Sep 30 2009, 12:32PM
In Honor of Banned Books Week, My Hometown Moves Towards Banning Some
When I was 10, my eye caught a curious title on my school library shelves. It was A Wrinkle in Time, by Madeleine L'Engle. To make a long story short, I read it and fell in love with words and ideas.
Later, I learned that this splendid piece of literature has often been banned because its ideas about witchcraft may be too powerful for an impressionable child's mind. I also became vaguely aware that other highly-acclaimed books were occasionally banned in small-minded corners of the earth.
But for decades, book-banning seemed a pretty remote concept to me -- something that happened in far-away, unlit places.
No more. As I write this, book lovers are gathering in a park about 100 yards from this very same middle school (in Wyoming, Ohio, a suburb of Cincinnati) to protest a chilling response by the local school board to a parent's complaint about two highly-acclaimed books on the high school reading list. (The books are: The Bookseller of Kabul, by Asne Seierstad, and The Perks Being of a Wallflower, by Stephen Chbosky.)
Did the board respectfully remind the parent that he could have his child work with a teacher to read something else instead? Did the board immediately show complete confidence in its teachers and librarians?
No. The board declared that the school selection process had not been properly followed (refusing to provide details), and that all that approved books will be reviewed by a special committee according to four criteria:
• The relationship to the course of study;
• The uniqueness of the content that is not adequately provided in district materials;
• The appropriateness of the content for the maturity and comprehension levels of the students; and,
• The extent to which the content could create controversy among student, parents, and community groups.
Controversy, of course, being a negative. I checked this with the Wyoming Superindendent Dr. Gail Kist-Kline. She confirmed that if a book was found to be controversial, the principal would have to re-review it in light of its controversial nature. She also vigorously disagreed with the characterization from many that the Board is flirting with the notion of banned books. But to my eyes, and to many others, two very disturbing actions are taking place: first, the lack of support for teachers who have chosen obviously very distinguished books; second, and more importantly, the nature of a review which gives zero credence to quality and extraordinary credence to controversy.
It is, of course, entirely appropriate for a school board to investigate any parent's complaint. And I get the impression that Dr. Kist-Kline would personally be upset and even ashamed if a highly-acclaimed approved book were later un-approved. She understands that the national reputation of Wyoming's schools -- U.S. News & World Report ranked it the 50th best high school in the nation in 2009 -- would immediately and forever be tarnished. It would drop off that list faster than you can say "literature matters."
But what Dr. Kist-Kline and the Wyoming School Board don't seem to get is that a political review that gives great weight to controversy is, in itself, a profound retreat from the highest educational standards. My old Wyoming classmate Francesca (Schmid) Thomas, now president of the Parents-Teachers group for her local high school in Arizona, puts it this way:
The Board is not standing up for academic excellence, in my mind. If two parents object, how are we serving the vast majority of students if we eliminate the book from the selected readings? There are plenty of parents who have crazy ideas about what your children should hear, but that does not mean we should let them run our schools. Books need to be selected by professionally trained teachers based on their academic and intellectual merit.
A quality education requires the inclusion of controversial material, especially at the high school level, so that students can achieve their academic objectives while simultaneously becoming critical thinkers. Since state academic standards focus on broad objectives, not specific books, it is incumbent on teachers and administrators to open the eyes and minds of our students to the enormously complicated world in which we live in the context of the classroom. If public schools succumb to the pressures of vocal minorities to limit the educational experience of students, by diminishing access to materials deemed controversial by some, then we will relegate the vast majority of students in our country to a sub-standard level of education.
To have a Board of elected citizens give such weight to controversy is bad policy. It should be changed. Whenever we pit "educational merit" versus "controversy," we censor, plain and simple.
