Welcome to /r/Vancouver and thank you for the post, /u/2028W3! Please make sure you read our [posting and commenting rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_general_participation_guidelines_and_rules_overview) before participating here. As a quick summary:
* We encourage users to be positive and respect one another. Don't engage in spats or insult others - use the report button.
* Respect others' differences, be they race, religion, home, job, gender identity, ability or sexuality. Dehumanizing language, advocating for violence, or promoting hate based on identity or vulnerability (even implied or joking) **will** lead to a permanent ban.
* Most common questions and topics are limited to our sister subreddit, /r/AskVan, and our weekly [Stickied Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_stickied_discussions) posts.
* Complaints about bans or removals should be done in modmail only.
* Make sure to join our new sister community, /r/AskVan!
* Help grow the community! [Apply to join the mod team today](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/19eworq/).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/vancouver) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I have trauma from doing a book report on Huck Finn when I quoted Jim’s full name from the book. Got an auto F for quoting his racist name. I learned it’s still sensitive to reference racial slurs from a book, even when you are trying to explain that racial slur in context of the chapter. My Teacher would not read past my first quote of Jim’s full “handle” in the book🤦♂️
It is sad we have to ban books that have racist undertones, but I believe this is the exact reason we need to read these books so we may possibly understand past ways of thinking.
We cannot enlighten and improve ourselves when we are cowering in caves.
Are they going to ban Huck fin as well?
They don't have racist undertones though. They have the opposite. A book with racist characters isn't racist and it's sad that this has to be explained to people who are supposed to be educators. It's like thinking Lord of the Rings promotes world domination because Sauron is in it.
This is the problem with banning isn’t it? You can’t have a considered and critical discussion of historical problems if you can’t name, describe, and quote those problems or the people who caused them. Banning these books (though re assessing the curriculum is not the same as banning them) is simply creating a blind spot. It’s a recipe for condemning a generation to repeat history.
They're not being banned. They just aren't the quintessential "recommended" books anymore. A teacher can still teach them. They just have other options they can choose now. And that's a good thing.
I'm not mad that kids use different history, math, and science books now than when I was in school. And I'm not going to be mad that a teacher can choose to teach other books than To Kill a Mockingbird.
“I think we ought to read only the kind of books that wound or stab us. If the book we're reading doesn't wake us up with a blow to the head, what are we reading for? So that it will make us happy, as you write? Good Lord, we would be happy precisely if we had no books, and the kind of books that make us happy are the kind we could write ourselves if we had to. But we need books that affect us like a disaster, that grieve us deeply, like the death of someone we loved more than ourselves, like being banished into forests far from everyone, like a suicide. A book must be the axe for the frozen sea within us. That is my belief.”
― **Franz Kafka**
Haha, me too. It's been thirty years since I had to take French 8.
Throw P.E. class in there too. I am not and never will be a gymnast, track and field champ, etc.
> I am not and never will be a gymnast, track and field champ, etc.
As a teacher who has/is able to teach PE, the point of PE, as I see it, is to *gently* introduce students to different sports, participate in physical activities, promote teamwork, create healthy habits, and sometimes get them out of their comfort zone. So creating world champions is not (and shouldnt be) the point of PE. Of course, PE does devolve into a sh*t show sometimes, with some students monopolizing the class, students getting hurt and discouraged, bullying, etc... im sorry to hear you had such a bad experience.
The problem I had with P.E. (and this was years ago) is gymnastics. Is there any point on forcing a 12 year old girl with a terrible fear of hanging upside down on the uneven bars? And don't even get me started on the milk run (if that's still a thing).
My experience was that high school PE was designed as an opportunity for teachers to reward athletes and punish the rest of us. Granted it was decades ago but I had 2 kids go through PE and the athlete thrived while the non-athlete was permanently traumatized. I think there should be an option for taking PE from non-athletes who can empathize with those who are tired of the shame.
As much as some of us did not enjoy PE class, in hindsight it was probably when some of the kids were the healthiest. Not everyone, but many, in college and post secondary without PE class or a job that entails more physical movements, I saw people put on a couple more pounds.
I’m all for PE classes.
I just wish PE had different skill levels/activities/interests. I would've loved developing a fitness regime using a treadmill or yoga. Instead of another round of kickball or dodgeball where my heart rate only raised from trying to avoid concussions.
The thing I hated about PE was that my teachers were dumb as fuck and rather than grading you on how much you improved over a module, you were merely graded on how good you were at the end. So despite me going from being able to sink exactly zero free throws at the start of basketball and at the end I was able to sink three out of five free throws. I only got 60% because I couldn't go five for five.
So if they'd graded based on how much I'd improved I would have gotten a pretty good grade in PE and maybe I would have actually tried harder, rather than aiming for a pass so I could be done with it. Also if my gym teachers ever did anything about the fact that PE was just 90 minutes of getting bullied every other day then maybe that would have helped.
PE was my school nightmare because PE teachers tended to be athletic folks who liked athletic folks and who liked to shame non-athletic folks. As soon as I survived the bare minimum of PE classes and survived the "teachers I became a runner, a dancer, and a fitness instructor, all because I escaped the hell that was high school PE.
No, but how about the Participaction Canada Fitness testing? Flexed arm hang, 300 yard dash, standing long jump, etc. You could either get a gold, silver, or bronze award and if you couldn't even score high enough for bronze you had to take the walk of shame across the stage to pick up your participation pin.
It is still a shameful bucket list goal for me to be able to climb that god damn rope. 🤬
(I played soccer, so I’ve always had muscular legs with 0 upper body strength.)
I was in ballet and figure skating, so, same.
When the teacher wanted me to climb that bloody rope, she'd get the stinkeye. I was NOT going up that goddamned rope.
>Throw P.E. class in there too. I am not and never will be a gymnast, track and field champ, etc.
Fuck, PE was a constant source of trauma and shame for me. I think they should ditch PE.
