A case of libri interruptus
posted at 5:05 pm on December 8, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | regular view
Robert Cox reports on a curious outbreak of missing pages from a New Rochelle High School library. The same pages disappeared from every copy of the book Girl, Interrupted, which explores author Susan Kaysen’s experiences in the 1960s as a young woman self-committed to a mental health hospital. Vandalism? Only of an official kind:
Students at New Rochelle School High School are going to find it difficult to complete their next assignment: comparing the film adaptation of “Girl, Interrupted” to the best-selling book. In the book, Kaysen recounts her confinement at a Massachussets mental hospital in the 1960’s.
Pages from the middle of the book have been torn out by the school district after having been deemed “inappropriate” by school officials due to sexual content and strong language. Removed is a scene where the rebellious Lisa (played by Angela Jolie in the movie) encourages Susanna (played by Winona Ryder) to circumvent hospital rules against sexual intercourse by engaging in oral sex instead.
“The material was of a sexual nature that we deemed inappropriate for teachers to present to their students,” said English Department Chariperson Leslie Altschul, “since the book has other redeeming features, we took the liberty of bowdlerizing.”
At issue are pages 64-70 of the book, a chapter called “Checkmate”. It deals with a dialog between the girls in the facility about having sex with visitors and avoiding getting caught by the nurses during their five-minute room checks. The language is frank and realistic, and anyone with an Internet connection can read the first three pages of the section by using Amazon’s search function. New Rochelle High School apparently didn’t realize this or the curiosity their crude censorship would create, nor did they consider the strange message their actions would send to the students.
We had a similar issue when my son attended high school. We often read the books assigned to him first to help him through his homework, and one book was Walking the Rez Road by Jim Northrup. While I thought the book was an excellent recounting of Northrup’s life on and off the reservation in Minnesota — and I’d recommend it to anyone — I thought that some of the language in the book was inappropriate for high school. I called the principal to tell him this, and he eventually found out that only part of the book had been assigned, and not the objectionable passages, which I found satisfactory.
I would not have demanded that the book be removed from the shelves, nor would never have approved of tearing out the pages of it. I only questioned the wisdom of making it required reading while sanctioning students who used the same language in class.
If New Rochelle High and the school board found this book inappropriate for its students, they could simply have found another book to use in its lesson plan. Requiring students to read the book, and then ripping pages out of it, doesn’t just justify vandalism but also sends a message of incompetence and confusion. They had to have students return the books to get the pages torn out personally by the chair of the English department only after parents complained.
Did the school actually read the book before putting it on the lesson plan? If so, why didn’t they defend it from the complaints? And if they weren’t interested in doing that, why did they not just pull the book out of their library altogether? The same language persists throughout the book, and not just on the excised pages, as a search of the F-word returns more than 70 hits in the Amazon search.
New Rochelle High went too far in this case. Bowdlerizing books is a practice that went out of fashion decades ago, and for good reasons. It’s a poor substitute for proper consideration and preparation of reading and teaching material.
You must be logged in to post a comment.

















Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Interesting.
My high school had entire collections of books with far more questionable material in them than mere discussions about oral sex.
Count to 10 on December 8, 2008 at 5:10 PM
Angelina
lorien1973 on December 8, 2008 at 5:12 PM
This is moronic. High school students are exposed to more sexually explicit language than a Hustler movie within the first minute of their first bus ride than they would find in any assigned reading.
muyoso on December 8, 2008 at 5:12 PM
I have read this book. Every single word I have read. I did not understand it. Not one word.
Eh, who am I kidding. The book was stupid. Why even have it as an assignment for HS kids?
Does any current English teacher include the classics in their class or is that not politically cool or correct? You’d be surprised how many HS graduates don’t know about:
Shakespeare
Dostevesky
Hemmingway
Drieser
The Bible (as literature the stories are great)
Faulkner
Steinbeck
etc.
Andy in Agoura Hills on December 8, 2008 at 5:15 PM
While I think that parents have a right to question the wisdom of certain books being required, there’s a case to be made that high school students should be exposed to realistic books and required to think critically about controversial topics in the classroom.
Illinidiva on December 8, 2008 at 5:15 PM
they regularly removed books and pages from my school library, which prompted us to go across the street to the public library to see what was missing. we probably would never have paid attention if they had left well enough alone.
jbnyc on December 8, 2008 at 5:15 PM
Is this the real life “The Music Man”? … minus the entertaining song and dance.
