It has run its course and the award goes to ....

[MommaOfalotta]

I am a liberal and would be concerned if this book was chosen for my kid. I get it that the author is speaking of experiences, but can she not convey the same things without graphic s*x? It seems the same as gratuitous violence, but in this case it seems like gratuitous s*x which is of a disturbing nature. I have no problem with my kid reading about normal sexual relations that are not too graphic in novels of literary value when he is old enough. This book however seems to be describing very graphic and disturbing s*x. I think it is appropriate to protect my kid from gratuitous violence and I would also want to protect him from disturbing passages that this book has. Why fill a kid's mind with those sorts of images?

:iagree:

[JadeOrchidSong]

You deleted your opinion from the post. It WAS there.

 

Your posts have this unusual perky aggression. Like one of Charlie's Angels.

I did give my opinion and then deleted after confirming what you said. It WAS there for sure.

 

I need some educating about this Charlie's Angel thing and "unusual perky aggression" makes me feel so cool. If you can elaborate on that perky aggression, it would be even better, You made my day, Unsinkable:-):-)

[Kathryn]

It is graphic and disturbing, but I don't agree that it's gratuitous.

 

I wouldn't hand my 10 yo the book, but I absolutely would hand it to my 16 or 17 yo.

Isn't high school when we're supposed to be engaging our students in these discussions?

My concern would be with it being used across the board in a high school class. It just doesn't seem like the kind of book that you can say all 16/17yos are ready to grapple with maturity-wise. I'm mostly thinking here about how immature and insensitive a lot of the boys were my junior year. The way my AP English class worked that year was that we were split into groups of five and each group was assigned a novel to work with, write about, and present to the class. I found it interesting that my group happened to be all female and was the one assigned Beloved.

 

Besides the immaturity issue, you have kids who've led very sheltered lives for whom this would be terribly shocking, and you have those who might identify all too well with the subject. As I said, I don't think it should be banned or removed from libraries. But, I do think that it's the kind of book that might require some discernment in assigning to high schoolers. And I think there are other books that speak to the young African American girl mid-twentieth century that aren't quite so graphic. "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings" was a bit shocking and disturbing, but without being quite so pornographic about what was happening.

[Mrs Mungo]

I'm wondering why you deleted your entire opinion if you were so keen on giving it. Your original, post #12 read:

 

I am just glad nobody quoted my post. I just deleted it.

Language of child poxxn from the predator's POV trying to make it sound "gentle, loving, fine" is inappropriate for a minor who is 17. Yea, a 17 or 18 year-old may get married already, but there is no place for this book to be for school reading.

I am totally fine for young people to read romantic novles with intimate scenes between two adults who love each other. However, Bluest Eye does not belong to this category. However, I am totally fine if parents choose this for their own children to read because they have the right to do so.

This thread dies here, I hope.

 

Lolita is a classic example of a book from a predator's POV. I will never understand why people think it's not a POV worth exploring. Nobody suggests empathizing with such a person. Exploring such a POV is different than validating it. 

 

I agree with one of the other posters who said Beloved is more disturbing then The Bluest Eye, and Beloved is on TWTM 12th grade reading list. I read Beloved as a freshman in college when I was 17. I definitely disagree that either book contains "gratuitous sex." It sort of goes to what we were discussing the other day-not every book should be an easy thing to tackle emotionally. Some topics are *hard* and should be disturbing.

 

I would be curious to see a Venn diagram of the people who object to the book, the people who have actually read it in its entirety and the people who are teaching high schoolers about literature. 

 

eta: I'm also curious how people feel about OTHER works. Is Cassandra's rape in the Temple of Athena okay in a way that this newer rape scene is not? 

[kitten18]

Lolita is a classic example of a book from a predator's POV. I will never understand why people think it's not a POV worth exploring. Nobody suggests empathizing with such a person. Exploring such a POV is different than validating it. 

 

I agree with one of the other posters who said Beloved is more disturbing then The Bluest Eye, and Beloved is on TWTM 12th grade reading list. I read Beloved as a freshman in college when I was 17. I definitely disagree that either book contains "gratuitous sex." It sort of goes to what we were discussing the other day-not every book should be an easy thing to tackle emotionally. Some topics are *hard* and should be disturbing.

 

I would be curious to see a Venn diagram of the people who object to the book, the people who have actually read it in its entirety and the people who are teaching high schoolers about literature. 

 

eta: I'm also curious how people feel about OTHER works. Is Cassandra's rape in the Temple of Athena okay in a way that this newer rape scene is not? 

