Objectionable Curriculum:
'Banned Book' Lists
Today's Snack: They say one bad apple doesn't spoil the whole bunch .
. . but let's eat a GOOD apple for today's snack before it has a chance to go
bad. Just as we try to keep "bad books" with a lot of violence, sex, profanity
and substance abuse from impressionable minor children and teens, until they're
mature enough to handle controversial content and themes, we know that it is
wise to keep food from spoiling by keeping it out of the sun, wind and heat. True?
True! So have some GOOD milk to go with your GOOD apple . . . pure, cold and
unadulterated.
--------------------
You
hear about school books that have been banned in various places, but they're
usually classics like "Tom Sawyer" with really quaint objections. What's the
deal?
The vast
majority of the books that parents and taxpayers have objected to for classroom
and school library use are much, much different from classic books that have
stood the test of time, like "Tom Sawyer." While it is true that in some places
parents have objected to that book because of the use of the word "n-gger," and
other books that are decades old and considered close to classics, such as
"Catcher in the Rye," for mature themes, the truth is that the vast majority of
books that have been objected to are NOT meaningful literature such as those
books.
The books
that parent groups have fought to have removed from classrooms and school
libraries tend to be recently-written and not all that well-written to boot, on
cutting-edge societal trends that tend to border on aberrant social behavior.
They tend
to have little or no literary or storytelling value, but have more to do with
graphic sex, violence and other controversies that the vast majority of
parents, taxpayers and everyday citizens would object to strongly, if they knew
those things were in the schoolbooks their kids are reading and their tax
dollars are paying for.
The issue
isn't "censorship." The issue is defining good educational judgment when it
comes to the selection of books for kids.
The
special-interest group, People For the American Way, calls complaints about books
"censorship." Each year it publishes a list, "Attacks on the Freedom to Learn,"
a compendium of challenges to schoolbooks.
Much of
the list is duplications of objections raised to the same heavily marketed
books in various communities across the country. That pumps up the numbers
deceptively.
If
you exercise your freedom of speech for the curriculum your tax dollars pay for
and to which your vulnerable, captive, minor children are exposed to, you're
the bad guy, in the eyes of PFAW.
PFAW
also wants to take away parents' rights to choose teachers for their children's
schools. It exposes schools to unlimited legal harassment. It seeks to weaken
protection for traditional family values and mainstream religious people and
practices, and to strengthen protections for aberrant social behavior and
non-mainstream and sometimes controversial and harmful religious people and
belief systems.
Here's
what a thoughtful parent or citizen can do:
Choose
a book on the 2009 list of "most-frequently challenged books," shown here:
http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/banned/frequentlychallenged/21stcenturychallenged/2009/index.cfm
Then go to
www.pabbis.org (Parents Against Bad Books
In School) and read the book review on that book, if it's listed, or use a
search engine to find excerpts and background.
Here's
a mega-list from PABBIS that shows some of the most-frequently challenged books
of recent years.
Then
make up your mind whether "Bad Book" lists are fair, balanced and
intellectually-defensible First Amendment-protected materials . . . or, just as
we keep junk food and cigarettes away from our kids, "junk" curriculum not
worthy of the taxpayers' dollars and support, which should be removed in favor
of higher quality fare for kids.