If this can happen in Wyoming, Ohio, it can happen anywhere. And consider some of the books that have been banned or challenged over the years. According to the American Library Association's Office for Intellectual Freedom, 42 of the Radcliffe Publishing Course Top 100 Novels of the 20th Century "have been the target of ban attempts." Here is that list, each book next to its corresponding number from the Radcliffe 100 list:
1. The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald
2. The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger
3. The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck
4. To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee
5. The Color Purple by Alice Walker
6. Ulysses by James Joyce
7. Beloved by Toni Morrison
8. The Lord of the Flies by William Golding
9. 1984 by George Orwell
11. Lolita by Vladmir Nabokov
12. Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck
15. Catch-22 by Joseph Heller
16. Brave New World by Aldous Huxley
18. The Sun Also Rises by Ernest Hemingway
19. As I Lay Dying by William Faulkner
20. A Farewell to Arms by Ernest Hemingway
21. Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad
23. Their Eyes are Watching God by Zora Neale Hurston
24. Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison
25. Song of Solomon by Toni Morrison
26. Gone with the Wind by Margaret Mitchell
27. Native Son by Richard Wright
28. One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest by Ken Kesey
29. Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut
30. For Whom the Bell Tolls by Ernest Hemingway
33. The Call of the Wild by Jack London
36. Go Tell it on the Mountain by James Baldwin
38. All the King's Men by Robert Penn Warren
45. The Jungle by Upton Sinclair
48. Lady Chatterley's Lover by D. H. Lawrence
49. A Clockwork Orange by Anthony Burgess
53. In Cold Blood by Truman Capote
55. The Satanic Verses by Salman Rushdie
64. Sons and Lovers by D. H. Lawrence
66. Cat's Cradle by Kurt Vonnegut
67. A Separate Peace by John Knowles
73. Naked Lunch by William S. Burroughs
75. Women in Love by D. H. Lawrence
80. The Naked and the Dead by Norman Mailer
84. Tropic of Cancer by Henry Miller
88. An American Tragedy by Theodore Dreiser
97. Rabbit, Run by John Updike
Read great books. Celebrate great books. And demand that school boards everywhere celebrate them too.
_______________________
Postscript: Here is the exact copy of A Wrinkle in Time that I read when I was ten. A few years ago, I made a swap with the Wyoming Middle School library: their old tattered copy for several brand new copies. It now sits on my desk, the most cherished book I own.
David Shenk
My mind was shaped profoundly by reading many of the books on this list. Through them, I learned about moral and emotional struggle and what it means to be human. Thanks for the reminder, David. And for the reminder about our need to vigilantly protect our civil rights.
How blessed to retrieve a cherished and momentous item from our childhood. Bravo!
Wow. I can't help feeling that a ban of 1984 should in some way be self-refuting. Similarly, a ban of Wrinkle because of a perceived promotion of witchcraft is odd considering the author was a confessed Christian. Has IT somehow traveled here?
David,
I am a fellow alum of the Wyoming schools (class of 2000). I sent the following letter to the Cincinnati Enquirer and the Wyoming school board and administration. I hope other concerned alumni (and concerned readers) will also send letters to the school and to local press. Thank you for your efforts and your excellent post!
Brian Goldstein
Sent to Cincinnati Enquirer, 9/30/09:
I write in response to two recent articles concerning reading lists in the Wyoming City Schools (Sept. 28th and 29th). I am a proud graduate of Wyoming's school district, which I attended from kindergarten through high school. My Wyoming education prepared me to be both an astute student and an adult in the world, and gave me a passion for learning strong enough to help me decide to spend my life as an educator. My middle and high school English teachers taught me to think analytically, question assumptions, and always read between the lines. These skills help me every day, and most recently as I read with great dismay first, that parents in one of the country's best school districts hope to protect their children from the ideas in a very compelling book, and second, that the school board, while not assenting fully to censorship, has agreed that "controversy" should be one measure by which they weigh the books on the school's reading list. One need not be too shrewd to see the slippery slope that Wyoming has stepped onto. Good ideas are tough, sometimes hard to face, and often controversial. The tension in a work such as The Catcher in the Rye is the very fiber that makes it not just a book worth reading, but one of the most compelling books in American literary history. That book, by the way, curse words and all, was the very best and most influential I read at Wyoming High School.
Mr. Hipsley, who has complained about The Perks of Being a Wallflower, is quoted in the Sept. 28th article ("Wyoming Denies It's Banning Books"). "This material exposes 14-year-old children to behavior many are not mature enough to understand," he told the Enquirer. Apparently, however, Wyoming High School students are mature enough to understand that the behavior they are witnessing by overzealous parents and an overly cautious school board is both a threat to their intellectual growth and a disservice to their apparent intellectual maturity. I wish I could have joined the students at their read-in, and hope the school board hears their subtle message loud and clear. They, like their predecessors, are up to the challenge of demanding, sometimes controversial books. Such challenges are precisely what have always made a Wyoming education a point of pride.
I am a parent in the Wyoming district. No one has proposed that any books be banned, merely that one book be removed from a freshman reading list. There has been no request that the book be removed from the library, for example.