AeroSpear on December 8, 2008 at 5:16 PM
Did the school ever do anything with the script from Gia? Now that was a great Angelina Jolie movie!
grdred944 on December 8, 2008 at 5:18 PM
Sorry, figuring out how to have oral sex without getting caught is not one of life’s great moral/complex questions. (I realize for some low-lifes it is). Especially, if you are a HS student. There’s plenty of time to figure that out.
Andy in Agoura Hills on December 8, 2008 at 5:19 PM
I’m a Baptist – and like Ed, I’d not ban the thing – but I sure as heck would not have had it be assigned reading.
Yeah, I know the teens are exposed to worse – but you don’t have to put a neon sign up pointing them to it.
Actually, banning (or cutting pages out) simply is the fastest way to make sure almost every teen will go hunt the thing up and read it.
kybowexar on December 8, 2008 at 5:20 PM
Except for Oxford dictionaries…
(ok, not quite bowderlizing, more like PCizing, but still.)
Y-not on December 8, 2008 at 5:22 PM
@ Andy in Agoura Hills on December 8, 2008 at 5:19 PM
You might think you still live in the 1800s, but in modern times, by the time a person gets to high school, they are already plenty well versed in their sexuality and have seen pretty much any sexual act under the sun online. Reading about a sexual act isnt going to affect your child unless you have spent every waking moment to shield them from reality.
muyoso on December 8, 2008 at 5:23 PM
Cutting pages out is horrible…have respect for the written word.
It gives me the chills to think some person sits there a uses scissors to make a book “right”…so much for Jefferson and his bible.
right2bright on December 8, 2008 at 5:24 PM
Back in 12th grade English, we had to write some paper comparing Apocalypse Now and Heart of Darkness. I remember getting my paper back with a question about whether there really was a necessity to include a quote with the F bomb in it. We watched the movie uncensored in class, but it was inappropriate to quote from it. She was an awful teacher. What a waste of a year.
rw on December 8, 2008 at 5:24 PM
Not one of your funnier comments. You’re slipping, arch-enemy lorien.
BadgerHawk on December 8, 2008 at 5:24 PM
You just posted this so you could use the word bowdlerizing!
For those, like me, who don’t know the exact definition, here it is: (according to dictionary.com)
“to expurgate (a written work) by removing or modifying passages considered vulgar or objectionable.”
Scranton on December 8, 2008 at 5:25 PM
Hence the problem…they have plenty of time.
right2bright on December 8, 2008 at 5:25 PM
I learned about sexual technique from books first, before I became a grand master post-puberty. It’s best for educators to actually read books and assign them appropriately, not to ban them outright. Even back then, virtually all books were available to me anyway, at least through the public library.
stonemeister on December 8, 2008 at 5:26 PM
I have it on good info that those pages were removed by Clinton operatives years ago and given to interns. This high school is part of the cover up. Ask Monica she knows.
patrick neid on December 8, 2008 at 5:29 PM
I remember huddling around Judy’s Blume’s Forever in the 5th grade to read the “randy” parts. Unfortunately, it didn’t lead to many lewd acts or much debauchery in high school.
Tom_Shipley on December 8, 2008 at 5:30 PM
Ripping out pages? Really? This is a gross insult to the writer (an artist as well as a craftsperson)…a gross insult to the students’ intelligence, and so much more.
Dr. Manhattan on December 8, 2008 at 5:33 PM
The book shouldn’t be in the library. There is plenty of great literature out there without crass or otherwise objectionable content without having to use these kinds of books. If the students would get in trouble using the language, the book shouldn’t be in the school. If that means you set aside some “classics”, that’s fine by me. High-schoolers shouldn’t be given or assigned content that they wouldn’t be permitted to see in theater.
jbsaff on December 8, 2008 at 5:33 PM
Yes and when you put it that way, reading a book about a guy who gets kicked out of boarding school and goes around New York whining about phonies also doesn’t present many moral questions. However, I don’t see schools not teaching Catcher in the Rye. I’ve never read Girl Interrupted, but I’m sure that it’s about more than a how-to-manual for sex. And I’m not sure why any library would want to rip pages from any book; it spoils the author’s intent. I’m sure that you wouldn’t want people ripping pages out of the classics you cited.