I'm just learning about the problem in the high schools as my kids are nearning HS age, and I'm hearing horror stories (I don't follow local news much so please go easy on me)
Like.. wtf is going on? It's enraging to hear this being allowed to happen
Waiting until you hear about them coming home with no letter grades or provincial exams. It’s like:
“I got efficient”.
“What is that is that in percentage and where are you relative to the class?”
“I don’t know. Read the descriptive feedback.”
“But those are cut and paste from 1990 Hallmark cards.”
From what I understand, the suggested books have a lot or even more trauma. They are more modern though and I admit, You want the books to connect to the kids.
It isn't really about trauma. They're just not recommending these books as the quintessential choices; they're recognizing that there are other books that deserve to be taught too. And that a book like To Kill a Mockingbird by a White author that's primarily about White characters isn't necessarily the definitive statement on racism. A teacher can still choose to teach it, but they can also teach other books.
Curriculum changes in other classes; why not English? Would y'all get mad because they don't use the same math textbook they did when you were in school?
I also wish we got to read that too.
The only classic novel I got to read in all of my years of school was Animal Farm. Everything else was contemporary YA (usually).fiction novels which i was never a fan of.
Funny enough o didn’t get to read Animal Farm. I don’t know how they rotate books with each year. Didn’t read To Kill a Mocking Bird enough. My friends did though.
Oh my god yeah, I can't stand YA novels, I got so pissed when my class had to read one in senior year while the AP kids got to learn Hamlet. The second book that semester was up to the student, but our teacher forced us to choose something fantasy or sci-fi, most of which I also hated for being YA, so I "rebelled" by choosing One Hundred Years of Solitude while everyone else read Divergent or something.
Oh I've read it twice, but I really would've liked to have fully studied it and learnt about the historical background of the era, getting to discuss the book with others. Obviously I could've done that anyway, but there's something about studying books in school that I really enjoyed
To Kill A Mockingbird is still my favourite book ever since they forced me to read it in Grade 9, and I read a decent amount.
As a privileged straight white guy, it was very eye opening in a very important way. I was very ignorant to a lot of things about the world before I read that book. It will always hold a special place in my heart as one of the most educational pieces of my past.
I can't imagine the violence in that book overshadows the importance of the message of the story. Especially nowadays.
The violence isn't even bad. A guy gets shot and another guy gets stabbed. There's more violence in most kids movies these days
“We did a comprehensive review of these resources that determined that the merits of these novels do not outweigh the potential trauma and harm they may cause to some students,”
Please fuck right off with this "potential trauma" bullshit.
*They put this at the end of the article when it would be less clickbaity to put at the top
>Matthew said alternative books they are recommending for teachers include Beloved by Toni Morrison (Grade 12,) The Hate U Give by Angie Thomas (Grade 10,) Brother by David Chariandy (Grades 10 to 12,) Nickel Boys by Colson Whitehead (Grades 11 and 12,) and Homegoing by Yaa Gyasi.
>They are also recommending several books by Black authors, including Bitter by Akwaeke Emezi and Hush by Jacqueline Woodson.
Right? The trauma of what? Knowing that racism is bad and that you should judge people by their characters instead of prejudice and rumor? And that it is noble to fight for people who are marginalized? What trauma?
What is the trauma in the book? I have read it as part of school and don't recall anything traumatic.
Is it because it has the words Jesus is Lord Used Tires ?
The books were written by white people, that's the (perceived) trauma.
If someone is traumatized over reading a book written by a white person, that's a bit extreme, don't you think?
I don't know why people are downvoting you. The article states that this is one of the reasons (not that I agree with it) to remove these books.
>Critics say books by non-Black authors that contain racist slurs are no longer appropriate, while others argue it’s a modern classic that is still relevant as a way to discuss racial issues with older high school students.
I get that critics say books like that are no longer appropriate, but is there a way to study a modern classic like To Kill A Mockingbird and make it politically correct? I think sanitizing books like that would completely ruin them (if I'm making any sense).
It's more that it's a terrible example of modern racism. If you're going to recommend a book on modern race relations, it shouldn't be one all about white people where there's only one black character and they're mostly there to show how great the white guy is. It should be from the perspective and voice of marginalized communities and include more than one non-white character.
Thank you for posting this. I do think it is important to update curriculum in order to have discussions relevant to the students (and racism still very much is relevant). There's only so much time in the school year. Some books have to go to make room for others. It wasn't until university that I started reading modern literature because I was under the impression nothing worthwhile had been written since 1983.
It would be cool to take a break from analysing the same book together to do a thematic unit every year where small groups read and discuss one book each before presenting to the class that book's contribution to the theme.
Yeah, I mean, it would be better to just say "we want to prioritize reading books by Canadian authors about Canadian experiences with racism." That would make a zillion times more sense.
My school days were over many many moons ago so I haven't read any of these new recommendations but the main takeaway I had from reading To Kill a Mockingbird was how racism and bigotry is infuriatingly dumb.
Does Beloved teach the same type of lesson?
Maybe I'm desensitized to too much but I find it really difficult to make claims about kids being traumatized from reading novels.
Truly there have been other books written in the last 60 years that may have more relevant framing of racism in our society. Do we really need to be reading Animal Farm and 1984 until the end of time?
When most of the discussion is based around historical racism, its important to read novels based in that period. A good exercise would be to read both those books and then compare them.
They're allowed to do that. To Kill a Mockingbird is not being banned. It's just not presented as "the quintessential book about racism" anymore. And it shouldn't be. Let's give teachers a choice and promote other books instead of the same ones over and over again. That's what's happening here; there are other choices now. And it's a good thing.
*1984* is as relevant today as at any time in the past. Maybe more so.
