THE CHOCOLATE WAR Banned In Maryland
A librarian writes from Maryland:
READ THE REST
Ok, here's the scoop. The Social Studies department in Harford County Maryland is offering a course to 9th graders called "Living in a Contemporary World." This course is designed to help ease the transition from middle school to high school for 9th graders. One of the classes focuses on stress management and decision-making and uses the novel Chocolate War by Cormier. So far so good, right?
I love Cormier's books. They present the life of young people in a realistic and often disturbing light. In his novels, Cormier takes on the real and often disturbing issues that our young people face. He uses their point of view, their mannerism, their language. His books are among the most popular books that kids check out. I am always recommending them - I've read most of Cormier's books myself. I find them realistic, engrossing, captivating, and overall great reads! Cormier's novels resonate with young readers. Without using their own language and thoughts, Cormier says his book "would lack credibility" with his readers.
Turns out the 40 parents don't agree.
READ THE REST
posted by Brent Hartinger at 11:17 PM
23 Comments:
Brent,
Setting aside the issue of the book and 9th graders, my 3rd grader has the book in her class available for reading. Now my girl still walks around with dollies under her arms. Yet the book repeatedly talks about numerous sexually inappropriate situations for a 3rd grader.
If I asked the teacher not to let my daughter read that book, would that be understandable and acceptable to you and the other AS IF! writers?
I'll use a separate comment to add some sample text just in case you have to remove it for being too crude for this blog.
Thanks.
- "The exhilaration.. vanished and he sought it in vain, like seeking ecstasy's memory an instant after jacking off and encountering only shame and guilt."
- Looking at girls in Playboy, wondering if “he would die before holding a girl’s breast in his hand.”
- “..how he sometimes felt .. horny..when he roughhoused a kid or tackled a guy viciously…”
- “At night in bed, he could have one without even touching himself, just thinking of her.”
- “..her breast brushing his arm, setting him on fire…first time (he) thought it was accident….then she brushed again…. He knew it wasn’t ..felt himself hardening ….. those beautiful breasts….tomorrow she’d probably let him get under her sweater.”
- “ (old people) were to old for sex… he couldn’t believe his mother and father ever actually..”
- Boy with camera without film catches another boy masturbating in toilet: “..pants dropping on floor, one hand furiously at work between his legs.” Pretends to take photo. Taunts him: “If you’re going to jack off in a toilet, at least lock your door.”
- “..calling to mind the figure of a girl…sweater had bulged beautifully…books pressed against her rounded breasts. If my hands were only those books, he thought….hand now curled between his legs, he concentrated on the girl. But for once, it was no good,..”
- “..Fantastic looking. Tight sweater, clinging low slung jeans. Jesus. ..Watching girls and devouring them with your eyes-rape by eyeball-was something you did automatically…… he feasted himself on her rounded jeans..”
- “How many times you jack off every day? Twice (he) replied quickly. See….no secrets here..”
- Teased by one boy: “..what I mean by closet, ..touching (his) cheek.. lingering in a faint caress…you’re a fairy. A queer.. homos..you must be creaming all over, wow, 400 ripe young bodies to rub against…Kiss me…You son of a bitch…” Then he was brutally beaten by a dozen boys: "..swarming all over him, hitting him high and low.. a dozen fists pummeled his body, fingernails tore at his cheek and a finger clawed his eye.. wanted to blind him.. wanted to kill him.. Pain.. in his groin.. kicked him there.. blows rained.. without mercy.. no let up.. somebody was pounding his head furiously... another kick in his groin.. vomit now.. open his mouth to let it spray forth.. threw up.. kick him again, ths time in his lower back, the final sheet of pain that drew a black curtain over his eyes."
This is totally obscene material.
Next thing you know, they'll be hoisting the gay flag again.
I find it really, really hard to believe that any third graders would actually read this book, and I know for a fact that they simply wouldn't comprehend much of what you've quoted. I've blogged before about this, but I think books sort of have self-regulating censors, Safe. If it's way about a kids' head, he or she can't understand it and will be strongly motivated not to finish it. Most people avoid books that are confusing or "over their head."
But yes, I hope we here at AS IF! have been clear over the years that we STRONGLY believe that and encourage parents should be involved in the books their kids choose to read. In fact, it's our strong belief in parently input that motivates many of our stands in the first place: simply put, many of us are parents, or work with parents with our books, and we want the parents who choose access to our books to have that access.
But in any event, absolutely parents have a big say in what their own individual kids kid, especially when that kid is in the third grade (the question is a little different if a 16 year-old wants to read a particular book, but his or her parents don't want him or her to).
