My word, this is horrible

I haven't visited Classkc.org for a while, but was motivated to by the recent comment inquiring as to sources for parental reviews for student literature. I continued to be appalled by both the attitudes and the arguments expressed. I can tolerate the former, but not the latter. In the interest of maintaining my blood pressure, I'm just going to look at the page linked above.

First of all, the page kicks off with the headline "Blue Valley Board of Education Supports the teaching of bestiality and oral sex." I love the idea that because something is being exposed or discussed that it is being taught. It's like saying that because the inquisition is taught in a world history class "Board of Education supports the teaching of torture." Or "Jesus supports the teaching murder." Matthew 15:19.

Each book listed refers to a low reading level -- that a 12th graders are reading at a 7th grade reading level or whatever. But if you look at their link, the reading level refers exclusively to a "textual difficulty." That is to say, it applies only to what the words themselves pose as a challenge. Not the ideas, or the concepts. If we want youth to be exposed to more challenging words, why assign more than a dictionary? Part of learning to appreciate literature is to learn about different points of view, and by exposing ourselves to things that we hope never to go through. Aristotle wrote about the dramatic "purgation of pity and fear" -- we read about events so that we can experience the emotions associated with them without actually going through the actions. We share the Oedipal horror at his marriage to Iocasta without actually sleeping with our own mothers. It's part of the purpose of art. Look at the William Carlos Williams poem: "so much depends/upon/a red wheel/barrow/glazed with rain/water/beside the white/chickens." It could be read by a second-grader. But there's enough there to challenge graduate students.

Next, the page features excerpts from the book. What a great idea. Instead of encouraging parents to look at the book to see why the group is against it, why not just post the dirty parts? Perfect. Several of the pages with excerpts on them have a screen that pops up warning of adult content. But if you click on Bestiality in the headline on the front page, you get no such warning. Beautiful consistency. Not that a click-through screen helps, but I would think you would at least pretend to be using it.

Also, I love the arguments that are presented at the bottom. No college English department would confirm that Beloved is essential college preparatory material. I'm sure that's right. If you wrote a college and asked "Will a student be denied admission because they haven't read . . ." of the answer will be no. But if you ask if an English student should have been exposed in High School to a broad range of classic and contemporary literature, with varying themes and ideas, of course the answer would be yes.

It's not on the linked page, but I continue to be amazed at the books that they do recommend that dont' comply with their own standards (apparently to be contemporary literature is the greater sin than the content of the literature) : The Aeneid, The Odyssey, The Cenci . . . apparently incestuous rape is a-okay as long as it doesn't take place on American soil, or in the 20th century.