 

OMG, can you believe what those classical homeschoolers are assigning to their children? :blink:

[twoxcell]

 

There are some people who think that there are plenty of beautifully written, powerful novels that don't go where this one appears too. If the author, judging from her quote above, writes a book so that when the reader gets to a scene of rape and incest, the reader thinks it's irrelevant and she wants the reader to focus on the rape as an act of love of a father to a daughter, then, yeah, I think I'll pass. I haven't read the book but the quote from the author above is disturbing to me. I think there are plenty of other healthy ways to discuss rape and incest with older children without using this book.

:iagree: :ack2:

[nmoira]

The Bluest Eye is already in use in a few school districts. I missed the original link, but I gather that this is a book that is on a CC approved list and not a mandated text. Can someone explain the logistics of this? Is it possible that works are submitted for approval and this was one of them?

[Catwoman]

I liked it better when the thread was titled, DELETED.

 

Now it's getting confusing.

 

How many titles does a single thread need to have? I think three is already two too many.

[nmoira]

I liked it better when the thread was titled, DELETED.

 

Now it's getting confusing.

 

How many titles does a single thread need to have? I think three is already two too many.

 

I think the OP should run with it now, and keep changing titles every few hours until we hit cupcakes and kilts.

[Caroline]

The Bluest Eye is already in use in a few school districts. I missed the original link, but I gather that this is a book that is on a CC approved list and not a mandated text. Can someone explain the logistics of this? Is it possible that works are submitted for approval and this was one of them?

Works aren't submitted for Common Core approval. The standards contain an appendix of exemplar readings based on text complexity, quality and range. What they are saying is that these texts have the level of complexity and the sample questions have the level of rigor expected to satisfy the standards. The Common Core in no way dictates what has to be read or even what should be read. It dictates the level of reading needed to satisfy the standard. Several examples are given for each grade level. The Bluest Eye is one of 17 novels listed for the 11th grade. There are also 9 plays and several poems listed. Teachers are not expected to have students read all or any of these specific texts. They are listed as examples of texts that fit the criteria.

[Catwoman]

I think the OP should run with it now, and keep changing titles every few hours until we hit cupcakes and kilts.

Yeah, she might as well have some fun with it at this point. Maybe her next thread title could ask if there are any kilts worn in that book. Later, she could change it again and ask if anyone eats cupcakes in the book.

 

She could get a lot of mileage out of it. :D

[nmoira]

Works aren't submitted for Common Core approval. The standards contain an appendix of exemplar readings based on text complexity, quality and range. What they are saying is that these texts have the level of complexity and the sample questions have the level of rigor expected to satisfy the standards. The Common Core in no way dictates what has to be read or even what should be read. It dictates the level of reading needed to satisfy the standard. Several examples are given for each grade level. The Bluest Eye is one of 17 novels listed for the 11th grade. There are also 9 plays and several poems listed. Teachers are not expected to have students read all or any of these specific texts. They are listed as examples of texts that fit the criteria.

 

Thanks!

[Mrs Mungo]

Works aren't submitted for Common Core approval. The standards contain an appendix of exemplar readings based on text complexity, quality and range. What they are saying is that these texts have the level of complexity and the sample questions have the level of rigor expected to satisfy the standards. The Common Core in no way dictates what has to be read or even what should be read. It dictates the level of reading needed to satisfy the standard. Several examples are given for each grade level. The Bluest Eye is one of 17 novels listed for the 11th grade. There are also 9 plays and several poems listed. Teachers are not expected to have students read all or any of these specific texts. They are listed as examples of texts that fit the criteria.

 

Thank you for the additional info. Clearly, most people don't understand how CC is supposed to work.

 

I remember back when I was starting to HS my eldest dd (who is a senior this year) Common Core/Core Knowledge was all the rage among homeschoolers. How many homeschoolers own some of these books? A way of somewhat standardizing education *seems* like a good idea in theory. It certainly would make things easier for kids who move a lot. I don't know why it's the devil now in some circles. Is it just because the government has actually started to take on some of those ideas and implement them that it is suddenly horrible and evil?

[unsinkable]

I liked it better when the thread was titled, DELETED.

 

Now it's getting confusing.

 

How many titles does a single thread need to have? I think three is already two too many.

 

The first title was its given "maiden" name.

 

The next title was its married name.

 

This title is its mid-life crisis divorce name.

[Guest submarines]

Yeah barf.  But I imagine some fathers who do this do think they are doing it out of love.  I'm completely repulsed at the thought, but I'm not even sure why.  So I suppose it's interesting (not a fun oh yay look at that interesting) that some people have this completely different feeling about it.  I assume the person is crazy who thinks like that.  But I dunno.  Are they?  Why are we generally repulsed over these things? 

 

Again though, why a high school lit class? 

 

Because this is the time to think about that very same issues that you wrote about above. This is the time to read controversial, difficult, challenging material and to think critically. This is the time to be shocked and repulsed while remaining within the safety of fiction. 

