Black Like Me - need ideas

[Cabertmom]

A few years ago, I read Black Like Me, and I think it was one of the most important books I ever read. I want my teenagers to read it, but I really don't want them reading some of the language and some of the really harsh themes that are in it, so I'm trying to figure out a way to handle this. I was thinking of buying the book in hard copy (I read it on my ipod) along with white-out to take care of that, but I was wondering if anyone knows if there is a PDF of the book where this could be done far more easily or has any other ideas for doing this in a way that would be less time-consuming.

 

I'm sure there will be some who think that I shouldn't "censor" this otherwise great book and some who think that they shouldn't read it all for the reasons mentioned above, but I'm trying to find a middle road here and would love ideas.

[ErinE]

I would wait until my child is old enough to handle the book without editing. I've held off on sharing great books with my kids due to mature themes.

[Lori D.]

Totally agree with previous posters.

 

My guess is one of the reasons the book made a profound impression on you was precisely because it reveals harsh attitudes in our culture for you to have to wrestle with. Learning and thinking comes out of the process of struggle. When you help a newly emerging butterfly from a cocoon, you cripple it; the struggle to emerge is what strengthens the wings to be able to fly.

 

If they are young teens and not quite ready for some of the topics brought up in the book, then wait until age 16, 17 or 18 to do the book -- and do it together with your student, so you can share what was profound about it to you.

[Lori D.]

 Let them read it, save the white out for actual errors. No individual word or concept in the book could be uglier than the racism in it. Censoring the words, thoughts, and responses of the people you're reading about is its own mistake.

 

Exactly. Beautifully put.

[creekland]

Count me in with the "don't censor it" group.  All three of my boys read it.  I want it to have the same effect on them that it had on me.  Changing the book will change the effect.

 

Plus, life isn't censored.  I wanted mine exposed to many parts of life - even the ugly parts - prior to their leaving home rather than seeing it for the first time after they left and being bewildered.  I see my job as a parent as preparing them for the real world.

[Cabertmom]

I will certainly give your point some thought, and I do understand the idea. What I"m wanting to censor is just two things: the repeated use of the Lord's name in vain in the worst possible way as well as the discussion when he was picked up by person after person in the dark wanting to know about "sexual differences" between the races. I really don't think either of those would help in their understanding of the book or be of use to the imaginations of teenagers.

 

Yes, prepare them for the real world, but neither of those items is helpful in the real world. I do not plan to censor the racism in any way as that is the point of the whole book.

 

Crrekland, regarding exposing them to the ugly parts of life before leaving home, I agree to some extent, but I also believe that when they are younger, keeping them free from some of that means that they will more readily recognize evil for what it is rather than viewing what is evil yet accepted in our society as normal. I would rather expose them to what is good, true, and beautiful to the greatest extent possible and only to what is evil so that they recognize it for what it is.

 

Does that make sense?

[Cabertmom]

I'm not concerned that they'll know what is there in terms of the Lord's name in vain but rather that they can avoid reading it. I really am not bothered by other profanity--just that. At this point, my teens are the ones who say we should turn off a certain movie for that reason when I'm the one saying I hope it will get better. As for the issue of sexuality in that one part of the book, I do understand that that exemplifies how unfeeling the people who picked him up were and their ignorance, but there's plenty of that in the book without that one bit. 

 

I am still thinking. I definitely want my 17-year-old and 15-year-old sons to read it and do so now while we're studying modern American history, and I am debating about the censorship part. I know I sound rather prudish here, but my real goal was to see if anyone knew of a PDF version that would make it easier to do.

[Cabertmom]

Good point, OKBud.

 

One other question: Are any of you familiar with an article that John Griffin published in a magazine, probably before writing the book? I found it at one point and am now unable to locate it again.

[Lori D.]

Are any of you familiar with an article that John Griffin published in a magazine, probably before writing the book? I found it at one point and am now unable to locate it again.

 

Was it one of the articles published by Sepia magazine? Here are the links to the 7-part article Griffin wrote of his experiences.

[katilac]

Black Like Me was written in 1961, so it's still under copyright and you will not find a legal pdf of it. 

 

I actually agree with your stance on exposing children to what is good, true, and beautiful to a great extent. However, I would argue that your sons are no longer children but young men about to leave home for a wider world.

 

The 17-yr-old in particular needs to be able to handle content on the level you are describing. He is going to encounter far worse at work or school, and he doesn't need to like it or participate in it, but he does need to be able to handle it. 

 

The questioning about the sexual differences between the races was included in the book for specific reasons. One, an obsession with, and fear of, black sexuality has always been an elemental aspect and justification of prejudice. Two, it shows that nothing, nothing, was safe and private for black people in that time and place. This intensely personal aspect of your humanity was hauled out by white people for curiosity and derision. 

 

It is one of the most essential passages in the book for modern readers, imo. As a society, America very much retains this obsession and fear. It is easily visible via popular culture. If you are cut off from popular culture to the extent that you don't see that, just google it: "fear of black sexuality" just gave me 13,200,000 hits in less than half a second.

 

When I google "fear of white sexuality" it just reverts to white fear of black sexuality, along with some near-misses on fearing adolescent sexuality and so on. Several pages into the search, there is absolutely nothing actually related to anyone fearing white sexuality. 

[katilac]

To add to my prior post, one of the reasons those passages are so important to modern readers is that they are far more likely to recognize and identify with the white obsession with black sexuality.

 

Modern teens have never seen overt forced segregation, but they have heard songs like Baby Got Back and that black people have rhythm. And many teens who oppose racism and never use racial slurs don't think twice about hearing or saying that black men are well endowed, black women have big butts, black people are good dancers, and so on. 

 

It is much more current, recognizable, and relatable than many other parts of the book. It's too easy to read such things and feel superior: wow, I would never think that way or act that way. If you delete the example that is most likely to make them uncomfortable with their personal thoughts and prejudices, you are really doing them a disservice. 

[Cabertmom]

Very interesting, Katilac. I will definitely give this some more thought. Regarding the racial slurs, things like that simply don't come up among our family or friends. Some people have lighter skin and some people have darker skin, but who cares? We are all made in the image of God and as such deserve to be treated with dignity. I would have to ask the older children to be sure, but I don't think my children think of people as groups or races--just individual people.

 

These ideas that you state as common stereotypes would be completely foreign to my kids. That I think is a good example of what I mean when I say that by having a "full tank" of the good, the true, and the beautiful, it becomes much easier to recognize evil or injustice when one encounters it. If one grew up with racial slurs as a norm, it would be much harder to see that they are wrong. Does that make sense?

[creekland]

I actually agree with your stance on exposing children to what is good, true, and beautiful to a great extent. However, I would argue that your sons are no longer children but young men about to leave home for a wider world.

 

The 17-yr-old in particular needs to be able to handle content on the level you are describing. He is going to encounter far worse at work or school, and he doesn't need to like it or participate in it, but he does need to be able to handle it.  

 

:iagree:  My kids have grown up to not like such things too, but they definitely need to be able to deal with it in life as it is in many parts of what they encounter.

 

Sheltering young kids can be good, but in their teens, it's not so good IME.

 

It in no way means they shouldn't share your values.  Whether they do that or not will be totally up to them at some point.  It only means they should understand their world, and getting that understanding is easier when they have people they can discuss it all with openly - with no shame.

[Cabertmom]

Thank you for the link, Lori D. Unfortunately, I can't seem to pull the actual article up. Are you able to?

[Lori D.]

Thank you for the link, Lori D. Unfortunately, I can't seem to pull the actual article up. Are you able to?

 

…ssigghhh… No, I can't either. :( I can click on the links but they don't bring up the actual article. I'm sorry about that! I can't seem to search and find any articles by Griffin. Was your search recent enough that you could look through your search history and find the website again that way?

[Cabertmom]

…ssigghhh… No, I can't either. :( I can click on the links but they don't bring up the actual article. I'm sorry about that! I can't seem to search and find any articles by Griffin. Was your search recent enough that you could look through your search history and find the website again that way?

 

Unfortunately no, and I have looked elsewhere to no avail. Thanks very much for looking for me, though, Lori.

[Cabertmom]

Creekland, I totally agree that at some point their values must become their own and not merely an unpondered version of their parents'. However, in response to everyone who said that they have to learn to handle this stuff at some point, I'm not convinced that the best way to learn to handle difficult or disturbing ideas is by a steady diet of the same. Like most things, I think there is a point of prudential moderation for many things and total avoidance for a few. I don't think anyone above would say the best way to learn to handle the problem of pornography is to expose our teens to porn. Quite the contrary, the best way is for them to know that it exists so that they are ready to shut it off should they come on it inadvertently or leave the room should it be on the computer in their neighbor's dorm room. To do otherwise is to objectify women and men and to take something beautiful and turn it into something so very much not in keeping with human dignity.

 

Back to the case at hand, there are times when exposure to the disturbing ideas is important and even necessary (racism, the holocaust, abortion for example) so as to understand the plight of another and to help avoid the same or other horrors in the future. So where is that point of prudential moderation in a case like this? You may all be right--it may be worth it in this case to let them encounter the whole horrible tale of what it was like to be an African American before Civil Rights. The question remains, though, as to whether the use of the Lord's Name in vain adds to their understanding in any way.

 

I'm still pondering the question, but I definitely appreciate your insights as well as the necessity to clarify my own thoughts and ideas here.

 

I love this board because we can really discuss things freely here.

[Tsuga]

A few years ago, I read Black Like Me, and I think it was one of the most important books I ever read. I want my teenagers to read it, but I really don't want them reading some of the language and some of the really harsh themes that are in it, so I'm trying to figure out a way to handle this. I was thinking of buying the book in hard copy (I read it on my ipod) along with white-out to take care of that, but I was wondering if anyone knows if there is a PDF of the book where this could be done far more easily or has any other ideas for doing this in a way that would be less time-consuming.

 

I'm sure there will be some who think that I shouldn't "censor" this otherwise great book and some who think that they shouldn't read it all for the reasons mentioned above, but I'm trying to find a middle road here and would love ideas.

 

Opinion without reading the thread: Depends on the age of your teens. I could see how some young teens may not be ready for some themes. For older teens (15 - 18) I am having a hard time seeing which things you'd need to censor. I'd wait until then.

 

After reading the thread: We just have different opinions on this. That book is, to some extent, about evil in human hearts and sins of omission and how evil begets evil. Reading it without the depth of evil and sin described is in some senses not reading it. I think you lose the theme when you lose some of the evil. I assume you are religious since you are trying to keep them from this depiction of evil, but if not, sorry for my assumption. My question to a Christian would be, would you read the Bible without the genocide of the Philistines? Without the death and destruction in Revelation? Would you read the New Testament without the story of the prostitute and throwing the first stone? There are horrible stories in the Bible, absolutely vile things. But they are instructional.

 

Every single story in Black Like Me, in my memory, was instructional in that way, but about the same themes happening in our own country very recently.

 

I believe that any child who can handle the Bible can handle Black Like Me.

 

The middle road for me, I suppose, would be to go through with a Sharpie and mark out all the swear words and n-words. I had never heard the n-word in real life, in anything other than history books condemning its use, as a teen, but I was completely able to handle it. I was not traumatized and that book actually did a lot to put it in context for me. I am so glad I read Black Like Me and Invisible Man before being exposed to gangsta rap (I knew about rap but didn't listen to the uncensored version, which you had to buy, before college, when I met kids with huge CD collections).

 

Best of luck. What a great journey to be able to explore that with your kids.

[Tsuga]

"but they have heard songs like Baby Got Back and that black people have rhythm"

 

I just would like to say that Sir Mix-A-Lot is one of the most enlightened rappers I've heard; the song is about not dieting and appreciating a woman's body for what it is, NOT about black women having big butts. I feel the need to defend my fellow Seattlite because I've seen him several times and he is actually a very intelligent, decent person who is a positive force in the community.

 

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3493200073.html

 

(Warning: He does quote some rap stereotypes so there are one or two swear words in that article, but he is speaking against that type of talk.)

 

This just goes to show how important it is to read things in context and I think that reading Black Like Me in context is critical as well.

[katilac]

"but they have heard songs like Baby Got Back and that black people have rhythm"

 

I just would like to say that Sir Mix-A-Lot is one of the most enlightened rappers I've heard; the song is about not dieting and appreciating a woman's body for what it is, NOT about black women having big butts. I feel the need to defend my fellow Seattlite because I've seen him several times and he is actually a very intelligent, decent person who is a positive force in the community.

 

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3493200073.html

 

(Warning: He does quote some rap stereotypes so there are one or two swear words in that article, but he is speaking against that type of talk.)

 

This just goes to show how important it is to read things in context and I think that reading Black Like Me in context is critical as well.

 

Perhaps I should have been clearer: I am not at all saying that the song itself is racist because it talks about big butts. Rather, I meant to say that racism, subtle and otherwise, is one of the reasons the song exists. In the spoken intro, a white girl is fascinated and disgusted by a the large butt of a black girl, and implies that it makes her look like a prostitute and that a big butt is  "just so . . . black!" 

 

The song might be problematic in certain ways, but it was clearly intended to counteract this attitude. I would argue that you are wrong when you say it's not about dieting (he does go on about that itty bitty waist and very specific body types), and he does clearly imply that he is talking about black women, but overall the song is a positive response to a negative stereotype. 

 

Unfortunately, the song and catchphrase became (and remained) so popular that they do add to the stereotype of 'what black women look like' and 'what appearance black men like'. Note that I think it inadvertently reinforced these stereotypes, but certainly did not create them. 

[Tsuga]

Hmmm... I think we have different interpretations and experiences of that song, but I don't want to derail the thread. Certainly we agree that pretty much everyone in our society that has not been literally under a rock has probably had some experience, direct or indirect, of racial stereotypes and that it's important to know where they come from, and books like Black Like Me are a critical part of that.

[Lori D.]

Unfortunately no, and I have looked elsewhere to no avail.

 

Ug. That is so frustrating. :(

[Jean in Newcastle]

Ignore the discussion, but the first post on this thread on another board tells how to censor ebooks.  I have no idea if this actually works, but it may answer the OPs question.

 

 

[creekland]

 That book is, to some extent, about evil in human hearts and sins of omission and how evil begets evil. Reading it without the depth of evil and sin described is in some senses not reading it. I think you lose the theme when you lose some of the evil. I assume you are religious since you are trying to keep them from this depiction of evil, but if not, sorry for my assumption. My question to a Christian would be, would you read the Bible without the genocide of the Philistines? Without the death and destruction in Revelation? Would you read the New Testament without the story of the prostitute and throwing the first stone? There are horrible stories in the Bible, absolutely vile things. But they are instructional.

 

Every single story in Black Like Me, in my memory, was instructional in that way, but about the same themes happening in our own country very recently.

 

I believe that any child who can handle the Bible can handle Black Like Me.

 

 

I wasn't getting the impression that the OP was against the actual evil in the book.  She was wanting her students to see that and learn from it.  She was mainly against all the use of the Lord's name in vain.  One has to admit, that's very much frowned upon in the Bible.  ;)

 

My guys don't like it and don't use/say it improperly, but it is very common in life, so seeing it in a book didn't come as a shock to them.  It's merely the way others sometimes are.  It didn't change their behavior or make them feel that it was ok afterward.  

 

We choose how we live regardless of what others choose for themselves.  That's one lesson I've taught them from birth and it doesn't just relate to our religious beliefs.  It's the way we feel about life.  Live and let live.

[kroe1]

Why does teaching exploitation, racism, and abuse have to be taught with THAT book. If the book offends you and does not match your teaching goals for your sons, then choose another book.

 

Personally, I would not read a book that is offensive to me just for one little jewel of knowledge. There are too many other choices which would do the same thing without being offensive. I might have to search a bit, but with all the written word in the world, there is always something somewhere. I teach my kiddos the same thing. Just because we are adults, does not mean we have to watch/read/partake in offensive, "mature" material. By the way, I am speaking in general terms as I have never read the book in question.

 

Good luck with your choice. My first instinct is that if you turned out OK after reading the book, probably your sons will, too. But, if you read the book and had intrusive thoughts that made you feel uncomfortable, then perhaps your sons will, too. Go with your instincts.

[Cabertmom]

Minniewannabe, why that book? I think it is uniquely worthwhile as a book that explains racism and the need for the Civil Rights Movement in a way that nothing else I have come across does. A Caucasian person generally would be unable to experience the suffering that an African American experienced before Civil Rights, and an African American would not have experienced the lack of suffering that makes that suffering all the more poignant in the south in the 50s and 60s, but the author, a Caucasian who for all intents and purposes became African American in order to experience what they experienced can and did describe the experience in a way that no one else could have done. It is an excellent example of the subjectivism of St. John Paul and Maritain (whom Griffin refers to frequently). That's why that book and not a substitute for it.

 

As for me and disturbing ideas, yes, it was disturbing in the sense that it should have been but not in terms of intrusive thoughts, and I do know what you mean by that. However, I read it as an adult just a few years ago, and I will admit that I am generally far less innocent than my children, having had a much more typical American upbringing.

 

I definitely want my teens to read this--it's still just a question of whether to go through the book and white out the Lord's name in vain and still possibly ask them not to read that one section discussed above.

 

Who knew this thread would become so active and varied? :-)

[creekland]

I fully agree that this book is unique due to being non-fiction and the actual "experiment" the author did.

 

If one wants Shakespeare, there are many options.

 

If one wants World/American/European Lit, there are many options.

 

But to get this specific insight into racism, there are no other options.  That's why this was one book that WAS on my reading list for my guys.  To me, it was critically important.

 

If you haven't yet read the book, it's worth picking up to read IMO.

[Lori D.]

I fully agree that this book is unique due to being non-fiction and the actual "experiment" the author did...

 

… But to get this specific insight into racism, there are no other options.

 

I totally agree that Black Like Me is unique in what it brings to light, and the way it does so, through the very personal and human voice of John Griffin who focused on voices and humanity of the real people he encountered. And the reaction his insights into racism creates in the reader.

 

However, Griffin was not unique in the experiment and the resulting non-fiction, nor was he the first. (I know, I was surprised, too!)

 

While I was looking for an article by Griffin for the original poster, I ran across Ray Sprigle of the Post-Gazette, who ran the same experiment 10 years earlier than Griffin, and published a 21-part series of newspaper articles about his experiences as "I was a Negro in the South for 30 Days."  (and these links work! ;) )

 

Sprigle's tone and intent is very different than Griffin's Black Like Me, which is much more interested in individuals. Sprigle's articles are much more of an investigative reporting tone, with the theme of uncovering segregation as "oppression, cruelty, exploitation, denial of simple justice, denial of rights to full citizenship and the right to an education which the white South imposes upon the Negro."

 

NOT suggesting Sprigle as a substitute for Black Like Me, but the articles look interesting -- maybe as an additional primary source document for middle/high school students studying that era?

[Cabertmom]

Creekland, I completely agree. Lori D., thanks for finding this. Who knew that there was another person who had done the same? I wonder if Griffin knew about it. It would be very interesting to compare the two and see what difference if any 10 years made. I'm definitely going to read this second one. Maybe we'll do both!

[katilac]

 

While I was looking for an article by Griffin for the original poster, I ran across Ray Sprigle of the Post-Gazette, who ran the same experiment 10 years earlier than Griffin, and published a 21-part series of newspaper articles about his experiences as "I was a Negro in the South for 30 Days."  (and these links work! ;) )

 

 

 

What a great find! This is more important than doing laundry, right? 

 

[MerryAtHope]

I will certainly give your point some thought, and I do understand the idea. What I"m wanting to censor is just two things: the repeated use of the Lord's name in vain in the worst possible way as well as the discussion when he was picked up by person after person in the dark wanting to know about "sexual differences" between the races. I really don't think either of those would help in their understanding of the book or be of use to the imaginations of teenagers.

 

When I first read your post, I figured that at least the 2nd was what you were going for. I read the book  last year, and had my 16-17 yo read it too. He said  it was the most moving book he had ever read. When I read it, I felt he could handle those parts, but I also felt that I would--and still plan to--edit a bit for my daughter.

 

My daughter read Peace Child last year, but a chapter or two in, she came to me and said it was too disturbing & did she have to read it. She  never says this, so I took her seriously. There are really only a couple of scenes that are over the top, and it was only a couple of paragraphs that I knew were too much. So I told her I would mark in the margins, and she could skip those parts if she liked. She still got the full impact of the book, without the exact, full description of the goriest  parts. 

 

I am thinking that I will go back to Black Like Me when she is 16 or 17--I might save it for her senior year--and re-read that chapter with the pick-ups, keep a few tamer parts but mark in the margins some she could skip. I don't think that every person needs every last detail to know that it was awful, dehumanizing etc..., just like I don't think we have to know every last detail about horrible people or other horrible events in history to understand how awful they were. Sometimes I don't need the full vicarious experience. 

 

I think we each have to know our kids and prayerfully decide what we're okay with and what's okay for them. 

 

I hate the Lord's name in vain too. I probably won't mark that out though, but I think one could probably do that. I think your boys are old enough that I'd ask them what they do if they come across that in a book, and maybe ask if they feel it needs to be addressed. I'm with you that this book is incredibly valuable--worth even dealing with these issues.

 

I hope you can find a way to make it work for your family! 

[Cabertmom]

Thank you MerryAtHope! Perhaps I didn't express my concerns well enough, but I feel like you are the first to really get what I meant.

 

Thanks to everyone for your insights and ideas.

[Jenny in Florida]

Something to keep in mind is that authors don't just throw words at the page willy nilly. They make intentional choices about what to include and what to leave out, in an attempt to convey a specific, exact message. If you respect an author as much as it sounds like you do Griffin, I find it puzzling that you would feel comfortable essentially defacing his art by editing his words.

 

I'm afraid I'm in the camp that says it's probably best to skip a book if you don't think your children are ready for the actual book.

 

You can probably tell I feel strongly about this. As a "word person," myself, I am protective of the rights of authors to have their work respected.

[MerryAtHope]

Something to keep in mind is that authors don't just throw words at the page willy nilly. They make intentional choices about what to include and what to leave out, in an attempt to convey a specific, exact message. If you respect an author as much as it sounds like you do Griffin, I find it puzzling that you would feel comfortable essentially defacing his art by editing his words.

 

I'm afraid I'm in the camp that says it's probably best to skip a book if you don't think your children are ready for the actual book.

 

You can probably tell I feel strongly about this. As a "word person," myself, I am protective of the rights of authors to have their work respected.

 

I'm an author, and I don't feel this way. (I actually gave notes to a couple of people on how to abridge my book to avoid the most emotionally charged parts--things that wouldn't bother 95% of people but were triggers for them.)

 

To me it's akin to telling me I might as well not watch a movie if I want to close my eyes during one really gory scene that lasts for 60 seconds. I really don't have to see every last detail to get it. And if the whole rest of the movie is entertaining or thought-provoking--I don't see skipping the movie just because of one 60-second scene. To me that's pretty equivalent to this. Maybe Griffin would say if we can't see every last iota through his eyes and live it vicariously, skip the whole book. But I don't think he would. I think his message is too important to say that. 

[Jenny in Florida]

I'm an author, and I don't feel this way. (I actually gave notes to a couple of people on how to abridge my book to avoid the most emotionally charged parts--things that wouldn't bother 95% of people but were triggers for them.)

 

To me it's akin to telling me I might as well not watch a movie if I want to close my eyes during one really gory scene that lasts for 60 seconds. I really don't have to see every last detail to get it. And if the whole rest of the movie is entertaining or thought-provoking--I don't see skipping the movie just because of one 60-second scene. To me that's pretty equivalent to this. Maybe Griffin would say if we can't see every last iota through his eyes and live it vicariously, skip the whole book. But I don't think he would. I think his message is too important to say that. 

 

Two things, and then I am content to agree to disagree:

 

1. It's quite different if the artist offers to help someone edit or abridge. Griffin is not being offered that courtesy.

 

2. I think it's quite different for one individual who is watching or reading or viewing or listening to a piece of art to make the individual decision to turn away for a moment than it is for a third party to deface the art to prevent someone else from fully engaging with it.

[MerryAtHope]

Two things, and then I am content to agree to disagree:

 

1. It's quite different if the artist offers to help someone edit or abridge. Griffin is not being offered that courtesy.

 

2. I think it's quite different for one individual who is watching or reading or viewing or listening to a piece of art to make the individual decision to turn away for a moment than it is for a third party to deface the art to prevent someone else from fully engaging with it.

 

 

Good points! I guess with the way I handled (another book) with my daughter, I don't see it as defacing or preventing. She asked for help avoiding things she wasn't ready to read, and I made subtle hash marks in the margins, so that she could choose not to read certain paragraphs. Nothing was blacked out, and if she read the surrounding material and it didn't make sense, she could easily choose to go back and read those paragraphs. So I've come at this with that mindset. I think Griffin's experience and message is life-changing, whether or not someone reads those few passages about the ride-alongs--I guess I hate more for that to be missed. 

[Cabertmom]

Jenny, you make an interesting point about the purity of the author's message, but let me put forth an analogy. Suppose you go to an art museum specifically to see the work of a particular artist and this artist is the only one in the world who paints in this particular style. You want your teenagers to see and understand his unique style of art, yet your only opportunity to do so means looking at an amazing work of art that contains little miniature images of child pornography on one end. The artist included it not to glorify child porn but to show how wrong it is. Nonetheless, you deem it too raw and horrid for your teens to view. Do you harm the artist by deciding to suggest to your teenagers that they learn from the entire work of art but avoid looking at the one end with the child pornography?

 

It may be that your teens fail to grasp some small portion of the point that the artist is trying to make, but I would suggest that the cost-to-benefit ratio is in favor of steering the teen away from the child pornography yet letting them experience what this artist has to say overall.

 

Now, nothing that John Griffin writes is in any sense the equivalent of child pornography, but it is pretty raw in places. It's raw with a purpose, but I am making a choice as a parent to have my teenage sons read the work as a whole in order that they can better understand the ugliness of racism, but I am also choosing to leave out one disturbing scene as well as the use of the Lord's name in vain because, while it is so very common in our society, that doesn't make it any less wrong.

 

I had no idea this thread would stir up so much discussion!

[mathwonk]

I read that book in college over 50 years ago in a class on the nature of prejudice.  I don't remember any of the things you are worried about, only his stark first experience of the "hate stare".  Another thing I remembered, his reported death from skin cancer as a result of his experience, seems not to be true.

[Amy in NH]

I'm in the "leave it whole" camp.  It has impact because it is truly shocking in many ways.  You'll lessen the impact by omitting any part.

[kiwik]

I read it in my late teens and honestly remember nothing about it. Perhaps it would have made more impact if I had been a US citizen. Maybe I will read it again.