My reasoning as to why they no longer teach To Kill A Mockingbird is because the n-word and other derogatory terms are used multiple times throughout the entire book. In today's society, it is extremely offensive to say those words and rightfully so. If the book was still being taught it would be a tough read and a lot of discussions would take place regarding the offensive terms. Despite all of its faults, it is still an excellent piece of American literature and it should still be taught at Mayfair. If we as a society ignore the past, it will have a chance to repeat itself.
What are your thoughts on the subject? Should To Kill A Mockingbird be taught at Mayfair once again?
I've heard multiple people say, "Ignorance will be our downfall" and I completely agree. Banning or not teaching about books with tough ideas is censoring important historical events that we need to learn about. Without the knowledge of these concepts we will not understand the severity of them. Saying that books cannot be read because of their "tough" ideas and offensive ideas is part of a bigger problem. Uncomfortable conversations about the rough past are needed to make sure times like those can't occur again
ReplyDeleteI, for one, have not read the book yet, but I do know the basic gist of it (please feel free to correct me if I get anything wrong, though). There was a school in Mississippi that had banned the book due to parents feeling "uncomfortable" with its frank discussion of rape, racial inequality in the justice system, and other topics. I've understood another issue that people have with the book: this idea of the 'white savior complex'. It is found similarly in movies like "The Help", where the storyline revolves white protagonist who saves the minority rather than the trials of that said minority. Nonetheless, I agree with Cindy. Banning the books would do more harm than good. Conversation avoidance does not help situational confrontation. School systems must teach students about the past in order to assess the future. The abolition of some of these books promotes a 'feel-good' history; as Cindy said, "ignorance will be our downfall" but ultimately, ignorance is a bliss. Uncomfortable topics create discussion and awareness. However, I believe that there should be conversation with students and families about certain words, because they obviously do carry weight with them, and peers saying the word nonchalantly is the last thing that they should get out of the book.
ReplyDeleteAlthough some of the terms may be offensive to some, I don't think that is reason enough to remove a classic piece of literature from our curriculum. Being offended by the book just because some slurs are there is just plain silly, they aren't directed at you and they are there to portray what society was like there at the time. You can't sugarcoat the past and pretend that racism never existed. That's the equivalent of burying your head in the sand. We can't address problems in society if we won't acknowledge them. Besides, it's not as if this book is promoting racism, its whole central topic is about how the main character's dad believes racism is wrong in an area full of it. Removing this book is more of a shot in the foot, if the goal is to eradicate racism, rather than a step forward.
ReplyDeleteThough I believe that it is important to show the past and how conflicts unfolded, I also believe there are better ways of conveying these stories without using offensive words. Personally, I have read “To Kill a Mockingbird” in 9th grade English class, and I do acknowledge that it had a significant impact on my learning and knowledge about the racial injustices of the past, but like censoring other curse words, they should do the same for racial slurs. Instead of removing the entirety of the word, the author or editor can just say “n word” or “n*****” Throughout my whole time in high school, this book has sparked many jokes and punchlines that included this highly offensive word, because these specific students thought it was funny or entertaining. They think it is acceptable to say this, due to the fact a recording, teacher, or other staff said it. But of course, my opinion will not change these books and how they’re printed and distributed, but one thing I can suggest is to just skip the word or avoid using audiobooks in that specific chapter or part of the book.
ReplyDeleteThough I agree that it is very important to teach young, impressionable students which words are not okay to use, the book also has a fault. Its plot feeds into the white savior archetype by portraying the protagonist as a savior to black people. He is looked up to and "defends" African Americans which takes away the power of the black person and essentially gives it to the white man. This gives the idea that the oppression and systemic racism dealt with by the black person can only be compromised by the white person/man. The book is definitely interesting and eye opening, but it portrays the white person as the savior for solving an issue that was essentially instituted by the white person.
ReplyDelete