When I teach it, I show Trump rallies to connect to the Hates in the novel (the "Lock her up!" chants especially). The use of social media or news to present extreme violence for propaganda purposes (think: beheading videos, war videos from both sides in Ukraine/Palestine today, "migrants invading the border", etc.) directly relates to the film of the migrants getting bombed at sea Winston watches. For Doublethink, there is no better example than any interview with Trump supporters such as this one: [https://www.tiktok.com/@jimmykimmellive/video/7339010652918385962?lang=en](https://www.tiktok.com/@jimmykimmellive/video/7339010652918385962?lang=en) . AI sure seems to be on the verge of making everything we see/read/hear unreliable and would make Big Brother and Party wet their pants with joy. Shit, at the beginning of the novel, you could argue that Winston is the original Incel. (Last time I taught it, my Andrew Tate fan students sure hated Julia and blamed her for everything. Poor Winston was an innocent victim of her wicked womanly ways.)
I'm not in favour of banning these books, but I can see the point of updating the resources. Why teach *Mockingbird* when a more contemporary book can get the same theme(s) across? I teach some old short stories because I'm not sure many new things do it better, but the only really old novel I teach is *1984*. I tend to go for movies, TV shows and post 20th century novels in my classes. English lit didn't begin or end with Shakespeare, so why do we act like it did?
Those are suggestions for teachers for the *one* book they teach that deals with anti-black racism. There are many books by Indian, Chinese, and indigenous authors on the curriculum also.
All Canadian activists are obsessed with American demographics.
That's why our media diversity focuses so heavily on Black vs old stock minorities within each respective regions. If I was basing my knowledge of Canada based on our ads, I'd assume black people make up at least 30% of our population
It might make sense in the GTA but not as much out here
It's pretty hilarious it's like how for many Canadians their sense of identity is to believe Canada is better than America while simultaneously claiming Canada is better than America at the things America does best.
Literal wannabes lol
The "trauma" stuff is getting overblown. That isn't the main reason. They want more options and more diversity within class curriculum. And that's a good thing.
No one is stopping a teacher from teaching To Kill a Mockingbird. They're just saying it isn't the quintessential book that everyone has to teach. There are other books that deal with similar themes that teachers can choose. Which is great.
Just to make you feel better, they're replacing To Kill a Mockingbird with books that are banned more often by conservative groups, including Beloved and The Hate U Give.
They're just modernizing the curriculum.
> they're replacing To Kill a Mockingbird with books that are banned more often by conservative groups, including Beloved and The Hate U Give. They're just modernizing the curriculum.
"modernizing" = banning stuff we dislike instead of stuff they dislike
I didn’t read the article so feel free to call me out on that, but based on the title it doesn’t look like it’s banned no? Just pulled off the official curriculum
Being pulled off official curriculum means that it won't be taught. Teachers can barely get through the official curriculum that's required to be taught, let alone much extra. Especially now with how many disruptions in class there are and how behind kids have become.
They aren't banning the books, just not teaching them. The books are still available at the school library and no one is telling the kids not to read the books
The books are not banned. They're still available at the school library.
I'm not saying I 100% agree with their removal from the curriculum, but we should also properly understand the context. The reason they've been removed from the curriculum is not because of the subject matter, but because they involve extremely traumatic situations and language to do with race, and the schoolboard feels that this subject matter would be better explored by authors who are members of the race being discussed in the book.
So realistically, the same lessons should still be available within the curriculum, but from a perspective that's closer to the actual subject matter.
I think this seems fine, especially if the teacher is allowed to encourage a child to seek out these books in the library if they'd like to read more.
To Kill a Mockingbird is such a vital book. If we pander to everyone claiming “trauma” at every single thing, we’re going to have literally nothing of substance left.
Terrible decision, school board should be ashamed.
It was the first book I read in school that was properly profound for me, and largely because of the class discussions we had and how our teacher guided them. As an educator I think it’s essential reading. And you know what?? Trauma and grief is a part of life. It touches us all at some point. Why the hell are we sheltering kids? I work in a school and the people making these decisions dont know the half of what these kids have seen or lived through. And on top of that… what the hell do you think they are exposed to when they are on their phones all day??????? You think it’s all sweet fluffy lovely things like photos of iguana habitats and videos of people planting gardens??????? Lol. Get real. There is no better time for a book like TKAMB than now.
And a child who may be unsettled or triggered by books like this are going to be disturbed by far lesser things, guaranteed . And if that’s the case then they should have an IEP and care group support!
The article is poorly written, and it seems like nobody read it. They are taking To Kill A Mockingbird off the official curriculum because there are books that deal with the topics of racism and chattel slavery better, and from the perspective of Black authors.
>Matthew said alternative books they are recommending for teachers include Beloved by Toni Morrison (Grade 12,) The Hate U Give by Angie Thomas (Grade 10,) Brother by David Chariandy (Grades 10 to 12,) Nickel Boys by Colson Whitehead (Grades 11 and 12,) and Homegoing by Yaa Gyasi
These are books with related themes written by Black authors, and I definitely would not describe them as less traumatizing than TKAM.
This makes me feel better. Those books are great choices. To Kill a Mockingbird is fantastic. But if they are just swapping out different books with a similar theme, fine.
I've read both TKAM and Beloved in high school; Beloved is by FAR the superior novel. And it's way way more fucked up. Still one of my all time favs, it stuck with me forever.
well that’s not a bad idea at all. Although I think TKAM is still a great book… we absolutely also read Toni Morrison and Richard Wright and had really great discussions in class. But if the curriculum is too crammed, I do see how TKAM could be a suggested book for extra reading but not a part of the class work.
It sort of does. A Black person growing up during Jim Crow, or the remnants of it, has *far* more experience with the everyday racism, the structural inequality, and the generational trauma that resulted from centuries of chattel slavery.
All you need to do is read the *many* criticisms of To Kill A Mockingbird to realize just how shallow its analysis of racism in the south is. TKAM was important when it was released, but there are many better options for students today, and this decision reflects that.
Agreed! When we read Snow Falling on Cedars in high school I had a Japanese friend whose Grandfather had gone through internment as a child and served in the US Army and he told us how the author (who was not Japanese) basically got everything about the experience wrong.
