News item I picked up through a friend's blog:
TUSCOLA, Texas — A popular English teacher has been placed on paid leave _ and faces possible criminal charges _ after a student's parents complained to police that a ninth-grade class reading list contained a book about a murderer who has sex with his victims' bodies.
Kaleb Tierce, 25, is being investigated for allegedly distributing harmful material to a minor after the student selected Pulitzer Prize-winning novelist Cormac McCarthy's "Child of God" off the list and read it. (See rest of article at http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Oct22/0,4670,BookControversy,00.html)
So far this year I have taught literature that deals with the following: incest, murder, death, capital punishment, adultery and self-multilation. And in the remainder of the year I will teach literature that deals with hellish punishments, burning books, genocide, Buddhism, racism, anti-government ideas, and sex.
Choosing the right book to teach is always a judgement call. If it was on the district's list, Tierce will have some protection. (Still, his protection will be limited; in another article I read it said he was not part of the teacher's union--in my opinion, this is where he really goofed.) Usually teachers follow a couple basic steps when it comes to choosing which books to teach: first, we choose books based on personal passion and curriculum requirements. Next comes the part that Tierce may have skipped--always have a rationale and a back-up plan. Since the book was on the pre-AP list, I am sure there is a rationale somewhere that justifies the use of Child of God in the classroom. (I have not read McCarthy's book, so I cannot speak to the grade level appropriateness of the story.) I cannot believe he didn't realize a book dealing with necrophilia couldn't be partly objectionable to some readers. If Tierce did not first send home a letter and then have an equitable and fair plan for those students who might not want to read the book for whatever reason, then he did not protect himself. And sadly, self-preservation and protection is something teachers need to think about if they wish for the longevity of their career.
I could rant and rave about the parents who objected to the literature, but quite simply, it is their right. And of course the beautiful reality of their objections is that they are self-punishing; their conservative battle-cry will renew interest in the very same material they mean to censor. So, Mr. Tierce, expect a thank you note from Cormac McCarthy soon.
Because these works are important, and because I believe you cannot be free without literature I will continue to teach Oedipus, The Crucible, Dante's Inferno, To Kill a Mockingbird, Civil Disobedience, Night, Siddhartha, A Midsummer Night's Dream, and Fahrenheit 451.
"You don't have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them." Ray Bradbury
TUSCOLA, Texas — A popular English teacher has been placed on paid leave _ and faces possible criminal charges _ after a student's parents complained to police that a ninth-grade class reading list contained a book about a murderer who has sex with his victims' bodies.
Kaleb Tierce, 25, is being investigated for allegedly distributing harmful material to a minor after the student selected Pulitzer Prize-winning novelist Cormac McCarthy's "Child of God" off the list and read it. (See rest of article at http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Oct22/0,4670,BookControversy,00.html)
So far this year I have taught literature that deals with the following: incest, murder, death, capital punishment, adultery and self-multilation. And in the remainder of the year I will teach literature that deals with hellish punishments, burning books, genocide, Buddhism, racism, anti-government ideas, and sex.
Choosing the right book to teach is always a judgement call. If it was on the district's list, Tierce will have some protection. (Still, his protection will be limited; in another article I read it said he was not part of the teacher's union--in my opinion, this is where he really goofed.) Usually teachers follow a couple basic steps when it comes to choosing which books to teach: first, we choose books based on personal passion and curriculum requirements. Next comes the part that Tierce may have skipped--always have a rationale and a back-up plan. Since the book was on the pre-AP list, I am sure there is a rationale somewhere that justifies the use of Child of God in the classroom. (I have not read McCarthy's book, so I cannot speak to the grade level appropriateness of the story.) I cannot believe he didn't realize a book dealing with necrophilia couldn't be partly objectionable to some readers. If Tierce did not first send home a letter and then have an equitable and fair plan for those students who might not want to read the book for whatever reason, then he did not protect himself. And sadly, self-preservation and protection is something teachers need to think about if they wish for the longevity of their career.
I could rant and rave about the parents who objected to the literature, but quite simply, it is their right. And of course the beautiful reality of their objections is that they are self-punishing; their conservative battle-cry will renew interest in the very same material they mean to censor. So, Mr. Tierce, expect a thank you note from Cormac McCarthy soon.
Because these works are important, and because I believe you cannot be free without literature I will continue to teach Oedipus, The Crucible, Dante's Inferno, To Kill a Mockingbird, Civil Disobedience, Night, Siddhartha, A Midsummer Night's Dream, and Fahrenheit 451.
"You don't have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them." Ray Bradbury
