12 ms·
'To kill a mockingbird,' other books removed from Burbank schools' curriculum
- OneGuy123 6y agoBooks that get banned will only get more popular. Sooner or later it backfires. This is what happens when the society becomes so childish and immature that they would rather ban something than to try and understand what caused the book to be written. Once you start banning X, you will move on to banning Y sooner or later. Then it will be Z, and sooner or later the things you like and do in your everyday life. Adult children.
- treeman79 6y agoBackfire yes. But how many people will die until it does? People bent on banning, then burning books, then destroying statuses don’t normally stop.
- watwut 6y agoFun fact: after communism fell in Eastern Europe and after nazism fell in germamy and after Irak lost, they all took down statuses. I particularly don't mind Stalin or Lenin status going down. There are videos on YouTube of these. There is this idea that taking down celebratory monument to something is inherently bad, but I don't really think it is workable general rule.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- agustif 6y agoAlso 2020 america is big on dismantling statuses of historical figures too, look for those gone columbus statues... [1] Politicians moving money so they can profit... Nothing else about this in my opinion... [1](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/christopher-columbus-statue-removed-cities/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/christopher-columbus-statue-rem...)
- treeman79 6y agoAmerica destroying statues is part of the worrying trend. There is fixing problems, then there is burning society to the ground. Lincoln being torn down? https://www.opb.org/article/2020/10/12/portland-protesters-tear-down-roosevelt-lincoln-statues-during-day-of-rage/ https://www.opb.org/article/2020/10/12/portland-protesters-t...
- watwut 6y agoColumbus was actually cruel psychopath. Even his contemporaries complained.
- krapp 6y ago>People bent on banning, then burning books, then destroying statuses don’t normally stop. I don't think its likely that Burbank schools removing To Kill A Mockingbird from their curriculum is going to lead to mass murder but ok.
- mckirk 6y agoI think it's more the sentiment shown through such actions that is the worrying part. "This is wrong, we need to remove it" is a terrible way of dealing with things/ideas/people you don't agree with.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- tzs 6y agoThe Confederate memorials that were actually erected reasonably after the war ended tended to be memorials to the people who died in the way. I see no reason to take these down. But more of the Confederate statues we now have were built long after that, and not as memorials to those who died. Most were erected around 1900-20, when Jim Crow laws were being widely enacted, and in the 1950s and 60s, when the civil rights movement was ramping up. They were built as symbols of white supremacy to send a message. I see no reason to keep those up. It wasn't just monuments that got built or change to oppose black civil rights. A similar thing happened with the Georgia state flag. It had long had a blue vertical stripe on the left and red/white/red horizontal stripes on the right. Then the left got what appears to be a Minuteman standing next to some columns that have banners that say "Constitution", "Justice", "Wisdom", and "Moderation". That was in 1902. In 1906 they added "Georgia" to that and 1799, and made the design of the columns more stylized and uglier. (This also changed the way "Moderation" line wrapped, from "Moder" "ation" to "Mode" "ration", so you might mistake it for two words). In 1920 that changed to a circular thing with "State of Georgia" and 1776 on the outside, and a simple blue and white set of columns with the Minuteman, and "Moderation" back to sensible line breaking. I think this matched or is similar to the state seal. And then in 1956, with black people pushing harder for equal rights, Georgia replaced the right side of the flag, the part that had been three red/white/red horizontal stripes, was replaced with the Confederate battle flag. This was adopted amidst a slew of bills adopted at the same time designed to protect segregation and white supremacy. This was all in response to Brown v. Board of Education. They partly got rid of that in 2001, going to a blue background with the columns/Minuteman seal things, and a banner below that labeled "Georgia's History", which had images of five small flags in it: the original 13 colonies flag, three Georgia flags (ending with the one with the Confederate battle flag), and the current US flag. Finally in 2003 they adopted their current flag: 3 red/white/red stripes with a blue inset in the upper left containing a circle of 13 stars around the Minuteman/Column thing, much more tastefully done than any of its past versions. https://www.npr.org/2017/08/20/544266880/confederate-statues-were-built-to-further-a-white-supremacist-future https://www.npr.org/2017/08/20/544266880/confederate-statues... https://www.history.com/news/how-the-u-s-got-so-many-confederate-monuments https://www.history.com/news/how-the-u-s-got-so-many-confede...