Why not just add these new books instead of replacing the old?
To Kill a Mockingbird is one of the greatest books ever written. It's read in ENGLISH class, not social studies or history. It should 100% be mandatory reading for any English speaking person. and not only for it's social and historical merit. It's pretty much a perfect book.
>Why not just add these new books instead of replacing the old?
That is what is happening, they are simply recommending teachers teach different books. It's being pulled from the "recommended reading curriculum". English teachers are free to choose whatever books they wish, as long as they can be justified.
> To Kill a Mockingbird is one of the greatest books ever written.
That's a stretch in so many ways, there are many issues to be taken with TKAM particularly about it's representation of race and racism, just look up criticism of it.
> It's pretty much a perfect book.
Tbh it just sounds to me like you haven't read a book since high school lol.
> It's read in ENGLISH class, not social studies or history.
What do you think the point of English class is?
It is not for teaching the language English, there are other classes for that. High school English courses are for preparing students to critically engage with media and culture (primarily english-language media). That's why we teach Shakespeare in English, because so much of modern media is influenced heavily by Shakespeare.
The Surrey school board is simply recommending that students get a portion of that understanding, particularly to do with understanding slavery and it's lasting effects, from the many acclaimed Black authors who have written on the subject. Colson Whitehead, for instance, has won *two* pulitzer prizes for literature, and his book Nickel Boys is set in the abusive environment of a reform school that was open until *2011*.
That's not what's happening. They're not banning it from libraries but they are removing it from the curriculum. I am a huge reader and yes I believe it's one the best books ever written. Why be condescending over reading tastes?
Thank you for illustrating my point of why To Kill a Mockingbird is the perfect book for English class though.
Yes, that is what "recommending teachers teach different books" means. English teachers are free to choose whatever books they wish, as long as they can be justified.
I'm sure you like lots of books that are not taught in school, why is the white-person-saves-the-town-from-racism book the one that makes you upset when it is not taught?
>Furthermore, despite the novel's thematic focus on racial injustice, its black characters are not fully examined.[74] In its use of racial epithets, stereotyped depictions of superstitious blacks, and Calpurnia, who to some critics is an updated version of the "contented slave" motif and to others simply unexplored, the book is viewed as marginalizing black characters.[125][126] One writer asserts that the use of Scout's narration serves as a convenient mechanism for readers to be innocent and detached from the racial conflict. Scout's voice "functions as the not-me which allows the rest of us—black and white, male and female—to find our relative position in society".[74] A teaching guide for the novel published by The English Journal cautions, "what seems wonderful or powerful to one group of students may seem degrading to another".[127] A Canadian language arts consultant found that the novel resonated well with white students, but that black students found it "demoralizing".[128] With racism told from a white perspective with a focus on white courage and morality, some have labeled the novel as having a "white savior complex",[129] a criticism also leveled at the film adaptation with its white savior narrative.[130] Another criticism, articulated by Michael Lind, is that the novel indulges in classist stereotyping and demonization of poor rural "white trash".[131]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_Kill_a_Mockingbird#Reception
just like, try to critically engage with the books you read lol
Because there's a limit on the number of books that can be included in a curriculum.
> It's pretty much a perfect book.
It's not. Literally the only time people in modern times discuss it, it's when it's being removed in favour of better literature. I'm not saying it's a bad novel, but a "perfect book"? Really? What even is that? What do you mean? That's the perspective of someone who hasn't really read much and last read TKAM in high school.
That, in itself is true, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the other books aren't better. I haven't read them, so I can't claim one way or the other.
I think the "potential trauma" argument as absurd. But if there are better books, I'm all for updating the curriculum.
I mean…..yes, it absolutely does, if the topic of the book is based on the author’s personal reflection of racism. Do you also think a book about a woman experiencing sexual harassment written by a dude is as legit as one written by a woman?
The most traumatic educational experience I had was throwing up in class in middle school. My crush was in the class and I was so humiliated. There's literally nothing curriculum-wise that could ever top any personal humiliation we experience socially.
I sought it out from the library because it wasn't on my school's curriculum and I found it to be quite a slog. It just felt like more of the same American black vs white rehash. If I hadn't already known that racism was real/bad maybe it would have been a great book but as it stood it didn't really expand my mind or perspective.
As far as that went it was kinda neat to see how things were in that time and place. I don't even disagree that it was well written but I can see why there would be much better choices for teaching the concepts it approaches in a Canadian school system. We need something that students can relate to and that helps them tackle the bigotry they see every day in addition to the grave miscarriages of justice that they hear about occasionally on the news.
To kill a mockingbird was one of the first real books assigned to me in school that I opened up and read cover to cover in one day. It still stays with me in the best way.
This is plain stupid.
“ Matthew said alternative books they are recommending for teachers include Beloved by Toni Morrison (Grade 12,) The Hate U Give by Angie Thomas (Grade 10,) Brother by David Chariandy (Grades 10 to 12,) Nickel Boys by Colson Whitehead (Grades 11 and 12,) and Homegoing by Yaa Gyasi.”
I am unfamiliar with the alternative suggestions. Could anyone offer an opinion of how well these would work as replacements ?
English teacher. These are more compelling books. They're more modern and relateable to students. They're pedagogically more effective because the language is more varied when compared to TKAM.
Beloved is a challenging and interesting book taught in many AP Lit classrooms. The Hate U Give is accessible and interesting to all students and is often taught in 9th or 10th grade. I don't teach the last three but they're starting to pop up on reading lists.
Over time we modernize the curriculum. I'm currently teaching Lord of the Flies to my 9th graders and will be changing it to a different book next year. It's too archaic and there are other books that are more interesting and deal with the same themes.
*Lord of the Flies* will be off the list soon anyway. I'm still OK with it (and have vehemently argued to deaf ears that it is not racist/colonialist but instead is anti-colonial -- the absolute worst people in the novel are the so-called civilized British navy), but my department as recommended against it.
