and cried after I read a chapter in Pet Sematary where the 2 year old child of the protagonist dies in a road accident, but when I read the same section section as QMP it didn’t bother me. </p>
<p>What I am trying to say is that we cannot predict the way we will process reading about certain things until we read them, and getting upset sometimes is a very normal reaction. Why is it wrong to be upset about a passage you read in a book? Isn’t that how we learn, mature, and grow emotionally?</p>
<p>I think the book should be available in the library. You oppose banning materials. I don’t favor banning materials, either. </p>
<p>I oppose forcing people in public schools to read material that is deeply troubling to them, with the only alternative to that being home-schooling (or perhaps private schooling, if there is a good one within a reasonable distance, and a family can afford it).</p>
<p>This was in response to sally305 #153–just wanted to clarify, because of the intervening posts.</p>
<p>Sorry, I don’t understand the question, FinanceGrad. How is “Santa Claus” not associated with “Santa Claus”? The scene is in the book, and it was discussed at some length in class. I have the feeling that the boys knew they were making the girls uncomfortable, with the way that they were discussing the scene. I have the strong impression that the teacher knew that the girls were being made uncomfortable. Managing a class discussion is part of teaching.</p>