Illinidiva on December 8, 2008 at 5:34 PM
Apparently only if you’re using an account that’s made “eligible” purchases in the past.
amerpundit on December 8, 2008 at 5:35 PM
Another thought: If your child is getting their “smut” or what-have-you from a book, feel lucky. With the dawn of portable gaming units, ipods, text-messenging photo-snapping cell phones, portable DVD units, you just GOTTA think “hey, at least they’re reading.”
Readers are leaders.
Dr. Manhattan on December 8, 2008 at 5:37 PM
Had you gone to high school in an earlier time, it’s likely that you would have known the definition, although not so much about the moral equivalence of fellatio vs. chastity.
warbaby on December 8, 2008 at 5:40 PM
But if you start banning one, then where do you stop?? Do you ban Judy Blume’s books from the libraries?? Anne Frank’s diary has some questional parts in it, do you ban that as well?? Most of Shakespeare’s plays have some pretty bawdy sexual humor in it. Do you not have HS students read Shakespeare??
Illinidiva on December 8, 2008 at 5:40 PM
Has anyone contacted the new Ministry of Hope
and Change,to get a clarification as to what
pages should be removed,or added,and where the
h#ll is the ACLU when you don’t need them!
(Snark!)A hem.
canopfor on December 8, 2008 at 5:43 PM
There’s an even stronger case to be made for kids reading really good writing. It can help them learn how to read, think well and write clearly. I’m grateful I had some excellent English teachers and was not exposed by them to Girl Interrupted or the like.
snaggletoothie on December 8, 2008 at 5:45 PM
No link? you’re slipping, dude.
TexasDan on December 8, 2008 at 5:45 PM
Upon my honor, i did not read that before posting.
TexasDan on December 8, 2008 at 5:47 PM
They will blame it on Palin
KBird on December 8, 2008 at 5:47 PM
TexasDan agrees. You’ve peaked, old man.
BadgerHawk on December 8, 2008 at 5:48 PM
TexasDan on December 8, 2008 at 5:47 PM
BadgerHawk on December 8, 2008 at 5:49 PM
Go ahead and take the book out of the library. Kids shouldn’t be exposed to sexual innuendo. That’s what network television is for.
RightOFLeft on December 8, 2008 at 5:50 PM
Well, yeah, it’s closing the barn door after the horse is out. What’s more moronic is assigning such stuff in the first place.
ddrintn on December 8, 2008 at 5:51 PM
Literature has always been a controversial topic in high school. I think part of my crazy, evil ways can be blamed on teacher after teacher that assigned us nothing but tragedies to read. Native Son comes to mind.
Here’s another torturous moment from my youth. Did anyone ever see in elementary school a short movie about a young inner city boy that was bullied, he finds a kitten in the street and takes his new friend to an abandoned building and makes a home for him in an old stove? He sneaks food to the cat, then the bullies find out and start playing with the cat in the street. The cat ends up getting hit by a car and killed. After that, I’m not really sure what happened because I was traumatized as a young child. What the hell was the reason for showing that to a bunch of second graders? This was back in the 70s, I guess that’s the liberal CT public education system for you.
cannonball on December 8, 2008 at 5:56 PM
Believe me… There are some so-called great books out there that really are pretty hard to follow.. like most of Joyce and Faulkner, so I don’t think that writing and thinking clearly are the main literary selection criteria. High School literature class is to really get students to think critical and react to different ideas and who is to say which books prompt such discussions.
Illinidiva on December 8, 2008 at 6:00 PM
High school boys readin’ somethin’ like at and they’ll be going off like lawn sprinklers…
Wyznowski on December 8, 2008 at 6:04 PM
Reading Faulkner and Joyce would in fact encourage students to think critical(ly), and certainly force them to react to different ideas than any they are exposed to currently. “Hard to follow” exercises the brain.
warbaby on December 8, 2008 at 6:05 PM
Damn, that Sarah Palin is at it again! :)
ThePrez on December 8, 2008 at 6:07 PM
Will Huck Finn be banned? The n-word is used quite often in that book. I don’t think books should be banned just for vulgar or profane content. I think books should be reviewed and a determination made based on the literary value. Only the best books should be on the “required reading” list.
However, I do think what is in a particular school’s library should be age appropriate. In other words, I wouldn’t put Huck Finn in an elementary school library.