- Ir0nMan 6y agoIn general, a list of banned books makes a pretty good list of books to read.
- spacemanmatt 6y agoMy musical taste got a solid push from an unexpected source. Some group of religious busybodies in the early 90s produced an absolute fire mixtape of songs they wanted banned.
- enjoyyourlife 6y agoThe article title is misleading as only the Burbank Unified School District banned books
- jchw 6y agoI mean this with utmost sincerity: I legitimately never thought “socially progressive” people would advocate banning books. I guess we have many more lessons to learn regarding censorship and puritanism. I’m not surprised about that — I’m just surprised that it was the people I thought could be trusted to not make this mistake that seem to be doing so.
- ppf 6y agoI'm a little sorry to pick on your comment, but hopefully you now see the danger of naievly trusting a group of people because they self-identify as the "good guys". > I legitimately never thought “socially progressive” people would advocate banning books. Are you kidding me? The US Progressive Left is heading down a path that has been obvious for years. >I guess we have many more lessons to learn regarding censorship and puritanism. No. This lesson has played out many times. We just ignore it, or somehow think this time we have out-smarted it. Or, we don't care, because this time we really are the good guys, and the other people are just really bad.
- JaimeThompson 6y agoIt isn't just the "left" as the "right" wants to ban such things too. Just see PMRC and other such joint efforts.
- barbacoa 6y agoScary part is that it does seem to be a part of the left's platform. Decades ago the left used to be the champions of free speech and the right wanted limits. Now that is reversed. Even the ACLU has questioned their commitment to free speech.
- jchw 6y agoYou know what they say, history doesn't repeat itself but it sometimes rhymes. I share your frustration, but I do think it's possible to eventually learn a lesson here... looking back at censorship in the past, it does feel like we're still at a relatively high point historically.
- tareqak 6y agoThere was principal who was dismissive of a racist incident: that’s a problem and not the books. > "Helligar, who is one of the parents who filed a complaint in the case, claimed the boy's excuse was that he had read it in class and the principal had been dismissive of the incident." This other quote is interesting, but it is not a reason to ban any books: if anything it means more books that take into account this additional perspective should be on the curriculum. > Nadra Ostrom, another Black parent who filed a complaint, argued that the portrayal of Black people is mostly from a white perspective. > "There's no counter-narrative to this Black person dealing with racism and a white person saving them," she said. > Ostrom added that the current education given to students assumes "that racism is something in the past." Edit: fixed quote
- spacemanmatt 6y agoEven as fundamentally against banning of books as I am, I am pretty sympathetic to most of those complaints. We could do a lot better by teaching modern Black perspective and literature rather than antiquated white literature, albeit good literature, IMO.
- lixtra 6y agoIf it was about doing better the approach would be constructive: We should include B into the curriculum and to make place I propose A to go.
- ntsplnkv2 6y agoInstead of forcing people to read certain books to check off certain criteria, we should be teaching people how to read and choose their own books, encouraging them to broaden their horizons. There will never be a perfect curriculum. And also, the "black perspective" is not a monolith - this is another example of white people trying to put it in a box that's easy for them.
- watwut 6y agoBut the person you are responding to is not saying that there is single black perspective. How to kill ... is totally absolutely white perspective. It is white antiracist perspective and also kind of propaganda for anti violent racism. It is not the only white perspective, white are various. But, it lacks any perspective but white. It has no black person with agency or personality. No actual personality. Victim is super clear victim, not even ability to do crime is there. Victim is not threatening or uncomfortable to whites, he could not possibly be less clear model victim. The book actually made political impact. In historical context, it is and was actual thing. But not necessary same impact for 2020 black student. And even this discussion lacks discussion about actual back then politics. Because that actually feels bad. Because people don't actually want to teach 13 years old about postcards with lynching victims being popular.
- Thorentis 6y agoIsn't To Kill a Mockingbird meant to combat racism? I read it in school and thought it was fantastic. What on earth have they found in this classic that is so bad, it needs to be banned? Banning books is dangerous territory that should be entered into very, very carefully.
- zalkota 6y agoLiberals are actually racist against white peoples, so they makes sense
- goatinaboat 6y agoWhat on earth have they found in this classic that is so bad, it needs to be banned? A false allegation of rape.
