In this article in English Journal, Sean Connors (University of Arkansas) and Roberta Seelinger Trites (Illinois State University) note recent challenges to controversial books, among them New Kid by Jerry Craft, Brown Girl Dreaming by Jacqueline Woodson, The Hate U Give by Angie Thomas, All Boys Aren’t Blue by George Johnson, Drama by Raina Telgemeier, and Maus by Art Spiegelman. Connors and Trites believe that most parents who object to these and other books are genuinely concerned for their children, and educators need to understand their concerns while also helping them understand why teachers want to use the books in their classrooms. Here are their suggested talking points:
- The desire to shield young people from certain kinds of knowledge and content is based on an unrealistic understanding of innocence. Many adults believe that children are born pure, gradually gain knowledge, and eventually lose their innocence, say Connors and Trites, and parents see their job as preserving and protecting youthful innocence as long as possible. “But anyone who has taught school-aged children,” they say, “knows that children are typically so inquisitive that they are rarely innocent of knowledge about, for example, sex and sexuality.” Whether they live in cities, suburbs, or rural areas, children find out about that subject, and others, around the age of seven. Most parents will acknowledge that fact.
- Paradoxically, many parents assume their children have a Rousseauian innocence while admitting that they, as children, did not. Upon reflection, adults remember when they first learned about topics like the Holocaust and economic injustice and heard homophobic slurs. “How many children are truly innocent by the time they leave middle school?” ask Connors and Trites. “And how many more have developed empathy and understanding because they witnessed (or read about) an injustice that stirred their social conscience?”
- In every classroom, students are at different stages of maturation. When Connors taught eleventh-grade English, a parent said her child wasn’t old enough to read The Bluest Eye with the class. They arranged for an alternative book and writing assignment without denying the rest of the class the powerful experience of reading Toni Morrison’s novel.
- Arguments for protecting young people are often made with only one type of student in mind. Are those objecting to a particular book “thinking of African-American teenagers who have no choice but to attend underfunded and under-resourced schools?” ask Connors and Trites. “Or immigrant children whose parents live under the threat of deportation? Are they imagining children who have experienced physical or sexual abuse, or who are exposed to some form of addiction at home, or whose families struggle in poverty?”
- Reading literature develops young people’s capacity for empathy and understanding. Research shows that people who read fiction on a regular basis are better able to understand and empathize with fellow humans and see the world from their perspective – abilities most parents want their children to possess.
- Removing books that might make white, heterosexual students feel uncomfortable ignores the fact that LGBTQ parents and parents of color also have school-aged children. They too want their children to learn about their own histories and experiences. All students need books that provide “windows” and “mirrors” on their own experience and culture. “By engaging in this kind of perspective-taking,” say Connors and Trites, “students are better able to comprehend how other people understand and experience those historical events and social topics. Equally important, they are better prepared to make informed, conscious decisions as to whether they wish to reproduce discriminatory policies and practices that have been, or are, injurious to other people.”
Please Note: This summary is reprinted with permission from issue #940 of The Marshall Memo, an excellent resource for educators.