Further, there is no doubt that "demanding, sometimes controversial" books are important to a student's intellectual development. No one is suggesting otherwise. The only question being raised is if this book in particular is worthy of inclusion at this stage of these children's academic experience.
People will obviously have different opinions on these matters. The bigger question in my mind is whether we can have disagreements that are debated on their merits rather than with name-calling.
Please also see this letter to the editor (not written by me):
http://nky.cincinnati.com/article/AB/20091001/EDIT02/910010362/-1/TODAY
I am sorry to hear that the debate has devolved to name calling--I think here you have a debate that is taking place at a higher plane.
No one is questioning a parent's right to be involved in their child's education, but there is a limit beyond which a parent's own objections begin to impede the learning experience of others. As I understand it, first-year high school students receive a 22-book list from which they choose books for their assignments. This means that no student must read any of those particular books, and that parents may decide with their teenager that one book may be better for him or her than another. But the parents who complained about _The Perks of Being a Wallflower_ are asking for that particular book to be taken off this list, therefore removing the possibility of any teenager choosing it on their own or in consultation with their parents. This isn't banning books, per se, nor explicit censorship, but it does effectively have the same end, by striking a book chosen by experts (teachers) in consultation with other experts from a list they have chosen with students in mind. Schools would be chaotic, to say the least, if parents could simply second guess every decision that their children's teachers made.
The other issue, which concerns me and Mr. Shenk as well, is that the criteria for judging whether a book is appropriate includes whether it is "controversial," which is itself entirely outside the scope of whether a book is intellectually fortifying. At the same time, the criteria do not include whether a book has educational and intellectual merit, which seems like the most important objective of all. Again, this is a slippery slope, one which gives far too much weight to whims and thus opens the door to many more controversies of this kind (two in a year is not a small number, by the way).
I'd like to make it very clear that I bear no ill-will whatever toward the parents who have complained about the books. I disagree with them, but I have no problem with them lodging a complaint. And I don't think that the community should come down on them, or leave nasty notes, or boycott their business. The problem here, as stated above, is in the Board's review process. The review process should be the same as the initial selection process, which gives appropriate weight to quality and relevance. Once we shift the consideration over to how controversial something is, we've lost sight of the appropriate priorities.
How many of the listed books have been banned? And by banned, I don't mean a democratically elected board decides not to buy them and have teachers distribute them. Banned means prohibiting books from being read. And the answer is zero.
You have to feel that gut-fear when the book under your coat is contraband and could result in, at best, a severe beating and possibly disappearance before you really know what's a ban and what's a spirited democratic debate.
I also am a Wyoming parent. I have not read the book in controversy so I don't have an opinion whether it belongs on the outside reading list. I do, however, have a viewpoint on the manner in which this issue is discussed.
Wyoming is an affluent suburb of Cincinnati with a highly educated population and elite high school that is consistently rated among the best in the nation. A parent in the district (who happens to be a well-educated and personable owner of a popular local restaurant) read a book on the outside reading list. He then expressed concerns regarding the age appropriateness of the book using a review process set up by the district to address such concerns. The district is in the process of reviewing the book in accordance with its policy. No decision has yet been made.
This "controversy" hit the local papers and immediately the district and the complaining parent were met with cries of "book banning". Of course, nothing remotely involving book banning is taking place. Regardless of what decision the district makes, no one will be prevented from selling, buying, possessing or reading any book.
The complaining parent has also been accused by some of attempting to impose his viewpoint on the entire community. Of course, no parent has such power. If a decision is made to remove the book from the reading list, the decision will be one made by the school district.
Moreover, there is no evidence that the district will be unduly swayed by the opinion of the complaining parent. Last year, a similar challenge by another parent was made to The Book Seller of Kabul, and the challenge was overruled. In response to the challenge, however, the district send a letter to parents explaining why some viewed the book as controversial and why the district nevertheless kept it as a required book. The letter also gave parents an option to choose a substitute book.
Although the discussion here is reasonable, I have strong objections to the manner in which the complaining parent has elsewhere been vilified with charges of book banning and attempting to impose his views on the community. These inflamatory charges amount to little more than name calling that is designed to intimidate parents generally from raising their concerns and expressing their viewpoints. I likewise object to the American Library Associations failure during "Banned Book Week" to clearly distinquish the issues involved in banning a book and those involved in challenging the appropriateness of a book in a public school's curriculum
It is true that in this case, a parent and a child could choose to read a different book from the outside reading list. The presence of a book on the reading list, however, is an endorsement by the district that the book is of sufficient literary worth to be included on a short list of options and is age appropriate for the grade level. Both of these criteria are highly subjective and subject to reasonable debate by people of good faith.