 

I think that by protecting "children" who are almost adults from real issues and real literature leads to emotionally and morally shallow adults. 

 

ETA: And no, I wouldn't like some possibly incompetent lit teacher discuss this book with my children and guide them through those difficult feelings and thoughts. However, this is a a typical homeschooling perspectives. Those who send their children to school do want other adults lead and guide their children. So this is not actually the point. 

[Catwoman]

The first title was its given "maiden" name.

 

The next title was its married name.

 

This title is its mid-life crisis divorce name.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

Will the next one be its short-lived transitional relationship name?

[VeritasMama]

You don't need to read graphic depictions of incest in order to avoid being emotionally shallow or be exposed to "real literature."

 

There is plenty of "real literature" that explores complex issues in mature and challenging ways without graphic depictions of incest.

 

Incest is taboo, and rightfully so. It is one of the worst crimes that can be committed, and should be discussed in a healthy way, not become a topic for a lit course.

 

I realize this book has other themes, but I would not like to have to discuss sexual abuse or incest in a literature class with my peers, it hits too close to home for my family.

[nmoira]

The first title was its given "maiden" name.

 

The next title was its married name.

 

This title is its mid-life crisis divorce name.

Followed by an unpronounceable symbol, in "the thread formerly known as..." era.

[Guest submarines]

You don't need to read graphic depictions of incest in order to avoid being emotionally shallow or be exposed to "real literature."

 

There is plenty of "real literature" that explores complex issues in mature and challenging ways without graphic depictions of incest.

 

Incest is taboo, and rightfully so. It is one of the worst crimes that can be committed, and should be discussed in a healthy way, not become a topic for a lit course.

 

I realize this book has other themes, but I would not like to have to discuss sexual abuse or incest in a literature class with my peers, it hits too close to home for my family.

1. What's wrong with graphic depictions on incest in a work of fiction?

2. Real literature supposed to make one uncomfortable, otherwise, what's the point?

3. So taboos are not to be discussed? Like ever?

4. Why discussing a topic in a literature course seems to be "unhealthy" to you?

5. The extreme discomfort with the themes of sexual abuse is exactly why these topics have to be discussed. 

[FaithManor]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

Will the next one be its short-lived transitional relationship name?

I think what comes next is the one night stand and then the transitional or

rebound relationship.

 

As for the book, I'm all for wrestling with controversial, challenging

material and we routinely do that here. That said, this one would not be on

our reading list because well, there is only so much time in a semester and

so much literature we can possibly cover. Therefore, it wouldn't make the cut.

 

The reality is that in many school lit classes the kids don't read the material

and discussions are abysmal. The value there might be in wrestling with it

would be lost. My concern then is that without digging into issues it is

nothing more than gratuitous blather. But, that can be true of any book, Homer,

Chaucer, Dante...surface reading only can reduce anything to garbage.

 

My issue is not that it made it to a common core list, but what will the teachers

do to help students work through the material in a healthy fashion and how

will this plan be implemented? Unfortunately, I know how ridiculously

superficial the lit classes are at my local Ps high school, and I am not imbued

with any confidence that this would be handled well thereby negating any potential

value reading it might have.

 

Of course, last year they didn't read any novel in its entirety. Just excerpts.

That's it. I cannot imagine taking a book on such a difficult topic in snippets.

In my brain, it just does not bode well!

 

I can imagine educational situations in which something positive could be gained

from reading and discussing it with mature teens and young adults. I just

can't imagine that taking place in the context of educational chaos that takes

place in the school down the road.

[Mrs Mungo]

You don't need to read graphic depictions of incest in order to avoid being emotionally shallow or be exposed to "real literature."

 

There is plenty of "real literature" that explores complex issues in mature and challenging ways without graphic depictions of incest.

 

Incest is taboo, and rightfully so. It is one of the worst crimes that can be committed, and should be discussed in a healthy way, not become a topic for a lit course.

 

I realize this book has other themes, but I would not like to have to discuss sexual abuse or incest in a literature class with my peers, it hits too close to home for my family.

I think discussing issues as literature topics *is* a healthy way of discussing them.

 

Certainly incest and rape are taboo topics. But, they are also *common topics in literature*. A person teaching literature should not have to avoid every mention of taboo topics because there would barely be anything left to discuss!

 

Shakespeare? Rape and incest.

 

Greek tragedy? Rape and incest.

 

Greek mythology? Rape and incest.

 

The Invisible Man? Rape and incest.

 

Lolita? Pedophilia.

 

Absolom! Absolom!, The Bible, The Color Purple, Hamlet, Cass Timberlane, The Well-Beloved, Tess of the d'Ubervilles, One Hundred Years of Solitude, The Left Hand of Darkness, Tender Is the Night, To Kill a Mockingbird, The Sound and the Fury-all of these deal with rape and/or incest on some level. Are you going to ban them all?