TexasAg03 on December 8, 2008 at 6:11 PM
In my public h.s. Lit classes, we were assigned things like The Grapes of Wrath, Wuthering Heights, The Old Man and the Sea and Frankenstein. And this was just a little over 20 years ago. Why assign insta-”classic” contemporary stuff?
ddrintn on December 8, 2008 at 6:11 PM
It’s pretty astonishing that any parent would feel the need to help any high school student with their homework. Advanced math, maybe if they were qualified, but to read a book before they do to “help” them with their homework? In high school?
That is very bizarre.
Jaynie59 on December 8, 2008 at 6:12 PM
You’re obviously not as
superannuateddecrepitelderly as I am…I’m older than you.Catcher in the Rye really cheesed off some parents of kids I went to school with. As far as I could tell, it was all over one lousy word which, even then, was all too familiar to even sixth-graders.
I was fortunate. The assigned reading in my sophomore high-school English class bored me, so a hip teacher slipped me a copy of Candy on the QT.
I didn’t turn out too twisted, but didn’t much like not being able to read my book report aloud in class….
MrScribbler on December 8, 2008 at 6:19 PM
Why is that bizarre? My son didn’t do well with literature, and my wife and I wanted to help walk him through some of the analysis. He’s no dummy – he graduated summa cum laude from the U of M in math and is a scholarship student in the grad program — but English Lit wasn’t his strong suit, and we wanted to support him.
Plus, it gave us a chance to do some reading for ourselves. Walking the Rez Road was an unexpected pleasure.
Ed Morrissey on December 8, 2008 at 6:24 PM
Yep I remember back in the day when Lady Chatterlys Lover was quite the hot topic…
serenity on December 8, 2008 at 6:25 PM
You too, huh?
But I bet you didn’t learn about its existence from a high school teacher.
warbaby on December 8, 2008 at 6:28 PM
Two thoughts:
First, don’t jump to the “slippery slope” argument too quickly. More than a few parents (and students, if I’m any indication) would far rather that a few “marginal” books be skipped over instead of opening the floodgates. I’d gladly trade not getting to read Anne Frank for not being exposed to Beloved or Grapes of Wrath. Parents who don’t like the guidelines can give their kids the books they like. But, there is plenty of good material without these poor excuses for literature. Best book I read in high school was Jane Eyre, and I only got that assigned when I objected strenuously to Beloved.
Second, why shouldn’t morally objectionable books be left out of high-school and under classrooms? The students are minors, and we have laws and guidelines in place regarding what forms of entertainment minors can and cannot participate in. Why should books be excused from those guidelines? If the student isn’t allowed to talk about it or use those same words and phrases in the classroom, then it shouldn’t show up in their textbooks either. Parents with less strict views are welcome to provide their children with what they consider to be acceptable material, but don’t shove the trash down the throat of every school age kid.
jbsaff on December 8, 2008 at 6:29 PM
These kids ought to be lucky they didn’t have my Brit Lit teacher. Apparently, everything that’s ever been written by an Englishman is filled with coded references to sex, and that we as American high school students needed to be aware of this. Heck, even my senior term paper was on that topic, comparing differing sexual mores from the books Brave New World and 1984 – and BNW is full of sexual content (including children openly playing with each other sexually).
Point is, tearing out the pages of a book is not going to prevent students from reading about sex. And personally, it’s nice to know that students are reading from different, and newer, books. Nothing against the classics (except for Steinbeck, who bored me to tears), but they aren’t the only books worth reading. And if a few pages about risque sexual behaviour gets a teen to read, we should celebrate that. Especially if they can read and understand all the words on each page – there are plenty of graduates out there who would struggle to read Shel Silverstein, let alone Shakespeare or Chaucer (sp?).
Anna on December 8, 2008 at 6:38 PM
Illinidiva
It is not necessary to start with Joyce and Faulkner. But both of them have writings that are accessible to high school kids and also show the human spirit and the English language in good light. I first read Joyce’s Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man while in high school and enjoyed much of it.
snaggletoothie on December 8, 2008 at 6:51 PM
That’s simply not allowed. Apparently teachers are required to teach the same books they were taught. They aren’t allowed to find new books on their own.