- dalu 6y agoThe Nazis also banned books
- jassany 6y agoall they're doing is curating a list for people to read. It's like those DMCA lists of free movie sites. They literally provide you with a trove of urls to watch free movies lol
- klmadfejno 6y agoThe title says "Banned" which implies you are not allowed to read the book. What it actually means is "Banned from curriculum", meaning teachers shouldn't use it in the classroom. The latter seems far less controversial to me. You can still read the book. You just can't be required to read it. I don't care about the racist "incident" they're flaming up with some dumb kid. If educational leaders think To Kill a Mockingbird is a poor, white dominant perspective that does not realistically portray black perspectives, then by all means, let's stop teaching it, and teach a more relevant book instead. I liked that book. I read it in school and found it enjoyable and an interesting intro to racial issues beyond "Slavery is bad". But it definitely makes things all about white people. There's likely some much better source material out there for that conversation. Saying you're banning a book is a lot dumber than changing your required curriculum.
- ppf 6y ago>meaning teachers shouldn't use it in the classroom They are banned from using it in the classroom. I wonder if one of the kids in that school mentioned (for the sake of argument, in an appropriate setting like a discussion group) that they had read this book at home, how well received that would be? "It's not banned everywhere, just here" is justifying the silencing of free speech in a way that Soviet Russia would be proud of.
- amanaplanacanal 6y agoThere are a ton of books that are inappropriate for use in the classroom. I can’t get too excited about that.
- jjk166 6y agoAnd no one is complaining about the Kama Sutra being banned from the classroom. But why is To Kill A Mockingbird inappropriate for use in the classroom?
- klmadfejno 6y ago
- Traster 6y agoI think banning the books is obviously "Bad", but what it sounds like from reading this article is that this school is incapable of teaching children about these books in a productive way. If your teachers are so incapable of introducing the material in these books that students end up being subject to racist incidents then maybe we really are better off not having the school teach about the books at all. Obviously the ideal scenario is to teach the books but talk about their context, the issues that are raised and present some material that shows some other sides to the view of race in those books. But in reality, the people who are arguing against the ban are arguing against it on the basis of how they think the book should be taught, not apparently how they are taught.
- ppf 6y agoThose are some incredibly tortuous mental gymnastics you are performing. I suppose these same schools are also too incompetent to use books written from other perspectives about the same topic, so should just not mention the entire subject at all. If a school cannot handle this subject, then you have much bigger issues than exactly which books are permitted to be read or discussed.
- jjk166 6y agoIf you can't get kids to take away "racism is bad" from To Kill A Mockingbird, you have no business being a teacher. Banning books so we can keep the people who can't teach those books competently in place is insane.
- Traster 6y ago"Let's improve schools so that this material is taught in the way it should be" is a great answer, but unfortunately, demonstrably unacheivable.
- jjk166 6y agoWell given that the vast majority of schools can and do teach it effectively, the idea that it can't be done seems excessively fatalist. But if we do accept that it's just too high of a bar to ask schools to contextualize To Kill A Mockingbird in such a way that the literal lynch mob killing a man are not presented as role models to be emulated, then shut the school down. The kids are better off at home staring at a blank wall 8 hours a day than being exposed to that level of incompetence. Banning books to deal with teachers who can't teach is like sticking a "0 Trans Fat" sticker on an improperly stored barrel of radioactive waste - it is worse than not even addressing the problem.
- nullc 6y agoIn Florida a significant portion of the mandatory reading books when I was in school were books that were previously banned. Including, 'To Kill a Mockingbird'-- for that matter. A number of books listed in the article are in the ALA list, which gives a historical perspective on attacks on these works: http://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbooks/classics http://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbooks... Books from this list that that aren't on the current ALA classics list (though they're also elsewhere on the ALA site but without context, e.g. http://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbooks/top10 http://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbooks...): https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/789/adventures-of-huckleberry-finn https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/789/adventures-... http://collectingchildrensbooks.blogspot.com/2009/04/this-one-really-did-happen.html http://collectingchildrensbooks.blogspot.com/2009/04/this-on...
