Comments | bridgetester: [books] Quality Literature vs Conversation

bridgetester

[books] Quality Literature vs Conversation

Feb 19, 2007 09:58

With One Word, Children’s Book Sets Off Uproar
Julie Bosmanhttp://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/18/books/18newb.htmlRead more... )

2007february, books

Comments 9

wyldemusick February 19 2007, 17:59:54 UTC

what can I say? It's the dog's bollocks.

I'm just amazed at how idiotic people can be, especially those who are supposedly intelligent.

epi_lj February 19 2007, 19:09:59 UTC

Geez. I mean, it's a part of the human anatomy. That's totally sad.

foxfirefey February 19 2007, 22:15:26 UTC

And in the book, it's not even human anatomy. We don't expect dogs to wear pants to cover up their balls, even if we do tend to cut them off. This isn't even talking about something children are unlikely to see in public.

Squicky! semiotic_pirate February 20 2007, 01:10:28 UTC

It sounded medical and secret, but also important.

The above sentence, coming from a girl of ten, after overhearing the word scrotum smacks of female penis worship and envy. Medical in this sentence is akin to "sacred" because doctors are the priests of science - of the medical profession. So lets see, we have sacred, secret and important. Something to be worshiped. That which is worshiped by someone who does not have said object brings about envy. Blech. Great message to give to elementary shcool level kids.

Scrotum sounded to Lucky like something green that comes up when you have the flu and cough too much.That this is the sentence previous to the one I just dissected is like an attempt to bait and switch in advertising. Yeah, it may be something green that comes up when you have the flu and cough too much... but it is still sacred, secret, and important ( ... )

Re: Squicky! bridgetester February 20 2007, 14:40:18 UTC

I don't know all that much about the book myself, but here's the relevant quote from her eavesdropping on a 12-step group (probably AA). The Amazon reviews are about her trying to figure out adults and get control over her own life. So, in short, you're reading too much into it...

"Sammy told of the day when he had drunk half a gallon of rum listening to Johnny Cash all morning in his parked '62 Cadillac, then fallen out of the car when he saw a rattlesnake on the passenger seat biting his dog, Roy, on the scrotum ( ... )

Re: Squicky! leora February 23 2007, 07:36:29 UTC

That's a huge leap, from medical to sacred. I don't get that at all. I don't interpret this passage the way you do. It really looks like trying to find offense, rather than actually looking at something objectionable.

I think the passage just means she doesn't know the word, recognizes it's a word she's not really supposed to know, gets from context it's a part of the body, and is curious about it.

Oh please. She didn't know? montecristo February 20 2007, 22:21:24 UTC

Right. An artist chooses what goes into her work. Some idiots should not be writing childrens literature. Nevettheless, they do. That's freedom, and more power to it. I don't have any problem with that. We just don't have to buy it if as parents we don't like what's in it. That's freedom too, not censorship. Mind you, you could make the argument that technically, it is a kind of censorship in that the school is an agency of a supposedly impartial government, but that is the problem with government being involved in education in the first place.

The really shocking thing montecristo February 20 2007, 22:30:24 UTC

I don't have any problem with children being curious. If a nine year old child of mine wants to know what a scrotum is, I will tell her and even point her at more advanced material, if she really wants to know. On the other hand though, I DO have a big problem with adults who are not my child's parents deliberately attempting to push "worldliness" on her when she's not evinced any sign of being ready for certain concepts. The character in the book may have indeed been paterned after some hypothetical nine year old who did have a real encounter as related. What in the hell does that have to do with anyone else's child or the readiness of those children to be exposed to the concepts "Lucky" encounters?

Re: The really shocking thing leora February 23 2007, 07:38:53 UTC

But scrotum is a body part, and thus totally unrelated to worldly topics or needing to be ready for things. Almost all children are ready to know the terms for different body parts long before they can read.

It doesn't have to have any connection to sex unless you make it have one, just as teaching a child what the tongue is isn't sexual, even though tongues often play a role in sex.