-->
@bmdrocks21
It was though. Look at the Stalin shill I posted that still has the award posthumously.
Fight Club gets a new ending in China - and the authorities win
Posts
Total:
34
-->
@bmdrocks21
I think its fair to point out that the school board is only discontinuing the book in the reading curriculum and not actually, say, preventing 8th graders from reading the book. I agree that religious books probably require a different standard of consideration but my point was that nudity, profanity, violence and suicide were not very likely to have been the real reason for objection. These themes are widely featured in 8th Grade literature, indeed throughout all great literature.
When I look at the reading lists for 8th grade English online, most of the books I'm familiar with have plenty of nudity, profanity, violence, and suicide.
Durrell's "My Family and Other Animals" -- Lots of nudity and profanity. Some minor violence- one brother gets badly beaten by thugs.
Orwell's "Animal Farm" -- a lot of political assassination. The Goose famously commits suicide.
Twain's "Huckleberry Finn" -- some violence, some talk of suicide. A couple of dead bodies. Lot's of profanity.
Baldwin's "Go Tell it on the the Mountain" -- violence, profanity, homosexuality
Clarke's "2001: A Space Odyssey " -- violence, profanity
Meyer's "Twilight" Nudity, profanity, violence, suicide
Shelley's "Frankenstein" Nudity, violence, suicide
Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" Nudity, violence, suicide
White's "The Once and Future King" Nudity, profanity, violence, suicide
Dumas' "The Count of Monte Cristo" Nudity, violence, suicide I don't remember any profanity
Card's "Ender's Game" Nudity, violence, nude violence
etc.
I guess I am skeptical that nudity, profanity, violence, and suicide were the real reasons for objection considering the prevalence of such themes in 8th grade reading or else all of these books would be on the chopping block.
Indeed, I doubt a graphic novel depicting it with cats and mice would be the best way of imparting knowledge.
So it makes sense to talk about Totalitarianism with pigs and sheep in Animal Farm but not genocide with cats and mice? I think cartoons are an excellent way of limiting the horror while still maintaining visual impact.
From my understanding, the book is illustrated, while the Bible generally isn’t.
The Bible I received at baptism had many beautiful 19th century full color illustrations. I vividly recall the nudity of Adam and Eve and drunken Noah illustrated there. The vivid violence of Jesus's torture and crucifixion had a profound impact on me as well as Abraham's sacrifice of Isaac, the bloody suicides of Saul and Sampson.
So there is the difference between showing suicidal depictions and nudity than writing “Eve had no clothes” or “Judas hanged himself from a tree”
I'd argue that a cat and mouse cartoon has just as much potential to be less disturbing than a text description. Cartoons can symbolize an act of violence in a way that requires less imagination than an written description. Tom and Jerry do things to one another that would be appalling in text or live action. And Tom and Jerry was considered storytelling primarily targeting children younger than 8th grade.
It seems to me that the standards asserted by the school are fairly flexible and dependent on the context. Fine for Twilight, fine for the Bible, fine for Tom and Jerry not fine for remembrances of what happened the last time Western Democracies were threatened by the rise of Right-Wing personality cults.
So it makes sense to talk about Totalitarianism with pigs and sheep in Animal Farm
I wouldn't want to see a picture of a naked woman with a donkey's head describing a Democrat. Think of the animals.
-->
@oromagi
I guess I am skeptical that nudity, profanity, violence, and suicide were the real reasons for objection considering the prevalence of such themes in 8th grade reading or else all of these books would be on the chopping block.
I understand the skepticism (particularly regarding profanity as a reason), but I still think that it is highly unlikely that the school board is trying to cover up the Holocaust as you suggested by saying "an all-Republican Kentucky school board banned the Pulitzer-Prize winning graphic novel Maus for depicting the Holocaust as something that happened." (emphasis added)
I think that what is most likely is that parents saw the book and disapproved of the illustrations, then called in angry about why their kids had to read a book with drawings including nudity and a "mouse" hanging from a rope. Likely, had the book been a regular novel without illustrations, there would have been no removal from the reading list.
So it makes sense to talk about Totalitarianism with pigs and sheep in Animal Farm but not genocide with cats and mice? I think cartoons are an excellent way of limiting the horror while still maintaining visual impact.
You're correct, there is some merit to using animals as an analogy tool. But that doesn't mean it is the best way to do it all the time. There are different benefits to using historical books or other styles of fictional and non-fiction novels, depending on the learning objectives.
It seems to me that the standards asserted by the school are fairly flexible and dependent on the context. Fine for Twilight, fine for the Bible, fine for Tom and Jerry not fine for remembrances of what happened the last time Western Democracies were threatened by the rise of Right-Wing personality cults.
But again, they asked for another, more appropriate book to teach the kids about it. They aren't choosing not to teach it at all, so I don't understand why choosing a book other than Maus is akin to Holocaust denial.