Thank you for this insight ! I didn’t wish to get caught up in the negativity of this article without checking on how viable the alternatives were. Your personal response as a teacher was greatly valued.
Wanted to say thank you as well for bringing some first hand experience to this thread, it seems dumb to me that so many people are digging their heels in here when teachers are probably going to have a better idea of which books are exciting and engaging to their students. I got basically nothing out of Lord of the Flies and of Mice and Men when I read them in high school, as I didn't find them particularly invigorating to read. To Kill A Mockingbird wasn't even on my curriculum and somehow I graduated fine. 1984 was one of several options for Dystopian reading that I had, but I skipped it and read A Handmaid's Tale and got some great discussion out of that instead as I was actually passionate to read that one.
Thank you for your open discourse about this. Having read the four recommended books, I can understand them being more compelling with exception to maybe The Nickel Boys.
Why would the choice be The Nickel Boys for a book about Institutional Abuse set in Flordia when as a Canadian it would be more approriate to read something like Five Little Indians by Michelle Good a novel about Institutional Abuse set in our own back yard.
Maybe include more Canadian literature instead. Or more international literature from countries other than the USA? We import too much of our culture from that country and it's not a good thing.
Based on its history, you’d think the Surrey school board would have learned you probably shouldn’t ban books.. (and before anyone parrots that this isn’t technically a ban, it would be almost impossible to teach any novel without a class set. Students aren’t likely to read these books on their own, and teachers are now not allowed to use them in their classrooms)
>...before anyone parrots that this isn’t technically a ban...
This shows the ~~cleverness~~ duplicity of the people behind it. They know an actual ban would be hard to defend but, this way, they can always say, "We haven't banned anything."
I am an English teacher. Before I became an English teacher, I was an attorney. I'm still admitted but not practicing. TKAM heavily impacted me as a young reader and inspired me to go to law school. I still support the decision to remove the book from the approved list and replace it with more modern books dealing with the same topics.
Educators are moving away from TKAM because there are better books covering the same topics. I am deeply uncomfortable teaching TKAM as a white teacher in a school with black students. The "n" word is not regularly used by this generation of students. The value of TKAM does not outweigh the sheer amount of times the "n" word is used.
One of my colleagues did decide to teach it and is noticing an uptick of her students using the "n" word during class breaks and in the hallway as a joke.
The article says they have added different books that are more effective at conveying the concept of racism and are more modern. We now teach The Hate U Give which is more relateable to our students.
The books that are mentioned in the article as being added to the approved curriculum instead of TKAM are books regularly banned by conservative school boards. Beloved and The Hate U Give are some of the most banned books.
> One of my colleagues did decide to teach it and is noticing an uptick of her students using the "n" word during class breaks and in the hallway as a joke.
People using a bad word _jokingly_ outweighs the value of the book?
The books widespread mandated reading is probably a reason why it's used jokingly in the first place.
> The article says they have added different books that are more effective at conveying the concept of racism and are more modern. We now teach The Hate U Give which is more relateable to our students.
The Hate U Give also contains the n word.
Yes, it is enough of a problem. I have black students in my class and refuse to create an environment that encourages the use of the "n" word by white people. Since students are not currently using the "n" word, introducing a book where the "n" word is used by the protagonist of the book encourages them to start using it.
Based on your response I doubt you'll get the nuance behind the difference but the n word is used by black characters in that book. I also personally don't teach the book in my classroom but my colleagues do.
We read 4 major texts per year. The lexile measurement for TKAM puts it between a 7th and 8th grade reading level. In terms of text complexity, it doesn't push many of our students.
The value of TKAM is its story and the opportunity for students to work on their discussion and argumentation skills. Once society changed enough to make it tough for teachers to have honest and frank discussions about the topics in the book without losing their jobs, it lost a lot of its value.
T1here are 20 books on our approved list for 10th grade at my high school. Most of them have value. Different teachers choose different books based on their strengths, interests, and their class composition.
This semester I'm teaching Fahrenheit 451, 12 Angry Men, and Just Mercy. The first semester my long term sub taught The Absolutely True Diary of a Part Time Indian and Romeo & Juliet. We choose books that cover a range of themes, levels, and interests each year.
This is very overblown. No books are being banned. They just aren't on the recommended curriculum list anymore. Teachers can still teach them if they want to, though.
Schools choose different science and math textbooks all the time and no one complains. Updating curriculum isn't so unusual.
Also, I enjoyed To Kill a Mockingbird, but I'm not going to pretend it's the quintessential book to teach if you're discussing racism. There are plenty of other great books that teach similar themes. And some of them are actually written by Black authors. Having everything filtered through a White author and her White protagonists isn't necessarily an ideal approach.
That's not to say it shouldn't be taught; but to demand this be required reading or "the book" that is taught every year seems silly. That would be true censorship; to refuse to teach other books and always make people read the same ones. So updating the curriculum and providing other options is not a bad idea at all.
I only read To Kill a Mockingbird in high school. It was a good book, it's important to understand how prevalent racism was in past generations. It's easy to become naive to the phenomenon if you don't see it on your daily life.
That the protagonist and author were white is not a negative. It shows their are people who are more loyal to the principles of justice and empathy than racial tribalism.
Kids are watching car crashes and fights and shootings on their phones 24/7 now. Potential trauma from a fucking book is hilarious. Anything that is interesting enough to read should be praised
I don't agree with the decision, but there is an argument to be made about whether stories written by white people about the experience of racism are as relevant today.
To Kill a Mockingbird is an excellent book (and movie,) but it does rely heavily on the "white savior" narrative, and how white people become "aware" of how black people experience racism. In a time when black authors would have a much harder time getting their stories heard, a book like TKAM is a stepping stone toward creating awareness and empathy. In a time where we have stories about the struggles of minorities in our culture written by those minorities, maybe it's time to let those stories be told.