Have you talked to the teacher why that book is in the 3rd grade classroom? There may be a good reason you don't yet know about.
Robert Cormier spoke often and eloquently himself against censorship. He once stated that the most frightening thing is the way censorship groups have organized to censor. As a writer, he believed that the truth of the story would serve the reader. As a parent, he never wanted another parent to use censorship to tell him what his children should read. He fought long and hard against censorship and I so greatly respected him for it that I wrote his biography for Enslow's Authors Teens Love series -- Robert Cormier, Writer of the Chocolate War. I think anything we can do to promote Cormier's work is worthwhile. He was the first writer to create work that dealt with tough topics in honest and realistic ways, in ways that demonstrated not all things end happily. Kudos to you for supporting his work in your library!
Brent,
I agree third graders might not be interested in the book or even understand it, and to that extent, they can self-censor. Although it's really not censorship--it's more like selection. At the same time, I don't think such books should be offered to such children so the children can exercise their own self-selection. That's like giving children a table filled with candy and drugs and relying on the children to exercise their own self-selection.
And let me add that book choices for children did not used to be this way, and parents would not give such books to their own children to allow them to exercise their own self-selection. For example, I would not give The Chocolate War to my daughter and hope she is smart enough to self-select or stupid enough not to understand it. This pool of books from which children may choose nowadays includes, well, anything and everything inappropriate for them, and the ALA is the lead organization that made up this new view of the world and that has been very effective in ensuring it is carried out far and wide.
Now such materials for children are called "authentic literature." Let me quote from a scholarly source, "Judging a Book by Its Cover: Publishing Trends in Young Adult Literature," Cat Yampbell, The Lion and the Unicorn; Sep 2005; 29:3; Children's Module, The Johns Hopkins University Press, pp348-372, at p350-351:
The subject matter of a YA book is different depending on whether the book is intended for a thirteen-year-old or a seventeen-year-old. Despite intended age determinations for these books, liberals and conservatives continue to battle over the age appropriateness of subjects such as relationships, sex, drugs, and death. Judy Blume, an author of books for young readers, caused a scandal in 1975 with Forever (1975), which is commonly considered the first YA book to deal with teen love and teen pregnancy. Although Bradbury Press infuriated Blume by advertising the book as Blume's first adult book, Forever is a Young Adult novel; it soon made its way into the teen audience (Foerstal 107). Sharyn November, senior editor at Puffin and Viking Children's Books, said "Gatekeepers often underestimate what teens can handle. [Teens] know a lot. They self-censor when they read--they skip over what they don't understand and focus on what makes sense to them at that point in their lives" (qtd. in Maughan, "Making").
Young Adult publishers are journeying into new and potentially dangerous subjects. One YA editor notes, "As more and more edgy fiction is being published, the books are dealing with issues that hadn't been dealt with before: oral sex, male rape, incest. There seem to be no boundaries any more" (qtd. in Milliot et al. 39). In 2004, bookstores were filled with YA books that addressed edgy subjects: Cynthia Voigt's When She Hollers (1994) and Laurie Halse Anderson's Speak (rape) (1999); Sarah Dessen's Dreamland (2000) and Alex Flinn's Breathing Underwater (2001) (emotionally, mentally, and physically abusive relationships); Patricia McCormick's Cut (2001), Shelley Stoehr's Crosses (1991), and Alice Hoffman's Green Angel (2003) (self-mutilation); Margaret Bechard's Hanging on to Max (2002) and Angela Johnson's The First Part Last (2003) (teen fatherhood); and Linda Glovach's Beauty Queen (1998) (most of the aforementioned issues as well as teenage exotic dancing, threesomes, and heroin addiction). Amazon.com enables teens to find particular issue books by clicking on "Teen Books," then "Social Issues," which provides headings such as "Dating and Intimacy," "Drug Use and Abuse," "Pregnancy," "Suicide," and "Violence." A search box allows users to enter one's own issue. Young Adult Literature has broken nearly every boundary of acceptable subject matter in trying to address real-life problems and intrigue teen readers.
END OF QUOTE
So there we see the same "self-censor" argument. Give the kids a bunch of books with some containing bad material, and they will know what to self-select.
But why are we there in the first place? How did this happen? Why are we not giving children a selection of books from ones that do not include rape, self-mutilation, threesomes, suicide and the like? Then let them self-select which of those books they like. Why does the argument have to be framed from the ALA's position that the kids get everything and they will winnow it down naturally, rather than the kids get high quality books that they will winnow down based on subject matter instead of based on "authenticity"?