I agree that the review criteria currently promulgated by the superintendent has not been well-considered. I also think that a decision about which books to include on a list of about 140 outside reading books provided to four high school grade levels is a complex one to which careful thought should be given by all those involved. These legitimate issues, however, tend to be lost in the clamor when cries of "book banning" are carelessly tossed about.
Although no one knows with certainty how this all will play out, here is my prediction: The book will remain on the outside reading list. There will be a healthy debate regarding how books are chosen to be included on the list. The English faculty will become better informed about the diverse sensibilities and viewpoints in the highly educated and opinionated community they serve. The district will communicate better and give more information to parents about the books that are included and why. And if all this happens, then I think that the complaining parent will have accomplished some good things and I suspect that even he will be satisfied.
This is a very reasonable post (paul12345). Another outcome would be that the district carefully reconsiders their criteria, emphasizing quality as the judgment, not controversy, before reviewing any books, and after reviewing all works decides that this one does not meet a substantive test (based on quality or merit). If they do so in a way that justifies the decision (with a statement like that written for _The Bookseller_), preserves the role of the teachers as experts equipped to make these decisions, and establishes a fair and appropriate process then I don't think that is a negative outcome. My concern is if judgment is based on a subjective interpretation of "controversy" or challenging content, which does create a dangerous precedent and one that stifles academic freedom. I agree with you that name calling and personal abuse are not appropriate or helpful.
One of the criteria David lists for book selection is: "The extent to which the content could create controversy among student, parents, and community groups."
Is everyone jumping to conclusions? Just maybe books that create controversy get a HIGHER RATING. There are some very controversial, heavyweight classics on that reading list.
First, everyone, please read this book and decide for yourself, is it "highly acclaimed?" Or just infamous?
Wyoming is a mess! They’re # 1 in OH based on their state testing. Their HS is 50th in the nation based on their AP scores. Their teachers have been accused of lacking the intellectual capabilities of selecting supplemental materials & will now have to apply a "rubric" to use materials in their classroom. This was a district where academic freedom was in the teacher's contract-where the teachers were valued as the educational experts! Not only were they valued, they were rewarded for their efforts w/ good salaries. I have seen their salaries drop from being in the top 5 in Hamilton Co. of 24 districts to now being 14th. The educational expert is now the superintendant-who is paid the 8th largest salary of 24 districts. The teachers are currently working w/out a contract. The district is having a PR nightmare due to the Boards ineptness. This is not the Wyoming I used to know and it probably will never be again. I count myself lucky that I never accepted a teaching job there!
Readers of The Atlantic should know that the main Banned Books Week sponsor – the American Library Association – has failed to defend the most recent nearby victims of censorship.
In Cuba, inquiring minds have challenged state censorship by establishing dozens of independent neighborhood libraries at their own expense, offering uncensored literature to fellow citizens. Volunteer librarians in Cuba are being assaulted, persecuted and imprisoned, some sentenced to more than twenty years.
Out of devotion to the Revolution and its literacy campaign now half a century past, ALA violates its own principles by denying and covering up Cuba's violations of the freedom to read, refusing direct appeals to join the worldwide human rights consensus that demands release of the library prisoners. Although the Association has reported book burning in India, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Canada, Vietnam and the Republic of Georgia on its “Book Burning in the 21st Century” website, it refuses to post any information about Cuba’s ongoing police raids, beatings and the Cuban court documents of 2003 (available at the “Rule of Law and Cuba” web site) that contain orders to incinerate or destroy entire library collections, including biographies of Martin Luther King, Jr and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
For more details on this betrayal of intellectual freedom, readers can see the “Friends of Cuban Libraries” and “Cuba451Letters” websites on the Internet.
Though I’m saddened so many good books are banned from school curriculum, I am also hopeful that people of authority will realize the merits of these works of art. Many feel that the subject matter and the language used in 'Catcher in the Rye' is too much for youngsters to understand. Instead of banning these books, they can help us teach children to make the right choices in life. What is the bottom line of all the learning we do? It should help us in life to differentiate between the bad and the good, to make the right choices. And these books that we ban, for whatever reason, can help us accomplish this. `The Catcher in the Rye’ has always been in a controversy. But a different perspective can help us understand the novel’s merit. Shmoop.com helped me clear my doubts and questions about this.