- nullc 6y agoThe mental image of a family getting upset about exposing their children to any of these books-- particularly in an adult supervised context-- while also allowing their children on the internet-- usually with no supervision-- is a little perplexing to me. But some things never change: as the ALA lists show, these books have long histories of getting banned or challenged.
- listless 6y agoIt blows my mind that people readily give 10 year olds iphones. I have 3 teenagers and none of them have smartphones. They have no unfettered access to the internet in my house. I cannot think of a worse idea than a teenager with a camera and a wide-open internet connection. Some day they will have those things. But not today, Satan.
- damnencryption 6y agoThat sounds pretty bad tbh. You can have parental control on iPhones and macbooks. I don't see the issue as long as you limit the screen time and whitelist only useful stuff. Use next DNS on your router. > I cannot think of a worse idea than a teenager with a camera and a wide-open internet connection. Some day they will have those things. But not today, Satan. What's the worst that will happen? Porn? Twitter? 4chan?
- MyHypatia 6y agoIt seems like they need to learn how to have better conversations about the books, not remove them from the curriculum. Also, to address the concern that the books on racism and the black experience are all written from a white perspective, why not add a book by a black author and then have a discussion contrasting the perspective of the two writers? I think there is a lot of opportunity for growing from this, rather than just removing things from the curriculum. By the way the title is melodramatic. The books aren't being banned and this isn't across California.
- watwut 6y agoWhat do you mean by them not being banned? I read article and it said that "teachers won't be able to use them" in district. Was that a lie?
- mixmastamyk 6y agoBan typically implies they are no longer for sale, destroyed, and not kept by the library. Employees not allowed to teach from them probably would benefit from another word.
- greenie_beans 6y agoIt’s very ironic to read this headline. I’m from the south and we learn about racism through To Kill A Mockingbird. Sounds like the teachers aren’t doing a good job contextualizing these texts.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- mdpm 6y agoMy only thought here is that it's sad that the opportunities to discuss what were clearly impactful materials were dismissed, and that the books are somehow to blame. Two quotes I don't see in this thread: Where they burn books, they will also ultimately burn people and Art should comfort the disturbed, and disturb the comfortable
- CodeWriter23 6y agoThe problem with banning a book like this is they're doing nothing to address the underlying cause. Racism is learned behavior. They should address this through sensitivity training, conferencing with parents, and appropriate discussion surrounding race issues and framing this kind of literature in its proper historical perspective. Even my now 11yo could comprehend when she was 8 that various literature represented past things which we no longer find acceptable. I also in no way condone the behavior of this young man and do possess appropriate empathy for the young woman who was verbally assaulted by him.
- avmich 6y agoThis part is perhaps more illuminating to why the protest. "Nadra Ostrom, another Black parent who filed a complaint, argued that the portrayal of Black people is mostly from a white perspective. "There's no counter-narrative to this Black person dealing with racism and a white person saving them," she said. Ostrom added that the current education given to students assumes "that racism is something in the past.""
- mjw1007 6y agoOne of the books on the list is /Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry/, which is very much not a book written from a white perspective, and as far as I remember is lacking white saviours.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- watwut 6y agoThere is freaking massive difference between "banned" and "removed from curriculum". One is bad, other completely reasonable. One is outrage, other I am fully ok with.
- fallennode 6y agoIf you actually read the article it says they made these changes after receiving complaints from just four parents and have already begun to receive criticism from every side. How is this news? (I know, I know, it fits a narrative, gets the clicks, etc. Still kinda disappointing to see stuff like this here.)
- nkrisc 6y agoIt sounds like this was a ripe opportunity for extending y the curriculum and perspectives about racism, but it sounds like the what they have settled on is to just ignore it altogether.
- fallingfrog 6y agoThere is a distinction between banning books and just not having them as required reading in the school curriculum. There are many thousands of books they could potentially teach; are all the ones they didn’t pick therefore banned? Let’s not swerve into hyperbole here.
- bladegash 6y agoMaybe it’s just me, but race relations was only one of many arguably more universal themes in “To Kill a Mockingbird”. I always saw it in terms of its broader themes such as integrity, prejudice (in genera), doing the right thing even against unpopular opinions, human nature (both good and bad), injustice, etc. Then again, I felt similarly about “The Catcher in the Rye” and loved that book as a teenager as well. So perhaps I’m an exception or missing something.