If I taught your child, if you have one, how to purchase, train on, and use every kind of assault weapon available and let him self-select which gun he would like to use on his own unsupervised, would you take kindly to that? Would it not be better to teach your child about soccer, basketball, football, curling, archery, riflemanship, fencing, and water polo, then let him self-select which sport he wants? The first example is one of stacking the deck while the second is more well rounded. Well when the choice of books children are given includes significant numbers of sexually inappropriate ones, than we are supposed to trust them to winnow out the inappropriate one, isn't that similarly stacking the deck? Where have all the good books gone? Why does she get ALA-recommended sexually inappropriate material from an ALA librarian in kindergarten? Why? Why is it up to me to stop this flood of sexually inappropriate books that the ALA is recommending? Why is the ALA recommending them, even awarding them, even creating new top ten lists just for such books? Why does my child have The Chocolate War in third grade?
Which is the very question you asked. I asked the teacher that. She said it was recommended by the ALA but that she only read the ALA's recommendation, not the book. I don't blame her; there are thousands of books available in the school. I asked her to keep me child from reading it. She said ... I better stop here, I'm afraid the ALA might be monitoring this and might launch an investigation to ensure third graders read The Chocolate War. (SafeLibraries is based on the incident where despite the local interests repeatedly expressed even by the town government, the ALA ensured children maintained access to Playboy magazine in the public library.)
And I know parents need to be involved with their children's book selection. You say that, we all say that. But let's be honest. My kid is reading a book every 2 days or so. I could not possibly keep up that pace of reading all the books she is reading. One I read the other day, just a quick flip and a single paragraph, was about self-mutilation. And I'm a parent very aware of this but the reading rate is just so much faster than I can do, and I am not going to slow her down.
I need to rely on others to make the right choices for my kid, to give her a selection of books, all of them excellent. When my kid is given a selection of books that also contains self-mutilation, rape, incest, well some of that slips past me. I'm exasperated. Why is my kid reading about these "authentic" (not my word and a very misleading word) things instead of quality books? Why is the ALA recommending to teachers books that even the teachers themselves realize are inappropriate after they finally read them?
Oh, I could go on and on about this topic. The point is children should not be given sexually inappropriate material on the theory that they will self-select. Teachers should not be given books that are inappropriate for children while being told the books are actually excellent books for children, only to force the teachers to remove them from the libraries after finally getting past the glowing reviews and actually reading the books.
Also the point is parental involvement is excellent but 1) the kids read too fast for the parents to keep up, and 2) reviewers are making glowing recommendations about books that contain sexually inappropriate material for children. For example, the ALA says the parents must be involved, but the ALA misleads parents as to the true contents of the books. There is no true informed consent when a book about a father raping a daughter and has own grandchild still in diapers while the daughter is forced to perform oral sex on the mother is called an excellent coming of age book.
We are told to watch over our kids but we are misled about what to look out for. The deck is stacked in favor of the ALA and against the children. Result? Well just look around you. The problem here is the ALA, not the parents, and definitely not the authors.
I can't say all that I'd like to say in this limited space, and I suspect I won't convince you anyway, but I know firsthand that many of the books you cite have made PROFOUND (and positive)impacts on teens' lives, helping them cope with and understand issues that they and their friends are, in fact, dealing with.
But let me just say this: the YA genre is literally almost brand new. Not only was FOREVER one of the first "edgy" YA books, it was one of the first YA books, period. Before the 1970s (or, more accurately, 1990s, when YA really began to flourish), most teenagers when from middle grade lit (like ISLAND OF THE BLUE DOLPHINS) directly to adult books (which, in the case of my high school, was FLOWERS IN THE ATTIC and HAROLD ROBBINS). Many of today's YA is read by actual teens. Why? Because it speaks to them; it is relevent to their lives. You apparently see smut, but I see (in most of the cases you cite) thought, sensitive, wonderful literature that is perfectly appropriate for most teens, and virtually all older teens. It is written with teenagers in mind (unlike the adult books they would otherwise be reading); most teen authors I know, including myself, take their responsibility very, very seriously.
I know you disagree, that you think these books are somehow a bad influence. But I wish you could read my mail for a single week, or the mail of any of the other authors in AS IF! Kids are excited about our books; they often ask intelligent questions, and are finally passionate about reading, having found literature that "speaks" to them.
Has the world changed in the last 20 years? Yes. Are many of those changes negative? Some are, yes. But one of things that I think is most extraordinary about our age is the absolutely teen lit Renaissance that we are experience. The quality and breadth of the genre is extraordinary, and breathtaking. And, yes, that includes books that are not particularly edgy. What I find striking is the incredible diversity and high, high quality. And every year, it gets better and better. To take a wonderful book like CUT or BREATHING UNDERWATER or HANGING ONTO MAX and suggest that it is somehow a "bad" influence on kids, or is another sign of the coarsening of our culture, is, in my opinion, to fundamentally miss the point of all these books, and to also misundertand the evolving nature of literature (TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD, THE OUTSIDERS, and most of the other books we all now consider "classics" were, of course, once considered outrageous and a "bad influence" by some).
