Don’t Boycott Disney, Boycott Reading (and watching)

Evidence of where the sensitive college students are coming from?

A Virginia school district has banned two classic American novels after parents complained they were racist.

To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee and Mark Twain’s The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn have been temporarily removed from shelves because they use the N-word more than 250 times.

…according to WTVR.com, Accomack County Public Schools has removed both books from the shelves of its schools while they investigate complains into the books which, which have been available for 56 years, in the case of Lee’s novel and 132 years with Huck Finn.

One mother complained: ‘There’s so much racial slurs and defensive wording in there that you can’t get past that. Right now, we are a nation divided as it is.’

. . . School authorities were forced to act on the complaint and removed the novels pending ‘a review committee consisting of the principal, the library media specialist, the classroom teacher (if involved, a parent and / or student, and the complainant will convene.’

One parent Teresa Wilkins said: ‘It’s in a book and they’ll feel they are able to say that to anybody, and so I don’t feel that that should be done.’

David Simon, award winning journalist, author, and creator of The Wire tweeted: ‘We are going backwards,’ after hearing about the controversy.

Sort of like saying The Wire has nudity and bad language. A lot of pietists out there.

Advertisements

12 thoughts on “Don’t Boycott Disney, Boycott Reading (and watching)

  1. It’s bad, but it’s not new. A hundred years ago, The Merchant of Venice was banned in some schools because of its “antisemitism.”

    Like

  2. Curt, I don’t know but if you figure out a way, pass it along. Refraining is how someone lives by his principles without needing to make a point to others that his are superior. Refraining is Christian, boycotting is worldly.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Zrim, defining ‘refraining’ by living “without needing to make a point” may not be very helpful since simply living by one’s principles is sometimes construed to mean “he considers his principles superior, the prig!” — whether or not we feel the “need” to make a point or not. The point is, in other words, implied. Superiority need not be identified with the person, but it’s very hard to separate the two.

    Like

  4. R, it’s hard to account for everything, not to mention a mis-reading of living by principles that may cause one to zig instead of zag. If I leave the room because I’m ill-at-ease with the TV violence others aren’t, I may well be called a prig, but that’s hardly accurate. When I return with a sign reading “Down with TV Violence,” I’ve entered a-hole land.

    Like

  5. Curt, all that is worldly is bad, but not all that is neutral is worldly. But how is pointing judgmental fingers living a quiet and peaceful life?

    Like

  6. Zrim: When I return with a sign reading “Down with TV Violence,” I’ve entered a-hole land.

    Or self-aware irony. Who can keep up these days?

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s