At least that’s what I’ve concluded while hearing my daughters weekly rants on how the books they have her reading in high school are old, outdated, boring and a waste of time… and strangely, the same books I told my parents were old, outdated, boring and a waste of time when I was in high school. Apparently this is one of only a handful of books written in the last couple of decades that meets academic muster.
taznar on December 8, 2008 at 6:51 PM
There are plenty of graduates indeed who would struggle to read Shakespeare and Chaucer, and probably even Shel Silverstein – which only reinforces my point that giving students work wherein they can read and understand all the words on the page hasn’t worked out worth a damn. A quick perusal of even threads like HotAir should be sufficient to convince anyone of the sad state of American education.
The goal of education is to teach an adolescent’s (or anyone’s) mind to stretch, and to suggest that there are “more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”
‘Taint ’sposed to be easy.
warbaby on December 8, 2008 at 6:52 PM
The books we were assigned to read were: Great Expectations, Silas Marner, and A Tale of Two Cities. Good stories without being crude or crass.
That is the problem in today’s society, vulgarity for the shock value.
cjs1943 on December 8, 2008 at 6:53 PM
I agree to a point, but it’s easier for people to learn if they’re engaged. And you’re not going to get kids engaged unless you give them something that peaks their interest. Once you hook them, then start laying on the heavier stuff. Give them Calvin and Hobbes in comic form, and then get them to read the actual Calvin and Hobbes, that sort of thing.
About the content on thread posts reflecting American education, one must remember a lot is typed while either emotional or perhaps otherwise occupied. Hell, I’ll admit I’m too lazy myself to spell-check, because it’s a blog. A bit of leeway should be allowed.
Anna on December 8, 2008 at 7:00 PM
I’d think its more important for literature and social studies than math. Political, ethical and other issues are rarely raised in math class, but often are in literature. I think its important to know what my kids are being taught in those areas and be able to put in my opinion as well.
My daughter and I have had much more involved conversations about her AP European History class than about her advanced math, chemistry or biology classes.
taznar on December 8, 2008 at 7:01 PM
I’m trying myself to remember what books we had to actually read for class (I read prolifically, and I get titles confuzzelled) – I remember the Crucible, Death of a Salesman, Beowulf, Hamlet, the Scarlet Letter. Real light reading.
Anna on December 8, 2008 at 7:04 PM
Coitus interruptus, literally.
profitsbeard on December 8, 2008 at 7:06 PM
So, if I understand you correctly, the concept of having HS students reading about the mentally ill is okay but it’s the language that you are focused on?
HS is a time for learning but not necessarily introducing children to graphic sexual content. They get enough of that from MTV and, frankly, it’s evil the way we poison these children’s minds before they even are at a stage in life to understand much of the message forced on them by society- particularly when it comes to sex. Why is this book appropriate for a HS course in the first place???
highhopes on December 8, 2008 at 7:09 PM
Ed-
Have you ever read Tom Sawyer or Huck Finn? I read those, unedited, in Elementary School. I bet you would not have a discussion of it, with quotes, even here on Hot Air.
dentalque on December 8, 2008 at 7:17 PM
I don’t disagree with…no, actually I do disagree that students need to be started with something that, uh, piques their interest. If students were taught to read and analyze in grade school instead of being fed pap about rainbow families much of what passes for education in high schools wouldn’t be necessary in the first place. Schools aren’t there to entertain, or shouldn’t be.
To the point that “it’s a blog, and leeway should be extended”, I intend to “Stand athwart History yelling Stop!” The almost total degradation of the English language in the last 20 years is due directly to the computer generation’s assumption that “it no longer matters.” And if red lines under one’s spelling isn’t enough to give one pause, how will it ever improve?
It’s been theorized that the English conquered much of the known world due to the natives’ astonishment that they could communicate without the use of their hands. That faculty is eroding before our eyes.
warbaby on December 8, 2008 at 7:32 PM
I don’t get red lines, unless I’m using Word. But I am smacking myself for using the wrong word earlier. It happens, though. Proper grammar and spelling matter, of course, in formal settings. A blog is more of a conversation, just typed. I don’t expect the King’s English in casual conversation, but that’s just me.
Anna on December 8, 2008 at 7:38 PM
I remember doing a book report in junior high- either Slaughterhouse Five or Catch-22, can’t remember which. I was surprised at the time that such adult books were available in the library, but somehow I managed to grow up to be a little perverted. In the mostly harmless way.