I think there are a lot of things for parents to worry about, but honestly don't think the current state of the teen lit genre is one of them; on the contrary, I think it's something that parents should be proud of--that they live in an era where fantastic, thoughtful, life-enriching books are being written for their teenagers.
Brent,
Regarding "You apparently see smut," no I don't and I didn't say that.
Now regarding all those books you say I disapprove of, there's just an honest misundertanding here. I am only talking about one book, The Chocolate War, and only its inappropriateness for my third grader. And those other books you said I didn't like were--and here's the misunderstanding--part of the two paragraphs I quoted from someone else. Not me. I take no position on those particular books. I just included the quote because it was from a decent source and it generally discussed what we are discussing.
Do you see that now? Perhaps I should have block indented the two quoted paragraphs. I did not say those things about those books. I was merely quoting to show a scholarly source showing a generally downward trend in YA fiction, as least in her point of view.
That's it. Since most of your last post seems to have been written with that basic misunderstanding in mind, would you care to respond again to my comment?
Thanks.
The source of the quote in question:
"Judging a Book by Its Cover: Publishing Trends in Young Adult Literature," Cat Yampbell, The Lion and the Unicorn; Sep 2005; 29:3; Children's Module, The Johns Hopkins University Press, pp348-372, at p350-351.
Hey, Safe -
You quoted that huge chunk of text in defense of your point, so it's somewhat disingenuous to claim you don't agree with the pointed and harsh critiques it contains of a variety of YA novels.
Yes, as Jordan said, because you quoted from the article, I naturally assumed you agreed with its sentiments. But I'm glad to hear that you do not.
SL,all you do is quote.All all you pro - censors do is quote.Anti-censors actullay come up with original ideas!SL,all your doing is listening to other people without actulaay making your own ideas.All that so called adult content in books is what I as a teen see,encounter and go through each day.Books like the chocolate war are not policaly correct,so they actullay seem REAL.
Lizzie,
That is really not nice. I really am trying to have a well reasoned discussion. Brent sees that. Why do you not? Why can't we all speak civilly as if we were in a classroom setting. I am trying to quote from legitimate sources from graduate level writing classes, like those Jordan Sonnenblick attends. I am purposely avoiding questionable sources. Yet, instead of addressing the issues, you chose to make statements such as "All all you pro - censors do is quote."
First, that avoids the issue(s) I raised. Second, you are lumping me in with others in a fashion that would not be tolerated even by yourself under certain situations. Third, keeping my own child away from a book such as The Chocolate War given the quotes I gave above does not mean that I am "pro-censor." Fourth, quoting something does not mean I agree with it. I have quoted Cat Yampbell and Robert Cormier. In neither case am I agreeing with what they are saying, or not agreeing for that matter.
So why are you, Lizzie, so instantly hostile. Reread what I have said and there is not a hint of anything you are suggesting.
Now I want you to stay in the conversation, so why not just calm down and don't make assumptions just because I raise the issue of keeping my child from reading the Robert Cormier quotes I provided.
So, now that we got all the misunderstandings out of the way, let me re-ask the question:
"If I asked the teacher not to let my daughter read that [The Chocolate War], would that be understandable and acceptable to ... the ... AS IF! writers?"
Safe -
Brent stated AS IF's official position on parents' right to choose FOR THEIR OWN KIDS in his very first post on this thread:
"But yes, I hope we here at AS IF! have been clear over the years that we STRONGLY believe that and encourage parents should be involved in the books their kids choose to read. In fact, it's our strong belief in parently input that motivates many of our stands in the first place: simply put, many of us are parents, or work with parents with our books, and we want the parents who choose access to our books to have that access.
But in any event, absolutely parents have a big say in what their own individual kids kid, especially when that kid is in the third grade (the question is a little different if a 16 year-old wants to read a particular book, but his or her parents don't want him or her to)."
So you can definitely be irked by the post by Lizzie (not an AS IF member, BTW) above, but you can't say that your quarrel here is with AS IF.
Also, for what it's worth, I've never attended a grad-level (or even undergrad-level) creative writing course. I don't know why that matters, per se, but I didn't want to let your random little assumption stand.