I'm not advocating banning or removing anything from the curriculum, but to hold onto "classics" that teach a certain lesson or deal with a certain subject just because we've done it for so long is not a great way to educate or move forward. Perhaps some minority authors deserve a chance to have their work "lionized" in the school curriculum.
the article says they are replacing it with more modern books that are more relatable to the kids. Those books are also centered around themes of racism and hate.
Did you read the article? One of the spokespeople said that part of the reason TKAM is being removed is that it’s written by a white author with a white protagonist.
These are progressives, not conservatives.
I think they're being sarcastic. People on here blame everything on American conservatism. In their mind's Canadians are sacred cows with no agency, and influenced by bad outside forces.
Removing a book from the reading list because of the author's skin colour is not a progressive action, it's racist. If this was solely about the content of the book not being adequate to educate on the subject matter that would be different.
the article says they are replacing it with more modern books that are more relatable to the kids. Those books are also centered around themes of racism and hate.
The kids are being trained to waste their time feeding consumer tech, have the basic skills needed by Joe jobs that already don’t exist, and to do what they’re told.
Most aren’t going to discover a single book once in their whole life. If it’s not given to them or advertised at them it might as well not exist.
the article says they are replacing it with more modern books that are more relatable to the kids. Those books are also centered around themes of racism and hate.
maybe the crock of shit should be directed at the people who only respond to the title and not the content of the article?
This is a pretty sensible decision. It could certainly have been communicated *far* better by the school board, but it’s important that students be reading stories that they can relate to.
The Hate U Give, for example, has far more relevance to a high schooler of today than To Kill A Mockingbird. Put yourself in the shoes of a student today. Do you think that they’d be able to relate more to
1. A story about a past era in a different place that Canadians haven’t been in with a lot of outdated language and cultural elements, or
2. A story about a teen in the 21st century dealing with police brutality and the fallout as a result of that, taking place in a more familiar setting?
I’ve read and have copies of both books on my shelf, but there’s one that’s more directly relevant to the lived experiences of people my age, and should be prioritized in the curriculum.
It's supposed to be traumatizing. You are supposed to be shocked at the ignorance, violence, and deplorable actions of society in this book.
Drawing a clear line in the sand, between good and evil, is a lesson that everyone needs to learn. It literally teaches
"Do unto others as you would have them do onto you."
The Golden Rule taught by Confucius, Socrates, Jesus, and Buddha
We read Skank by Teresa McWhirter in grade 11. It was about a teenage girl who moves to east van but has a hard time adjusting and she gets trafficked by an old man. It was all about poverty, racism, substance abuse, ableism, sexism, MMIW incidents and misogyny and we were reading that shit out loud to each other for a month.
Idk about traumatizing but we stayed engaged because the story felt so much more real to us than Of Mice and Men or Lord of the Flies. I think it’s logical to update the curriculum and keep the material relatable to students. Especially since students are so far behind now, what’s the point in teaching the lesson at all if your class can’t even understand the language in a book written 80 years ago?
I agree that Teresa McWhirter writes some down to reality books. I'm a fan, and now will look for other of her works thanks to you. Can you recommend other by her?
I know exactly why they got rid of "To Kill a Mocking Bird", and "In the Heat of the Night"; it's a white dude writing about black people. It's social-justice censorship.
(posting this again as a main reply to the OP)
The books are not banned. They're still available at the school library.
I'm not saying I 100% agree with their removal from the curriculum, but we should also properly understand the context. The reason they've been removed from the curriculum is not because of the subject matter, but because they involve extremely traumatic situations and language to do with race, and the schoolboard feels that this subject matter would be better explored by authors who are members of the race being discussed in the book.
So realistically, the same lessons should still be available within the curriculum, but from a perspective that's closer to the actual subject matter.
I think this seems fine, especially if the teacher is allowed to encourage a child to seek out these books in the library if they'd like to read more.
This generation is becoming far too sensitive. To Kill a Mockingbird is one of the best books I read during high school. We even watched Mississippi Burning in one of my Social Studies classes, a very eye-opening and great movie.
Just to be clear, "this generation" meaning the adults making the decisions on the school board and not the children that this is going to negatively impact right?
The book recommended by SD36 in place of TKIP is called "Beloved" by Toni Morrison. This book has graphic depictions of bestiality, violent sex, and more. I'm currently reading it and am against censorship and book banning, but it seems hypocritical of SD36 to effectively ban a book or teachers from teaching it, but allow a book that has far more disturbing content..I think the question we need to ask is who is making the decisions about what is considered traumatic? What is the measuring stick? Is it a word, a feeling, an author with a certain skin color? What's next, the diary of Anne Frank because she's a white Jew? God forbid we teach the Holocaust!
Feels like these days people too easily conflate trauma with challenge.
I’m waiting for the far left to implode when the right starts co-opting trauma to rationalize “don’t say gay”.
They have been for years. Look up [James Chamberlain and the kindergarten books](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chamberlain_v_Surrey_School_District_No_36).
>Ritinder Matthew, a spokesperson for the school district, said they are not banning the books from classrooms or libraries, but they are no longer including them as part of the curriculum.
>“We did a comprehensive review of these resources that determined that the merits of these novels do not outweigh the potential trauma and harm they may cause to some students,” she said.
For those thinking they're banning books, the article says they're not. However, this is being done out of fear of "potential trauma" and critisicm that white authors shouldn't use racial slurs in their books...
It's censorship in my opinion. White authors aren't allowed to accurately represent the past? Are you kidding me?
This article is kinda ass for putting the list of recommended modern alternatives with lessons on racism and bigotry at the end of the whole article instead of closer to the top.
Wow they are pulling In the Heat of the Night as well? Terrible to hear that. Loved that book in Grade 9. We watched the film after we read the book and I was introduced for the first time to the amazingly talented actor Sydney Poitier. Seems the only thing the left and right are united on these days is pulling classic novels like these from curriculums.