Hollowpoint on December 8, 2008 at 7:42 PM
Those are both very good books. I’ll admit, it took me three readings to really understand Catch-22. I’m a little surprised at them being in the library, but in a good way.
Anna on December 8, 2008 at 7:44 PM
You don’t think I talk like this, do you? My point (about which I ranted and raved when I was teaching software in the ’90s) is that the written word takes on a power of its own.
The appreciation (in both senses) of that fact can enrich a kid’s life immeasurably. Or at least it has mine.
BTW, I use FireFox, which may be the source of SpellCheck in this case.
warbaby on December 8, 2008 at 7:46 PM
So, if I understand you correctly, the concept of having HS students reading about the mentally ill is okay but it’s the language that you are focused on?
I think the point here is fairly obvious. If you give detention to students who use the F-word in class, which I supported when my son got that punishment just before this reading assignment, then shrugging off that language as merely colorful within the context of fiction in required reading is both hypocritical and contradictory.
And yes, I’ve read Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer, and would have no problem with either being required reading in high school as long as the historical context of the N-word (and “Injun”) was covered, as well as its unacceptability now. What’s the excuse for the F-word?
Ed Morrissey on December 8, 2008 at 7:49 PM
No, I know. I have immense respect for the written word, and like I stated before, I read everything I can get my hands on. I learned long ago though that I was strange, and that most young people don’t like reading. That’s why I’d rather them read something they’d like, even if it’s not considered ‘classical literature.’
However, I too have serious misgivings about the course of our language and what my generation is doing to it. I try to tell myself that a language that changes is a language that lives on, but that’s small consolation when one is opposed to the changes taking place. I’m not sure how to remedy this, especially as I hear stories of teachers accepting text-speak and grammatical errors in writing – giving credit as long as something is turned in and is half-way readable. We can stand up to the torrent, but be prepared to be crushed by the inevitable flood.
Off to put the kids to bed. This has been fun. : )
Anna on December 8, 2008 at 7:55 PM
g’night.
warbaby on December 8, 2008 at 7:58 PM
New Rochelle,huh? All these comments and not one Rob and Laura Petrie reference. Guess I’m showing my age.
Big John on December 8, 2008 at 7:58 PM
Ed,
A good question, although a better one might be why putative adults find it comfortable (or necessary) to speak as though we’re all in nursery school, e.g.”F-word”, “L-word”, “N-word”, etc.
Talking babytalk to each other doesn’t advance the cause, and it should be obvious by now that it has hardly improved the public discourse.
warbaby on December 8, 2008 at 8:03 PM
I read One Flew over the Coo-Coo’s nest in HS. That dealt with mental health and I thought that it was OK for HS. We even watched the movie in class with the expletives bleeped, but they did a poor job of it so we knew what they were saying. It was a joke.
I am not familiar with Girl, Interrupted so that I do not know the context. If it is in as poor taste as you describe, then I agree with you. My point is this, you say
Instead of spelling it out, it is not a swear word and if it is given to 6th graders to read, we should be able to say it. Society has changed and not for the better when we limit speech.
dentalque on December 8, 2008 at 8:06 PM
What’s the excuse for the F-word?
Ed Morrissey on December 8, 2008 at 7:49 PM
There is no excuse for the gratuitous use of the F-word (i.e., saying “fuck” just because you want to show others how tough you are). But consider this. Sometimes its cool outside. Sometimes it’s chilly. Sometimes it’s uncomfortably cold. And every now and then there is a cold wind blowing from the north and it’s just fucking cold as a witch’s tits. And when the weather is like that, then you should be able to express that. That’s what those words are for.
factoid on December 8, 2008 at 8:31 PM
So, I’ve just posted something explaining my opinion on the use of the “F-word,” and in the course of my explanation, I used the “F-word” twice. Alas, my post never appeared. Looks like the software used on this site is not too keen on the freedom of expression.
factoid on December 8, 2008 at 8:38 PM
Why would that assignment even be in a high school?
Whatever happened to Shakespeare? How about the other greats?
Sapwolf on December 8, 2008 at 8:55 PM
They can’t teach them our nations history or geography but they sure can make sure they get to read smutty books. Sorry most of them can’t read either.