Okay, Jordan, so far so good. I really never doubted such an answer. But let me point out a distinction between the question and your answer. Your answer talks about parents being 100% encouraged to be involved in a child's book reading selection. My question was ever so slightly different. My question was on the issue of parental involvement in books selected for children by teachers.
Here is why I am asking. Some believe that a teacher knows what he/she is doing and the parents should have no control over the teacher's actions. For example, some might say if the teacher required my kid to read a certain book, I as a parent cannot countermand that. The bigger issue is, of course, if you send your kids to school, do parents lose the right to control their own child's education.
Now be careful. In some schools, particularly in California and Massachusetts, courts have ruled that kids who cross the entryway to a public school are now under the care and control of the state, and parents can no longer get involved.
Now, having pointed out this distinction, and perhaps restating the question, how do the AS IF writers feel if a teacher assigns a certain book and the parent disagrees? Should the child get another book? What are the consequences of that? Should the child be required to read the book despite the parent's wishes? Should the child get an F for the assignment based on that book if he/she does not read it? Should the other parents be informed that one parent has issues with the book? If the kids reading the book bully the kid not reading the book, what should be done? Etc., etc.
I hope you all find my questions interesting. I hope we are all enjoying this back and forth.
Afterthought, thought related to my initial comments. What about parents being misled as to the contents of the book? What about the book winning awards for children wherein the book contains sexually inappropriate material for those children? What do you AS IF writers think can or should be done to give parents accurate information so they are truly informed? (For example, describing a book about a father have sex with his daughter and his granddaughter still in diapers, then both together, as an excellent coming-of-age book is common nowadays but clearly misleading.)
Then defend your case no others.YOu are not even tqlking about your 3rd grader.Don't avoid the issue.I don't have to repeat what brent stated.You are an adult you should get the meesage.BTW,if you the civil is a classroom setting you're in for a surprise.Don't censor from the truth!
PS i'm a rep form teens against censorship,and reading books that tell it like it is has helped me since I was a third grader.
Another thing your girl isn't the world.Talk to the teacher don't comlain because you want to be the world's mother.That is the point AS IF! makes,it's ok to d ecide what your daughter shluoud read but not everyone.Since your so concerned go to the teacher.Those quotes showed me nothing.How lazy! Now go and voive your concerns TO THE TEACHER ABOUT YOUR CHILD
Safe, you've created a complete straw man argument. I doubt there is any school in the country where a kid, upon parental or kid request, cannot "opt out" and read a different selection than the required one. In any event, that is definitely the policy of ALA and AS IF!
I'm not sure what you're suggesting. That teachers not require books? Because saying, "Well, no, just don't require controversial books" doesn't work--there is something in almost ANY book that someone somewhere will find controversial. THE WIZARD OF OZ? TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD? Two VERY controversial books over the years. And if the teacher chooses a limp, lifeless book like DICK AND JANE, well, someone will complain that the book is limp and lifeless, and probably sexist to boot.
There is a solution to the problem you describe. It exists, it's call opt-out, we virtually ALL agree that it works. Except you (and the people you quote).
I'm honestly not sure what the issue is here.
Brent you made my point.
Brent,
You have answered my questions, and satisfactorily.
Now I'm not the book expert as computer filters in libraries is my strong point, but I that I have heard where children are required to read certain books despite parental complaint. I'll try to keep this issue in mind and update here if I find anything.
Thanks again to you and all the AS IF authors who have responded here or just watched from the sidelines.
And I agree with you about those excellent books people keep trying to block. You see, I am only concerned with inappropriate sexual material, the same as the US Supreme Court discussed in US v. ALA.
To that end, here is what comedian Tom Lehrer said about the WIZARD OF OZ:
All books can be indecent books
Though recent books are bolder,
For filth (I'm glad to say) is in
the mind of the beholder.
When correctly viewed,
Everything is lewd.
(I could tell you things about Peter Pan,
And the Wizard of Oz, there's a dirty old man!)
http://www.safelibraries.org/thealaanthem.htm
this book is pure porno and does not need to be published for the eyes of anyone
you guys are way to worked up in this. it's just a book. If we didn't let any kid read any book with any laguage,sex,drugs,alchohol,gays,lesbians,smoking ect...there would be almost NO books to read. not even a dictionary. Based on the quotes, this shouldent be alowed yet for third graders but it still should be published. Calm down people.
I can't believe a book for young adults is being banned. I bet most of the parents who have an issue with this book let their kids play violent video games, watch horror movies, listen to videos with obscene language, scantilly clad women, etc. It's only because this book is found in schools, which are usually held up to a higher standard to which parents don't even aspire. With that being said, I don't think this book is appropriate for any student in grades 7 or under. Keep it for the older kids.
Post a Comment
<< Home