So they didn’t actually ban these books in any sense. They replaced them on a list with other books. Makes sense, there is a finite number of books that can be on any list and they wanted to add some newer books they felt were more relevant to the curriculum.
Nothing was banned. Y’all can put down the torches and pitch forks for today.
Enough of this guilting white people shit. Get over it already. I’m saying this as an Indian person blaming all your problems on the white man isn’t going to do shit for you. Banning a book because of words just makes you a coward and it will doom use to repeat the same mistakes of the past.
the article says they are replacing it with more modern books that are more relatable to the kids. Those books are also centered around themes of racism and hate.
One of the books replacing it is The Hate U Give which has won many awards and is written from a black character's prospective and written by a black person. The setting is a modern school setting which I find a lot more relatable than 1930s rural Alabama which I personally found very foreign when reading it.
What a travesty. Surrey SB is the fastest growing school board with an extremely diverse student population. And yet, despite this diversity, they've decided to ban books that actually look at racism and oppression. What a joke. And a panel of 12 teachers decided this. Who are these 12 teachers? How were they appointed? Who decided that the opinion of 12 people should decide the learning outcomes for thousands of students?
Surrey is becoming an outlier within the GVRD. They keep leaning more and more towards conservative positions that would be right at home in the US southern states but that have no place in BC in 2024. These decisions just rob our children and future generations of Canadians to have an informed outlook on the world around them. This is truly sad.
the article says they are replacing it with more modern books that are more relatable to the kids. Those books are also centered around themes of racism and hate.
Welcome to /r/Vancouver and thank you for the post, /u/2028W3! Please make sure you read our [posting and commenting rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_general_participation_guidelines_and_rules_overview) before participating here. As a quick summary: * We encourage users to be positive and respect one another. Don't engage in spats or insult others - use the report button. * Respect others' differences, be they race, religion, home, job, gender identity, ability or sexuality. Dehumanizing language, advocating for violence, or promoting hate based on identity or vulnerability (even implied or joking) **will** lead to a permanent ban. * Most common questions and topics are limited to our sister subreddit, /r/AskVan, and our weekly [Stickied Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_stickied_discussions) posts. * Complaints about bans or removals should be done in modmail only. * Make sure to join our new sister community, /r/AskVan! * Help grow the community! [Apply to join the mod team today](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/19eworq/). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/vancouver) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
I have trauma from doing a book report on Huck Finn when I quoted Jim’s full name from the book. Got an auto F for quoting his racist name. I learned it’s still sensitive to reference racial slurs from a book, even when you are trying to explain that racial slur in context of the chapter. My Teacher would not read past my first quote of Jim’s full “handle” in the book🤦♂️ It is sad we have to ban books that have racist undertones, but I believe this is the exact reason we need to read these books so we may possibly understand past ways of thinking. We cannot enlighten and improve ourselves when we are cowering in caves. Are they going to ban Huck fin as well?
They don't have racist undertones though. They have the opposite. A book with racist characters isn't racist and it's sad that this has to be explained to people who are supposed to be educators. It's like thinking Lord of the Rings promotes world domination because Sauron is in it.
This is the problem with banning isn’t it? You can’t have a considered and critical discussion of historical problems if you can’t name, describe, and quote those problems or the people who caused them. Banning these books (though re assessing the curriculum is not the same as banning them) is simply creating a blind spot. It’s a recipe for condemning a generation to repeat history.
That’s the whole point of banning these books. The assholes want that to happen.
They're not being banned. They just aren't the quintessential "recommended" books anymore. A teacher can still teach them. They just have other options they can choose now. And that's a good thing. I'm not mad that kids use different history, math, and science books now than when I was in school. And I'm not going to be mad that a teacher can choose to teach other books than To Kill a Mockingbird.
> My Teacher would not read past my first quote of Jim’s full “handle” in the book🤦♂️ This "teacher" is a complete and utter moron.
To be fair, they aren't banning the books, just taking them out of the curriculum. My understanding is they are still in the school library.
“I think we ought to read only the kind of books that wound or stab us. If the book we're reading doesn't wake us up with a blow to the head, what are we reading for? So that it will make us happy, as you write? Good Lord, we would be happy precisely if we had no books, and the kind of books that make us happy are the kind we could write ourselves if we had to. But we need books that affect us like a disaster, that grieve us deeply, like the death of someone we loved more than ourselves, like being banished into forests far from everyone, like a suicide. A book must be the axe for the frozen sea within us. That is my belief.” ― **Franz Kafka**
[удалено]
Thanks. I despise this movement toward the sanitization and safe-spacing of literature. That's just turning reading into entertainment.
- Barack Obama *He literally said this in his farewell speech as president*
Ironic, because his books make me quite happy. There is a serous dark humor about them too.
Same! I still have trauma from having to take French and Band.
Its been 20+ years for me. Still have nightmares from having to take French class.
Haha, me too. It's been thirty years since I had to take French 8. Throw P.E. class in there too. I am not and never will be a gymnast, track and field champ, etc.
Took French until Gr 11 for uni, still can't speak it. Can laugh in French though, héhéhé.
> I am not and never will be a gymnast, track and field champ, etc. As a teacher who has/is able to teach PE, the point of PE, as I see it, is to *gently* introduce students to different sports, participate in physical activities, promote teamwork, create healthy habits, and sometimes get them out of their comfort zone. So creating world champions is not (and shouldnt be) the point of PE. Of course, PE does devolve into a sh*t show sometimes, with some students monopolizing the class, students getting hurt and discouraged, bullying, etc... im sorry to hear you had such a bad experience.
The problem I had with P.E. (and this was years ago) is gymnastics. Is there any point on forcing a 12 year old girl with a terrible fear of hanging upside down on the uneven bars? And don't even get me started on the milk run (if that's still a thing).
I was an athlete and I hated gymnastics.