Bullhead on December 8, 2008 at 9:03 PM
Funny thing-
I live in New Rochelle, the high school’s a mile from my house-
Ovewhelmingly Democrats- maybe one of them should put in a call to the ACLU.
marks on December 8, 2008 at 9:12 PM
Your hyperbole distracts from the truth that schools should not be the ones corrupting children. Rather than tearing out pages, they should be removing obscene books from school libraries.
eea on December 8, 2008 at 9:39 PM
Who’s talking babytalk?
Profanity is often referred to as “mature” language. Yet we’ve all heard children use these words. Are these kids more mature than their peers? Hardly. It is immature language because:
–cussers don’t care if they bother others (in this, they are on a level with those who pass gas, loudly chew gum, or burp in public),
–cussers usually don’t even use profane words according to their definitions, and
–cussers often trivialize and disrespect the names and titles of the awesome and wonderful Lord of Lords.
eea on December 8, 2008 at 9:45 PM
Destroying or physically defacing books is just so creepy. It’s shiver-inducing creepy.
omriceren on December 8, 2008 at 10:08 PM
I have to say that strong negative reactions to the use by children of “profanity” is generally counter-productive. If parents just ignore it, reacting neither favorably nor unfavorably, but focus on positively setting the standards for good behavior, then the problem disappears soon enough. Children can be exposed to “profanity” without corruption, provided they get no “payoff” from adopting the behavior.
mr.blacksheep on December 8, 2008 at 10:10 PM
Here is an excellent book I read, I think junior high school it is actually teaching a life lesson kids could use.
A great deal of sexuality is instinctual…so reading about it is titillation, is that what young people, with raging hormones need? Teenagers are already self absorbed, how about giving them something bigger in scope to dwell upon, outside of their 5 senses?
http://www.amazon.com/Pigman-Paul-Zindel/dp/0553263218
Dr Evil on December 8, 2008 at 10:14 PM
Sigh…
I don’t know how, but you’ve missed my point.
I agree, profanity is infantile.
Using terms like “F-word”, “L-word”, or “N-word”, however, is infantilizing.
Okay?
warbaby on December 8, 2008 at 10:24 PM
I’ve gotta say the frame of reference here is really sad. The assumptions are that all these kids are going on line with out any sense of limits from within or without so they’ve all consumed plenty of pornography. They’ve been groping in the back seats of cars for years, so there are no sexual experiences that they haven’t been exposed to, or practiced. The picture here is one where basically parents have given up by consensus, and then what follows is seen as inevitable–this becomes the school culture. Things are framed in terms of “rights” for the students, and I think this is a big mistake. Students don’t have or need “rights,” they should be thinking about trying to live up to what’s being expected of them, and they won’t have time to wonder about whether or not they are being deprived of some perverse garbage somehow.
There are schools out there where students adhere to a dress code, and don’t spend have their energy trying to evade it, where they stand up when their teachers, or any adult enters the room. They understand that the educational process is a cooperative project, they know the teacher can’t teach them well if they are trying to sabotage him/her at every turn, and since they are primarily interested in getting a good education, they don’t screw around. They also understand how detrimental it is to their future relationships to screw around sexually, because it has been explained to them from early on, so they don’t do that either–out their own self-interest.
It isn’t written in stone that adolescents are anomic, but the enculturation that takes them there begins way before adolescence. Parents give in to the siren song of “but Bobby gets to ____” and chip by chip, whatever higher intentions they had for their child are already undermined by the time the kid is ten. It takes work, and it takes perseverance, and networking with other parents who have the same approach. This “It’s inevitable” schtick is just a rationalization for the failure of the parents. I’m not saying that the failure is shameful, shocking, or surprising, even. But let’s not kid ourselves, either.
The aforementioned school is now–not the 1800’s. Why a school like I’ve described, or the values spoken of by Andy in Agoura Hills should be sneered at is beyond me. Read the book “The Death of the Grown-Up: How America’s Arrested Development Is Bringing Down Western Civilization,” by Diana West, because she shows exactly where the wheels fell off.
smellthecoffee on December 8, 2008 at 10:32 PM
Hear, hear.
warbaby on December 8, 2008 at 10:43 PM
Typical behavior of non-thinkers.
Zorro on December 8, 2008 at 10:54 PM
When I studied Chaucer in high school, our teacher made very sure that we understood that we would NOT be discussing “The Miller’s Tale” or “The Wife of Bath’s Tale” in class, thereby ensuring that we all read at least those two stories.