[poppy]

I'm saddened to read this discussion on an education board.  Selecting books for "appropriateness" rather than value and banning disturbing books is doing a grave disservice to students. Particularly considering that few people pick up Toni Morrison books for pleasure.  They are challenging, but also brilliant. Perfect for students.

 

I read The Bluest Eye in high school. It was on a list of supplemental books, not assigned. I remember being utterly shocked by it.  Not just the incest. It was such a foreign world to me. It put me into a world I'd never considered, and put me there so strongly that I still remember parts of it vividly 20 years later.   The incest wasn't what struck me, the fact that this little girl who was terribly abused by both parents wanted blue eyes to make it all better. I have blue eyes. The realization of why she felt that way, what it means, struck me quite powerfully. Maybe that's more obvious to kids now but... Toni Morrison is part of the reason why that's true.  Anyway, I'd encourage high school kids to read it.  Especially kids who grew up in primarily white, sheltered towns like myself.

 

[bettyandbob]

I think discussing issues as literature topics *is* a healthy way of discussing them. 

 

Certainly incest and rape are taboo topics. But, they are also *common topics in literature*. A person teaching literature should not have to avoid every mention of taboo topics because there would barely be anything lest to discuss! 

 

Shakespeare? Rape and incest.

 

Greek tragedy? Rape and incest.

 

Greek mythology? Rape and incest.

 

The Invisible Man? Rape and incest.

 

Lolita? Pedophilia.

 

Absolom! Absolom!, The Bible, The Color Purple, Hamlet, Cass Timberlane, The Well-Beloved, Tess of the d'Ubervilles, One Hundred Years of Solitude, The Left Hand of Darkness, Tender Is the Night, To Kill a Mockingbird, The Sound and the Fury-all of these deal with rape and/or incest on some level. Are you going to ban them all?

This reminds me about a "homeschooling high school" seminar I attended years ago. It was a put on by a conservative Christian group in my area. The thing that I remember most years later was "don't have your student dual enroll in cc literature classes, because they are just smut."  I think after that statement I decided there was nothing for me to learn from them about planning my student's high school education. 

[Mrs Mungo]

My issue is not that it made it to a common core list, but what will the teachers

do to help students work through the material in a healthy fashion and how

will this plan be implemented? Unfortunately, I know how ridiculously

superficial the lit classes are at my local Ps high school, and I am not imbued

with any confidence that this would be handled well thereby negating any potential

value reading it might have.

 

Of course, last year they didn't read any novel in its entirety. Just excerpts.

That's it. I cannot imagine taking a book on such a difficult topic in snippets.

In my brain, it just does not bode well!

 

It is on the list of examples of complex books for students to read to satisfy cc. But, that doesn't mean a teacher must teach it or that students must read it. 

 

My *understanding* of common core is that it is supposed to help eliminate books of snippets of other books in favor of solid literature study? But, maybe one of our resident teachers can help explain better?

[FaithManor]

It is on the list of examples of complex books for students to read to satisfy cc. But, that doesn't mean a teacher must teach it or that students must read it. 

 

My *understanding* of common core is that it is supposed to help eliminate books of snippets of other books in favor of solid literature study? But, maybe one of our resident teachers can help explain better?

Oh yes, I do understand that it is not an assignment must. The point that I did

not make very well in my allergy med haze, was that this type of material needs to

be handled intelligently, in a well planned, well guided manner, and my local ps

has made such a hash of the study of literature, that I don't have any faith

in them to do it well enough to be valuable.

 

I am absolutely NOT for banning books or culling them from reading lists just

because they make people uncomfortable or upset.

 

I would love it if implementing common core would eliminate the watering down

practice. However, I don't know enough about the rules of implementation to know if it would. I'd be all for it if it did!

 

But, I have had to take two Allegra D's and a benadryl in the last eight hours

in order to control the sneezing, and LOL, I don't think my brain cells are

holding hands anymore!

[VeritasMama]

1. What's wrong with graphic depictions on incest in a work of fiction?

2. Real literature supposed to make one uncomfortable, otherwise, what's the point?

3. So taboos are not to be discussed? Like ever?

4. Why discussing a topic in a literature course seems to be "unhealthy" to you?

5. The extreme discomfort with the themes of sexual abuse is exactly why these topics have to be discussed.

I wouldn't want to be forced to discuss incest in a class of 30 other people who I am only with because they happen to live in the same school district I am in and also happen to have been born the same time as me. That is what a high school classroom is.

 

I'd rather discuss it in a psychology or sociology course. Or in a college course where my peers are more mature.

 

I think that other people who have been the victims of abuse or are close to victims might understand why reading and discussing graphic depictions of abuse in a classroom setting would be upsetting for those victims.

 

I'm not saying ban the book. I'm saying lit class should be for discussing POV, characterization, etc. You can do that with challenging books that don't have graphic depictions of incest.

 

It is the way the material is presented that is an issue, not the topic.

[Mrs Mungo]

I disagree about the purpose of literature class. You read literature to learn about societies. Why does Beowulf go off to fight the dragon? Why are people upset about it? What does it reflect about the society? Why do we study it now? What values are reflected in our own society? How does this compare to say...a soldier with a pregnant wife volunteering for a combat tour? How does society see it? How do his fellow soldiers see it? How does his wife see it?

 

This book tells us several things about the society and time in which it takes place. It tells us something about our society now.

[Catwoman]

Fabulous new thread title!

 

Le Feu.

 

Sounds kinda fancy. :D

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

1. What's wrong with graphic depictions on incest in a work of fiction?

2. Real literature supposed to make one uncomfortable, otherwise, what's the point?

3. So taboos are not to be discussed? Like ever?

4. Why discussing a topic in a literature course seems to be "unhealthy" to you?

5. The extreme discomfort with the themes of sexual abuse is exactly why these topics have to be discussed.

Yes but one can have meaningful conversations about s*xual abuse and other atrocities without being so graphic as this book is. We have had conversations with our child in an age appropriate manner about s*xual abuse and predators and their motivations and frame of mind so that he can protect himself. We plan on continuing conversations about life along with the good and the bad. I just do not see this particular book as necessary when there are tons of great books out there of which there are so many that one would be very hard pressed to ever come close to reading them all.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

I think discussing issues as literature topics *is* a healthy way of discussing them. 

 

Certainly incest and rape are taboo topics. But, they are also *common topics in literature*. A person teaching literature should not have to avoid every mention of taboo topics because there would barely be anything lest to discuss! 

 

Shakespeare? Rape and incest.

 

Greek tragedy? Rape and incest.

 

Greek mythology? Rape and incest.

 

The Invisible Man? Rape and incest.

 

Lolita? Pedophilia.

 

Absolom! Absolom!, The Bible, The Color Purple, Hamlet, Cass Timberlane, The Well-Beloved, Tess of the d'Ubervilles, One Hundred Years of Solitude, The Left Hand of Darkness, Tender Is the Night, To Kill a Mockingbird, The Sound and the Fury-all of these deal with rape and/or incest on some level. Are you going to ban them all?

I am not opposed to my kid reading about difficult subjects at all. In fact, I want him to be aware of these things and we have had conversations of the difficulties and suffering that people experience in an age appropriate manner. However, I do not remember such vivid, graphic scenes of a disturbing nature that this book seems to have in the books you listed above of which some I have read. Obviously I have not read the book, but those few passages were quite disturbing. I am just not sure it is necessary for teens to be reading such graphic depictions when there are plenty of other great books out there.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

I'm saddened to read this discussion on an education board.  Selecting books for "appropriateness" rather than value and banning disturbing books is doing a grave disservice to students. Particularly considering that few people pick up Toni Morrison books for pleasure.  They are challenging, but also brilliant. Perfect for students.

 

I read The Bluest Eye in high school. It was on a list of supplemental books, not assigned. I remember being utterly shocked by it.  Not just the incest. It was such a foreign world to me. It put me into a world I'd never considered, and put me there so strongly that I still remember parts of it vividly 20 years later.   The incest wasn't what struck me, the fact that this little girl who was terribly abused by both parents wanted blue eyes to make it all better. I have blue eyes. The realization of why she felt that way, what it means, struck me quite powerfully. Maybe that's more obvious to kids now but... Toni Morrison is part of the reason why that's true.  Anyway, I'd encourage high school kids to read it.  Especially kids who grew up in primarily white, sheltered towns like myself.

I am sure it does have some value but why not wait till one is older and in college perhaps? I just do not see the necessity of exposing teens to such graphic scenes. I also see the possible harm that can come to young minds in being exposed to this sort of stuff. I am not saying ban it at all. I just think some things are better for adult minds to digest.

 

ETA: OTOH I think there is even stuff that is not even good for adult minds to digest. For example, I cannot and will not watch horror movies with blood, guts, and gore. It really is too disturbing for me and I find it hard to get those sort of images out of my head. This is part of my reasoning in not wanting to fill my kid's head with graphic depictions of disturbing stuff.

[Cricket]

Because this is the time to think about that very same issues that you wrote about above. This is the time to read controversial, difficult, challenging material and to think critically. This is the time to be shocked and repulsed while remaining within the safety of fiction.

 

I think that by protecting "children" who are almost adults from real issues and real literature leads to emotionally and morally shallow adults.

 

ETA: And no, I wouldn't like some possibly incompetent lit teacher discuss this book with my children and guide them through those difficult feelings and thoughts. However, this is a a typical homeschooling perspectives. Those who send their children to school do want other adults lead and guide their children. So this is not actually the point.

It's one thing to discuss issues but I fail to see what good comes from emotionally gut-wrenching, graphic descriptions of sexual perversions. Why does a person have to sink into the mire to gain understanding? Real literature doesn't equal graphic, stomach churning sex. Cases of incest are in the Bible. We don't gloss over those stories when we read them to our kids. What is missing is the graphic detail. Why is graphic detail wonderful? Why does exposing ones' children to it help them grow morally and emotionally? An author can write anything he wants. Why go there? Why does everything have to be shocking and horrible and emotionally troubling for it to be considered worth discussing? Another poster said "real literature is supposed to make one uncomfortable." I say, why? That is a thoroughly modern notion.

 

I don't doubt Morrison's writing ability or her courage for tackling tough issues but why make her material so inaccessible for many people? Why should someone have to read graphic descriptions of disgusting acts in order to discuss those issues? Especially as a pp pointed out that incest isn't even a focus of the book.

[Mrs Mungo]

Dp

[Mrs Mungo]

I am sure it does have some value but why not wait till one is older and in college perhaps? I just do not see the necessity of exposing teens to such graphic scenes. I also see the possible harm that can come to young minds in being exposed to this sort of stuff. I am not saying ban it at all. I just think some things are better for adult minds to digest.

 

ETA: OTOH I think there is even stuff that is not even good for adult minds to digest. For example, I cannot and will not watch horror movies with blood, guts, and gore. It really is too disturbing for me and I find it hard to get those sort of images out of my head. This is part of my reasoning in not want to fill my kid's head with graphic depictions of disturbing stuff.

I don't watch horror movies either. I think watching movies is different than reading books. I also think Stephen King has a very different purpose in mind when he writes than Toni Morrison does when she writes. He is out to titillate and to say, "people around you are thinking things like this all of the time, creepy, huh?" I think Toni Morrison is describing the types of acts that people really endure and to say, "these people are out there, they look like you, they think it is normal, watch out."

 

There is a lot of age overlap between freshmen in college and high school seniors. I started college at 17. My dd is a senior in high school and is 17. I don't see why it would be okay to discuss in college and not as high school seniors.

[Mrs Mungo]

It's one thing to discuss issues but I fail to see what good comes from emotionally gut-wrenching, graphic descriptions of sexual perversions. Why does a person have to sink into the mire to gain understanding? Real literature doesn't equal graphic, stomach churning sex. Cases of incest are in the Bible. We don't gloss over those stories when we read them to our kids. What is missing is the graphic detail.

You don't feel a mountain of foreskins or chopping a woman up into 12 bits as a warning to Israel is graphic? My eldest dd had trouble making it through The Aeneid due to the graphic details of spears through eyeballs and arrows through brains, etc. The Miller's Tale thoroughly embrassed the homeschooled teens I helped through a discussion of Canterbury Tales, but they lived through it. How about discussing the whore in Gilgamesh or the one in Heart of Darkness? You don't think buildings made of skulls are graphic and designed to make people uncomfortable? The fact that the building of skulls *isn't* a focus and is just mentioned in passing? It is supposed to give you a clue as to how shocking and extreme everything else is that such a thing could be a detail merely mentioned in passing.

 

Why does everything have to be shocking and horrible and emotionally troubling for it to be considered worth discussing? Another poster said "real literature is supposed to make one uncomfortable." I say, why? That is a thoroughly modern notion.

 

Strongly disagree with that. Do you think Measure for Measure or King Lear or MacBeth aren't designed to make people uncomfortable? You don't think Charles Dickens intended people to be uncomfortable? Do you find A Tree Grows in Brooklyn to be a happy, fluffy book?

 

Eta: I also strongly disagree that everything is like this. There are as many books about the beauty of the world as the ugliness. It is just some people are doomed to see more of the latter than the former. We read books like that to be stirred to do something about it or to understand the depths of the despair that was slavery and why it still impacts people today.

[Mrs Mungo]

Instead of cupcakes or kilts, in honor of the current title of the thread I give you Bradley Cooper speaking French:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hdoAD9UhmRs&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DhdoAD9UhmRs

[Halftime Hope]

You don't feel a mountain of foreskins or chopping a woman up into 12 bits as a warning to Israel is graphic? My eldest dd had trouble making it through The Aeneid due to the graphic details of spears through eyeballs and arrows through brains, etc. The Miller's Tale thoroughly embrassed the homeschooled teens I helped through a discussion of Canterbury Tales, but they lived through it. How about discussing the whore in Gilgamesh or the one in Heart of Darkness? You don't think buildings made of skulls are graphic and designed to make people uncomfortable? The fact that the building of skulls *isn't* a focus and is just mentioned in passing? It is supposed to give you a clue as to how shocking and extreme everything else is that such a thing could be a detail merely mentioned in passing.

 

Strongly disagree with that. Do you think Measure for Measure or King Lear or MacBeth aren't designed to make people uncomfortable? You don't think Charles Dickens intended people to be uncomfortable? Do you find A Tree Grows in Brooklyn to be a happy, fluffy book?

 

Eta: I also strongly disagree that everything is like this. There are as many books about the beauty of the world as the ugliness. It is just some people are doomed to see more of the latter than the former. We read books like that to be stirred to do something about it or to understand the depths of the despair that was slavery and why it still impacts people today.

 

Several points as I've been thinking about this topic for a day, before I posted (or posted more than the initial, knee-jerk post)

 

1) I don't think there is a problem with having students/learners feel uncomfortable because we are asking tough questions about ourselves and about humanity.  But there is a huge difference in looking at a character's sick/perverted/evil thinking and being able to remain detached from it, like we can with Macbeth or Hamlet or Heart of Darkness, or with any of the ones you named which do make us uncomfortable or open our eyes, vs. dragging an impressionable teen or young adult into the sewer of depravity so thoroughly that they will have images and thoughts that will stick with them for many years.   There most certainly is a difference of degree and intensity.    I agree with several other posters that this book might  make sense within the context of a college abnormal psych class, for those who have *chosen* to take the course, presumably with their eyes wide open.

 

2) Further, I would argue that there is no virtue in desensitizing a reader to horrific acts so that they will accept or understand the reasons why the characters committed the crimes (Morrison's stated tack) vs. the classic authors' approach of laying out the crimes or the twisted thinking and letting us draw our own instinctive, conscience-driven conclusions. 

 

3) When I am confronted with situations like this one, in which there are varied voices espousing values which conflict with one another (we should read literature which describes perverse acts in excruciating detail to better understand the human condition, to better appreciate the masterful craftsmanship of the writer, whatever...)  vs. my view (the descriptions are horrid, and while I do want to be aware of what is going on in the world, I don't need to immerse myself in it.), it brings to mind a useful illustration from The Hiding Place: 

 

Like the little girl at the train station struggling to move the big suitcase when she could have let her father carry it, I ask myself is this something I or my students need to carry now, or is it unreasonable/unnecessary/inappropriate for me/them to carry this weight at this time and place.  Furthermore, will I/they ever need to carry it?

 

I would argue that some adults, teachers and professors, really like seeing how big a suitcase they can demand that young people drag, and in this case, not only are they dragging a big heavy suitcase, but they are asking the students to open it and sort through all the inappropriate contents as well. 

 

4) Another completely different issue, and this time on a personal note: there is value in reading both cautionary and exemplary tales, in learning through fiction, parable, and through the lives of exemplars.  The Bible and other religious writings that serve as guides for life include both.  But the interesting thing is that Christians are instructed to let our thinking linger and dwell on "whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy."  (I don't remember if there are similar admonitions in other religious writings; I'm sure others can chime in.)  So in teaching my and others' children (and I have taught high school lit classes), I am going to draw a careful, responsible line between exposure to ideas vs. immersion in foul details, and I'm going to think long and hard about my goals and how to achieve them without causing harm to those in my care.  

[JadeOrchidSong]

Hi, Valerie, OP here.

I really admire you for how well you elaborated your points. I agree with you totally. This is the best post I read so far. I am glad that some great discussion is going on now after all. Thank you very much for taking words out of my mouth. With English as my foreign language, I cannot write as well. So thanks again!!!

[Cricket]

You don't feel a mountain of foreskins or chopping a woman up into 12 bits as a warning to Israel is graphic? My eldest dd had trouble making it through The Aeneid due to the graphic details of spears through eyeballs and arrows through brains, etc. The Miller's Tale thoroughly embrassed the homeschooled teens I helped through a discussion of Canterbury Tales, but they lived through it. How about discussing the whore in Gilgamesh or the one in Heart of Darkness? You don't think buildings made of skulls are graphic and designed to make people uncomfortable? The fact that the building of skulls *isn't* a focus and is just mentioned in passing? It is supposed to give you a clue as to how shocking and extreme everything else is that such a thing could be a detail merely mentioned in passing.

 

Strongly disagree with that. Do you think Measure for Measure or King Lear or MacBeth aren't designed to make people uncomfortable? You don't think Charles Dickens intended people to be uncomfortable? Do you find A Tree Grows in Brooklyn to be a happy, fluffy book?

 

Eta: I also strongly disagree that everything is like this. There are as many books about the beauty of the world as the ugliness. It is just some people are doomed to see more of the latter than the former. We read books like that to be stirred to do something about it or to understand the depths of the despair that was slavery and why it still impacts people today.

Well, Valerie(TX) summed it up very well for me. :-) I should have been more clear when I used the term "uncomfortable." As earlier posts did, I was using it in reference to the book in the OP. "Uncomfortable" isn't the right word. Maybe repulsive, shocking? I agree with you that some literature makes the reader uncomfortable and for good purpose, although I think a book can be thought-provoking and discussion worthy without that element. I read the Millers Tale in college and don't remember feeling particularly uncomfortable. Not with Macbeth, Gilgamesh, or Dicken's Oliver Twist either. I wouldn't compare the level of "uncomfortableness" in these books to what was quoted in the original article. The book in the OP crosses my lines. It goes way beyond uncomfortable to obscene. My point was that books don't have to go that far to make their point or in order to be considered real literature.

[mommymilkies]

I don't watch horror movies either. I think watching movies is different than reading books. I also think Stephen King has a very different purpose in mind when he writes than Toni Morrison does when she writes. He is out to titillate and to say, "people around you are thinking things like this all of the time, creepy, huh?" I think Toni Morrison is describing the types of acts that people really endure and to say, "these people are out there, they look like you, they think it is normal, watch out."

 

There is a lot of age overlap between freshmen in college and high school seniors. I started college at 17. My dd is a senior in high school and is 17. I don't see why it would be okay to discuss in college and not as high school seniors.

I agree to a point, but Stephen King's books aren't all about titillation.  He has some really deep works.  I never would have thought it until I took up reading some of his novels a few years ago. 

[Lady Florida.]

but in this case it seems like gratuitous s*x which is of a disturbing nature.

 

It's not gratuitous, it's part of what makes Pecola who she is. Gratuitous sex or violence is thrown in for the shock value. Morrison does shock us in her novels, but she doesn't do it without good reasons. If she did, it would be gratuitous.

 

 

It is graphic and disturbing, but I don't agree that it's gratuitous.

 

I wouldn't hand my 10 yo the book, but I absolutely would hand it to my 16 or 17 yo.

Isn't high school when we're supposed to be engaging our students in these discussions?

 

This.

 

 

There is plenty of "real literature" that explores complex issues in mature and challenging ways without graphic depictions of incest.

 

Are you saying a novel by a Pulitzer Prize winning, Nobel Prize winning, Presidential Medal of Freedom receiving author isn't "real literature"?

 

There's more than enough incest in the bible to go around. It's pretty disturbing. Would you, whether or not you believe the bible is true, keep your high school senior from reading it?

[Halftime Hope]

Are you saying a novel by a Pulitzer Prize winning, Nobel Prize winning, Presidential Medal of Freedom receiving author isn't "real literature"?    I understood her to mean that graphic depictions are not a required element of "real literature," in fact there are many examples of great lit that examine difficult topics without resorting to graphic portrayals.

 

There's more than enough incest in the bible to go around. It's pretty disturbing. Would you, whether or not you believe the bible is true, keep your high school senior from reading it?     Read upthread please, this has been addressed.

 

[Lady Florida.]

Are you saying a novel by a Pulitzer Prize winning, Nobel Prize winning, Presidential Medal of Freedom receiving author isn't "real literature"?    I understood her to mean that graphic depictions are not a required element of "real literature," in fact there are many examples of great lit that examine difficult topics without resorting to graphic portrayals.
 
There's more than enough incest in the bible to go around. It's pretty disturbing. Would you, whether or not you believe the bible is true, keep your high school senior from reading it?     Read upthread please, this has been addressed.

It won't let me quote because you quoted within the quote. Weird things are happening lately with reply options. :)

Anyway, the first point: We read it differently then. It was because the poster put quotes around "real literature" that I read it as her not considering The Bluest Eye real literature. She'll have to speak for herself if that's not what she meant.

 

Your second point: I confess to having skimmed over the last several posts, which is where the bible was mentioned. I've gone back and read them, and I stand by what I said. Rape is rape and incest is incest, regardless of whether or not it's couched in flowery language or euphemisms. It's just as disturbing.

[Lady Florida.]

Cool. Looks like the OP liked the suggestion of changing the title now and then. :D

[bettyandbob]

what does the title mean? Curious....

[nmoira]

The title changes are cracking me up!

 

Yup. Kudos to the OP for having a sense of humour about it. :)

[Χά�ων]

I just want to see how many pages this thread gets before people stop posting.

[nmoira]

what does the title mean? Curious....

 

Google Translate says "fire."

[MommaOfalotta]

Ahh, its this thread.

 

I keep getting notifications that someone liked a post I made in a thread that I was pretty sure I had never read/replied to.

 

Title changes... I dig it.

[JadeOrchidSong]

Google Translate says "fire."

Great job!

 

Not exactly when you have 了 after the ç«. Keep trying:-)