Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Brave New World banned from High School curriculum

blogs.seattleweekly.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 162 posts

Re: Brave New World banned from High School curriculum

#91

Post by rbanffy »

kenjackson wrote: post #25

It is a bit more nuanced. As pointed out by the appeal record ( http://www.seattleschools.org/area/board/10-11agendas/111710... ) there were three required non-fiction books for the 10th grade list: BNW, Othello, and Lord of the Flies. Apparently all three make reference to native or indigenous people as "savages". And then apparently in one lecture they promoted an inaccurate view as to why we have reservations. It'…

Perhaps we should concentrate on why people are so offended when characters in a book say "nigger" or "savage".

Re: Brave New World banned from High School curriculum

#92

Post by rbanffy »

sukuriant wrote: post #46
anamax wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are lots of books that aren't on the reading list. Are they all "banned"?

No; however, they aren't on the reading list for potentially different reasons. This book (I have not read it) was on the reading list, but has now been stripped from the reading list because someone didn't like it and was vocal about this. A very contrived example of a similar vein would be: Cooking with a Microwave isn't on the reading list. 1984 isn't on the reading list because some bureaucrat didn't like how it…

> This book (I have not read it)

You really should. It's a very good one. But don't ask me for anti-depressants when you finish it.

Re: Brave New World banned from High School curriculum

#93

Post by jap »

moconnor wrote: post #82
eru wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess the philosopher Kant would have had some problems with his name in English. (In German Kant just sounds very similar to the name for edge Kante, and not female anatomy.) But I guess you get around that impasse by just pronouncing it wrong. (German pronunciation: [ɪˈmaːnu̯eːl ˈkant])

I've had philosophical discussions with Germans that ended abruptly because one party suddenly exclaimed 'Kant!'

Did you mean Khaaaaaant! ?

Re: Brave New World banned from High School curriculum

#94

Post by rsheridan6 »

grellas wrote: post #49

The Enlightenment was premised on the broad idea that people were rational and that, once education became widespread, reason would eventually stamp out superstition and other evils and would cause humanity to want to promote and defend liberty. This thinking broadly underlies the idea that we are continuing to progress as a species and will ultimately learn to solve the problems that historically have beset us. This…

There's already been a war on the word niggardly:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_about_the_word_%2...

Re: Brave New World banned from High School curriculum

#95

Post by rbanffy »

Nitramp wrote: post #81
electromagnetic wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Edit: Just realized a key difference, I'm used to the GCSE reading lists not the US-style 'Required' Reading list. I remember getting Terry Pratchett novels in my reading list. A defacto ban is "We're removing it from our reading list, removing it from our library... but we not discouraging our students from reading the book". Removing it from a reading list isn't a defacto ban, it's modernization. If the kids at a s…

> If the kids at a specific school don't seem to respond well to a text, PULL IT. That seems like a very weird understanding of education to me. The whole point of the exercise is getting children to read something they might otherwise miss. If students oppose a book's content - very good, you have a debate running, and you can clearly learn from that (e.g., Huxley's use of the term savages does not dehumanize them,…

> Huxley's use of the term savages does not dehumanize them, quite the contrary

I would go as far and explain those parents who are so afraid of it, that it's just a word that means something for the "civilized" characters of the book that's very different than it means to us or them.

And that "civilized" is also just a word.

Meaning is in the brain of the reader. A book is only dehydrated knowledge. You have to add a brain to it.

Re: Brave New World banned from High School curriculum

#96

Post by mfukar »

TomOfTTB wrote: post #41
NathanKP wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to me that in case such as this the ones who ban the book haven't really read it. Anyone who reads "Brave New World" and actually thinks about it will see its true message, and anyone who reads "Huck Finn" and actually thinks about it won't find its use of the word "nigger" objectionable. The problem is that it is easier to jump to a conclusion than it is to stop and think.

> The problem is that it is easier to jump to a conclusion than it is to stop and think. I think the problem is that our society gives in to stupid people if they scream loud enough. There always has been and always will be fools in the world. People who don't think, don't read and jump to anger as their first reaction. The difference here is the fool got her way because a school board full of people not wanting to c…

One could argue that it's the nature of democracy to equalize stupid people to smart people.

Of course, there's a subtle distinction between treating all people the same, and giving in to 'fools', that is left as an exercise to the prospective citizen.

Re: Brave New World banned from High School curriculum

#97

Post by rbanffy »

roel_v wrote: post #73
wazoox wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't find it dystopic because the Brave New World so frighteningly resembles ours. The people on the article actually behaves like the idiot mainstream inhabitants of the Brave New World. That you don't even find it dystopic is probably another sign that it's actually the parody of the world we're living it; superficial, commercial, filled with porn and vulgarity, reality TV and shitty music, individualistic and…

You're ascribing all sorts of moral judgments to this world but don't make a case for why any of these things are bad, if they manage to make people feel (truly) content and happy. What's wrong with reality TV, Lady Gaga and advertisements if that's what people like? Do you honestly thing people would be better off if they didn't have those things and only had a Chopin record to put on at night? Maybe I'm reading you…

http://wilderdom.com/images/IQ.gif

With one picture we can explain reality TV, crappy music, Chopin and Huxley.

Re: Brave New World banned from High School curriculum

#98

Post by rbanffy »

Tyrannosaurs wrote: post #78
rbanffy wrote: post #2

"the text lacks literary value" Oh boy... Why not ban Fahrenheit 451 and 1984 while we are at it. And let's burn all copies too. What kind of spineless school principal is this?

I wish we'd been able to unilaterally decree books as lacking literary value at my school and have them removed from the reading list. Screw you Thomas Hardy, you're off the curriculum, some 14 year old has decided you lack literary value because they find all those descriptions of countryside dull and don't want to read them. (Obviously in this instance that 14 year old would have been me and I'd have been right but…

Maybe we are missing the point when we think school is about making kids happy.

1984 made me miserable. But it also helped make me into the man I am now.

Re: Brave New World banned from High School curriculum

#99

Post by rbanffy »

arethuza wrote: post #80
enjo wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish I could get 1984 banned. Far too many believe that saying "it's just like 1984!" somehow makes it a valid argument against something. Really I just want a required class in formal logic for everyone.

You don't happen to work at Amazon?

Thanks for the laugh. This discussion makes me want to grab a box of Prozac and eat the pills like cereal...

Re: Brave New World banned from High School curriculum

#100

Post by rbanffy »

brandnewlow wrote: post #18
Evgeny wrote: post #5

Ironically, I'm reading the book now ... "You can't consume much if you sit still and read books."

I.e. You can't consume much while in the act of consuming?

It takes a couple days for me to "consume" US$5 of books. It takes me a couple seconds to spend the same amount of money during lunch.
Post reply on HN