(As well as memorizing the Prologue in Middle English. C’mon, all together now! “Whan hath Aprille in his shoore soote, and the drougt of Marche hath pierc’ed to the roote, and bath’ed ever vein’e in switch liqueur, of which Vertue engendered is the fleur…”)
But then, Carter was in the White House…
skydaddy on December 9, 2008 at 12:06 AM
I’m amazed each time I’m reminded that almost no one thinks there’s anything strange or questionable about the contemporary practice of delaying sex and family until ten or twenty years after puberty. I don’t advocate any particular change of customs; perhaps I’m as puzzled as anyone about what change could reasonably be made. However, no one else seems even to wonder at the present custom: physical sexual maturity at age 16 or 17, but socially supported sex and family at age 25 or 27.
Kralizec on December 9, 2008 at 1:32 AM
I read contemporary books and stories when I was in high school eight years ago: Amy Tan, Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Toni Morrison, etc. Most schools want to update their curriculums to offer a wider variety of literature and get students interested in reading, which is a good thing.
Illinidiva on December 9, 2008 at 5:51 AM
I was just pointing out that both authors aren’t known for their clear, straightforward use of the English language. I don’t think that one would want students to start modeling term papers off of either of those writers though. Which proves my point that high school literature is more about thinking critically than learning to write clearly.
Illinidiva on December 9, 2008 at 5:59 AM
The first question I’d ask you is who gets to decide which literature stays and goes?? If one parent complains, does the book get pulled from the reading list?? Is it just sexual situations or do books with violence and bad words come off the list?? Do parents with religious objections to books get a say??
Secondly, I think the slippery slope is valid. Huck Finn, Of Mice and Men, and Catcher in the Rye always make the top 10 challenged book lists, and I believe that To Kill a Mockingbird gets challenged quite frequently as well. All are mainstays of HS English classes and for good reason. Frankly, if you start banning books for sexual content, then you could probably make a case of ditching a good majority of classical literature.
Each parent has their own guidelines for raising their children. For instance, what if a parent thinks reading about a character’s death would be too upsetting for their young elementary school student? Does that mean that the school needs to pull Charlotte’s Web out of the library?
Illinidiva on December 9, 2008 at 6:49 AM
“This is moronic. High school students are exposed to more sexually explicit language than a Hustler movie within the first minute of their first bus ride than they would find in any assigned reading.”
I always thought the idea of school was to provide children/adults with what they do not get within the first minute of their first bus ride.
The problem is most schools have stopped providing a reasonable education. I will leave what is reasonable up to the rest of you.
PS:
I know a few teachers who swear that the NCLB testing has destroyed their ability to teach. The problem is, good teachers that they are, they were unable to get some kids to learn before NCLB came along.
davod on December 9, 2008 at 6:54 AM
PS:
I agree with Ed’s point that they should have picked another book.
davod on December 9, 2008 at 6:57 AM
I agree with Ed Morrissey on this. The book should not have been required reading, in the first place. Materials with sexually explicit content do not belong, in our public schools.
The so-called educator who approved the book for the New Rochelle High School library and the teacher who required students to use the book, “Girl, Interrupted” for the assignment, ought to be suspended. Surely these buffoons can secure suitable and age-appropriate reading materials for students.
Those who mentor and teach our children when we’re not present must be monitored more closely and it’s up to parents to do so.
sinsing on December 9, 2008 at 7:28 AM
Hah! I thought Ed was criticizing the Reader’s Digest Condensed Books series when he said that bowdlerizing has gone out of fashion.
BigD on December 9, 2008 at 8:33 AM
This is why I am so glad we homeschool.
onthego on December 9, 2008 at 8:40 AM
Yes, of course kids should have access to soft porn at taxpayers’ expense. After all, what is school for if not prematurely sexualizing children?
Akzed on December 9, 2008 at 8:53 AM
Can we now start the rumor that New Rochell HS is a fanatical evangelical book-banning holy roller?
I think they got a good deal on some clothes, too…
hawksruleva on December 9, 2008 at 9:13 AM
Ritchie would never have been allowed to read the book.
I’m old too.
Bobbertsan on December 9, 2008 at 9:32 AM
I think so, too.
Lazy, robotic administrators. The educators should be educated.
bridgetown on December 9, 2008 at 9:34 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »