Explicit move is made to ban books from reading list

By Jamie Francisco
Tribune staff reporter
Published May 24, 2006

A bid to remove nine books from the required-reading list of the second-largest high school district in Illinois has triggered debate over whether works praised in literary circles are high art or smut.

The issue arose this month when Township High School District 214 board member Leslie Pinney flagged books that she said contain vulgar language, brutal imagery or depictions of sexual situations inappropriate for students.

The board is scheduled to vote Thursday night on whether to keep the books as part of the curriculum.

"If the media are bombarding our children with explicit sexual images and graphic violence and prolific profanity, can't a school relent from that?" Pinney said. "Is there a different level of standards? That's my question."

The titles on Pinney's list are "Beloved" by Toni Morrison, "Slaughterhouse-Five" by Kurt Vonnegut, "The Things They Carried" by Tim O'Brien, "The Awakening" by Kate Chopin, "Freakonomics" by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner, "The Botany of Desire: A Plant's-Eye View of the World" by Michael Pollan, "The Perks of Being a Wallflower" by Stephen Chbosky, "Fallen Angels" by Walter Dean Myers and "How the Garcia Girls Lost Their Accents" by Julia Alvarez.

It is the first time in more than 20 years that a reading list has been challenged in the Arlington Heights-based district, said Chuck Venegoni, who heads the English and fine arts departments at Hersey High School. The district uses an extensive review process based on established national reading lists, and the suggestion that teachers are using materials on par with porn is insulting, he said.

"This is not some serendipitous decision to allow someone to do what they felt like doing because they had something about talking about something kinky in front of kids," Venegoni said. "It's insulting to hardworking people who really do care about kids."

Pinney, the mother of a District 214 graduate, admits she has not read all the books. She is not seeking to ban them from district libraries, but in class she would like to replace them with books that address the same themes without explicit material.

Among her objections are a bestiality scene in "Beloved," graphic violence in "The Things They Carried" and masturbation references in "Wallflower."

Venegoni said he has received dozens of e-mails of support from parents but also has had to explain that pornography is not part of the lesson plan.

"For however edgy a few passages taken out of context, there is nothing in any of those books that even remotely approaches what an objective person would call pornography," he said.

Several conservative groups have rallied to Pinney's cause, saying that the books promote porn, which has prompted community members on both sides to flood board members and teachers with e-mail.

In 2005 the American Library Association received more than 400 requests to pull books from the shelves of school and public libraries, a spokeswoman said.

The call to ban books is timeless, but it is important to continue supporting literature that makes readers think, said Mary Dempsey, commissioner of the Chicago Public Library.

Mayor Richard Daley selected "The Things They Carried" in 2003 for the One Book, One Chicago city reading series. The book, about the Vietnam War, was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize in 1990. The themes--love, hate, war, kindness and cruelty--along with the author's ability to convey the harshness of war outweighed concerns, Dempsey said.

"I cannot imagine that language in that book is not said on a battlefield and, candidly, is not said in the corridors of most high schools in the suburbs of Chicago today," she said. "Good literature is supposed to get people to think. And sometimes, good literature takes you out of your comfort zone."

District 214 officials rely on the expertise of teachers and other members of textbook selection committees to scrutinize reading lists used nationwide, said board President William Dussling. The books are geared for juniors and seniors in honors or Advanced Placement courses to prepare them for college, he said. Parents can have their students opt out if they find reading material objectionable, he said.

"There will be accommodations made of something else to read that will still meet the learning points in the class," Dussling said. "It's not a matter of this is it."

The district's six schools have nearly 13,000 students in Arlington Heights, Buffalo Grove, Des Plaines, Elk Grove Village, Mt. Prospect, Prospect Heights, Rolling Meadows and Wheeling.

Pinney said the system needs to be modified so parents are better informed.

"The opt-out clause is flawed because unless you're digging around the student's backpack, looking at the books and reading them, how exactly will you know what your student is reading?" Pinney said.

Terri Brightwell, whose son is a senior at Rolling Meadows High School, agreed.

"Their standards may not be my standards," she said. "It should be open to a process where parents are involved."

On the other side, Sharon Neff said she trusts the judgment of educators compiling the lists and believes they are introducing subjects to her daughter, Valerie, that will prepare her for life beyond Hersey.

"That's not a watered, diluted version of reality. Without it, the literature isn't as effective," she said. "[Pinney] needs to read the books."

Aside from Slaughterhouse-Five I haven't read any of these! But I did hear this story on NPR this morning. They interviewed a couple of students and I swear that one actually said that he'd been assigned A Time To Kill in his freshman English class. John Grisham is now required reading? Was he confusing that with To Kill A Mockingbird?

I'm embarrased to admit that I don't really know what this Freakanomics book is. Is it really something that high school students can understand, let alone benefit from? And is it obscene by any definition of the word?

