In response to the WHALE TALK challenge in Alabama

LISNewster Mock Turtle noticed Chris Crutcher's "In response to the WHALE TALK challenge in Alabama." This is a follow up on Banned in Alabama: Crutcher's "Whale Talk" from yesterday.

Censors can make a case for zero tolerance in language. They can make the argument that since we don’t allow our children to use that language in schools, we also shouldn’t give them stories in which it is used. But that’s an easy thing to deal with, and I’ve seen it done a hundred times. Teachers bring up the offensiveness of the language and talk about why it’s used to make a story real. We don’t have to use the language to talk about the story in the classroom, but we can certainly talk about the raw power of any good story told in its native tongue.

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Lame argument anyway

Censors can make a case for zero tolerance in language. They can make the argument that since we don’t allow our children to use that language in schools, we also shouldn’t give them stories in which it is used.

That's such a lame argument anyway. They didn't allow us to make stink bombs at school either, but everything needed to do so was cheerfully provided by a Chemistry book and a Chemistry lab. I don't know aobut current Chemistry textbooks, but the one I had in high school was exquisite. With the textbook, a few chemicals, maybe one other book from the school library, and a good eye to detail in chemistry- you could whip up a batch of trinitrotoluene. (Or TNT for the non chemist type folks.)

You weren't allowed to do a lotta things in school that textbooks and teaching provided you the means to do. Why is this any different? And if people honestly believe that teens and kids don't use foul language, they're seriously deluding themselves.

Syndicate content