Never read it, but here's the Amazon.com review:

Economics is not widely considered to be one of the sexier sciences. The annual Nobel Prize winner in that field never receives as much publicity as his or her compatriots in peace, literature, or physics. But if such slights are based on the notion that economics is dull, or that economists are concerned only with finance itself, Steven D. Levitt will change some minds. In Freakonomics (written with Stephen J. Dubner), Levitt argues that many apparent mysteries of everyday life don't need to be so mysterious: they could be illuminated and made even more fascinating by asking the right questions and drawing connections. For example, Levitt traces the drop in violent crime rates to a drop in violent criminals and, digging further, to the Roe v. Wade decision that preempted the existence of some people who would be born to poverty and hardship. Elsewhere, by analyzing data gathered from inner-city Chicago drug-dealing gangs, Levitt outlines a corporate structure much like McDonald's, where the top bosses make great money while scores of underlings make something below minimum wage. And in a section that may alarm or relieve worried parents, Levitt argues that parenting methods don't really matter much and that a backyard swimming pool is much more dangerous than a gun. These enlightening chapters are separated by effusive passages from Dubner's 2003 profile of Levitt in The New York Times Magazine, which led to the book being written. In a book filled with bold logic, such back-patting veers Freakonomics, however briefly, away from what Levitt actually has to say. Although maybe there's a good economic reason for that too, and we're just not getting it yet. --John Moe

They want THIS banned from honors classes? THIS is unsuitable for juniors and seniors? No wonder the conservatives are backing this, this reeks, man.

BTW, are you serious about Grisham? This is what it's come to? What's next, Michael Crichton? Or some other B-grade crapola fit for grade-schoolers? Christ, I remember dealing with shit like this when I was in grade school, but I hoped things would improve BY NOW.

In their place, these books will be substituted.






Title's that also may be added
-Why you should let others think for you
-The world is perfect, so stop looking at its problems
-How to burn books!
-Ignorance is bliss.
-Why books that address controversy and stimulate thought should offend you.

Beloved was just voted the number one book by contemporary authors. Slaughterhouse Five is necessary to understand alternative interpretations of so-called reality. The Things They Carried presents a "true" version of war, and other versions of that version.

I just wish that we could "protect" kids and keep them "uninformed" about the existence of people like Leslie Pinney.

Why not the John Grisham book? It's just a ripoff of To Kill A Mockingbird anyway.

The local high school already had to read Stephen King a couple of years ago.

This whole thing is mostly centering around the high school that I graduated from last year (Hersey) because that's where the crazy board member's kid goes to school. We did read To Kill A Mockingbird, but the summer reading for all incoming freshmen is A Time To Kill, which while Grisham is usually considered fluffy, it is a good book to get new high schoolers thinking about bigger issues like race.

And from everything I've read/heard, the problem she has with Freakanomics is the theory they present that legalized abortion has lowered crime/murder rates.

If anyone here wants more details about all of this or what the other types of books we read, just ask me and I'll try and answer you guys.

Slaughterhouse fucking Five? What?

These people make me sick. I'm fairly certain there was no point in Beloved where Morrisson wrote "You should go fuck a cow, now." Personally I was more shocked by the child murder in the book, but I guess we all have different standards.

I just remembered that my parents got an e-mail from some supporter of Pinney last week when this first sort of broke with an attachment featuring passages from all 7 of the challenged books that are found to be objectional (which I'm pretty sure where just copied from other booking banning websites). I can upload it if people are interested, because after all, these dirty parts are apparently the only aspects of these books.

Pinney got shot down. No banning according to the news this morning. I may have conservative leanings, but this was over the top. Pinney should let those that actually read the book make the decisions.

It's like all those that complained about DaVinci, Last Temptation, and the Mel Gibson movie. They bitched and moaned but never saw it. Sorry, I cannot respect or take your opinion seriously if you haven't read or seen the so-called objectionable material.

This thread title is a bit misleading because Arlington High closed, like, twenty years ago.

As a 214 grad myself, I'll keep an eye on this. This Pinney chick should have started by actually reading the books. What could be so bad about that Botany of Desire book? I've heard Michael Pollan interviewed twice at length recently, and he's quickly becoming one of "my guys". The next book I check out will be his The Omnivore's Dilemma...

EDIT--just saw rudayo's update...phew!

I liked her quote on the radio this morning that was along the lines of, "you people are misrepresenting me, I don't want to ban these books. I just don't want them to be available to impression our children."



I was half waiting for her to say, "I don't want to ban the books, I just want to burn them!"

[quote name='Paul' date='May 26 2006, 12:05 AM' post='96056']
[quote name='undo' post='96005' date='May 25 2006, 09:27 PM']
And from everything I've read/heard, the problem she has with Freakanomics is the theory they present that legalized abortion has lowered crime/murder rates.
[/quote]

It's obvious Pinney hasn't read that book, because that's what everyone and his mother knows about the book, if at all.

I read The Things They Carried (it's a number of short stories regarding Vietnam), and I don't remember any specific objectionable thing, other than some graphic war-time situations. My goodness, that might make young people think that war is a bad thing, or something!

Dude. Slaughterhouse five contains the phrase "mother fucker" once. What the fuck else can be considered offensive in there? God damn, ignorance should have some sort of physical side effect, like herpes or leprosy or something. Assholes.

The human zoo? There is the necklace sketch with the boobs, but you're still talking about a VERY crude sketch, and if the zoo bits are pornographic, then zoos should ban monkey cages.

Hmm... seems more like they should beef up the reading list with, you know, decent novels, instead of crap. (excluding beloved , and maybe Chopin).