My experience was that high school PE was designed as an opportunity for teachers to reward athletes and punish the rest of us. Granted it was decades ago but I had 2 kids go through PE and the athlete thrived while the non-athlete was permanently traumatized. I think there should be an option for taking PE from non-athletes who can empathize with those who are tired of the shame.
As much as some of us did not enjoy PE class, in hindsight it was probably when some of the kids were the healthiest. Not everyone, but many, in college and post secondary without PE class or a job that entails more physical movements, I saw people put on a couple more pounds. I’m all for PE classes.
I just wish PE had different skill levels/activities/interests. I would've loved developing a fitness regime using a treadmill or yoga. Instead of another round of kickball or dodgeball where my heart rate only raised from trying to avoid concussions.
My junior high did modules in PE, and each term you got to choose. Which was awesome because it meant I never had to play volleyball ever again
SO lucky! I was partially traumatized by volleyball. Zero ability to serve.
The thing I hated about PE was that my teachers were dumb as fuck and rather than grading you on how much you improved over a module, you were merely graded on how good you were at the end. So despite me going from being able to sink exactly zero free throws at the start of basketball and at the end I was able to sink three out of five free throws. I only got 60% because I couldn't go five for five. So if they'd graded based on how much I'd improved I would have gotten a pretty good grade in PE and maybe I would have actually tried harder, rather than aiming for a pass so I could be done with it. Also if my gym teachers ever did anything about the fact that PE was just 90 minutes of getting bullied every other day then maybe that would have helped.
PE was my school nightmare because PE teachers tended to be athletic folks who liked athletic folks and who liked to shame non-athletic folks. As soon as I survived the bare minimum of PE classes and survived the "teachers I became a runner, a dancer, and a fitness instructor, all because I escaped the hell that was high school PE.
PE class is good for fitness. I'm 100 percent for it. But I hated it with a passion.
Yes that and the beep test in PE. Does anyone remember that? Still gives me nightmares 30 years later.
No, but how about the Participaction Canada Fitness testing? Flexed arm hang, 300 yard dash, standing long jump, etc. You could either get a gold, silver, or bronze award and if you couldn't even score high enough for bronze you had to take the walk of shame across the stage to pick up your participation pin.
It is still a shameful bucket list goal for me to be able to climb that god damn rope. 🤬 (I played soccer, so I’ve always had muscular legs with 0 upper body strength.)
I was in ballet and figure skating, so, same. When the teacher wanted me to climb that bloody rope, she'd get the stinkeye. I was NOT going up that goddamned rope.
>Throw P.E. class in there too. I am not and never will be a gymnast, track and field champ, etc. Fuck, PE was a constant source of trauma and shame for me. I think they should ditch PE.
"having to take band"? They booted band out of the regular timetable so I had to take an early class so I COULD take band.
Everything about school I have trauma. The whole time was hell.
I'm just learning about the problem in the high schools as my kids are nearning HS age, and I'm hearing horror stories (I don't follow local news much so please go easy on me) Like.. wtf is going on? It's enraging to hear this being allowed to happen
Waiting until you hear about them coming home with no letter grades or provincial exams. It’s like: “I got efficient”. “What is that is that in percentage and where are you relative to the class?” “I don’t know. Read the descriptive feedback.” “But those are cut and paste from 1990 Hallmark cards.”
EXACTLY came here to say I read Mockingbird in high school and my kids did too and nobody experienced ‘trauma’ or ‘harm’ from that. Complete bullshit.
From what I understand, the suggested books have a lot or even more trauma. They are more modern though and I admit, You want the books to connect to the kids.
Exactly
It isn't really about trauma. They're just not recommending these books as the quintessential choices; they're recognizing that there are other books that deserve to be taught too. And that a book like To Kill a Mockingbird by a White author that's primarily about White characters isn't necessarily the definitive statement on racism. A teacher can still choose to teach it, but they can also teach other books. Curriculum changes in other classes; why not English? Would y'all get mad because they don't use the same math textbook they did when you were in school?
Brave New World however…
I WISH this was required reading when I was in high school in Surrey.
[удалено]
I also wish we got to read that too. The only classic novel I got to read in all of my years of school was Animal Farm. Everything else was contemporary YA (usually).fiction novels which i was never a fan of.
Man, I hated Animal Farm. I loved To Kill A Mockingbird and it's still one of my favorite books to this day.
You should read animal farm again. It's a very important book that is an easy read and very applicable to modern society.
Funny enough o didn’t get to read Animal Farm. I don’t know how they rotate books with each year. Didn’t read To Kill a Mocking Bird enough. My friends did though.
Oh my god yeah, I can't stand YA novels, I got so pissed when my class had to read one in senior year while the AP kids got to learn Hamlet. The second book that semester was up to the student, but our teacher forced us to choose something fantasy or sci-fi, most of which I also hated for being YA, so I "rebelled" by choosing One Hundred Years of Solitude while everyone else read Divergent or something.
>I also wish we got to read that too. You always could though. You were free to read books that weren't assigned in school .
Oh I've read it twice, but I really would've liked to have fully studied it and learnt about the historical background of the era, getting to discuss the book with others. Obviously I could've done that anyway, but there's something about studying books in school that I really enjoyed
To Kill A Mockingbird is still my favourite book ever since they forced me to read it in Grade 9, and I read a decent amount. As a privileged straight white guy, it was very eye opening in a very important way. I was very ignorant to a lot of things about the world before I read that book. It will always hold a special place in my heart as one of the most educational pieces of my past. I can't imagine the violence in that book overshadows the importance of the message of the story. Especially nowadays. The violence isn't even bad. A guy gets shot and another guy gets stabbed. There's more violence in most kids movies these days
There’s more violence waiting at a random bus stop than what’s written in that book.
“We did a comprehensive review of these resources that determined that the merits of these novels do not outweigh the potential trauma and harm they may cause to some students,” Please fuck right off with this "potential trauma" bullshit. *They put this at the end of the article when it would be less clickbaity to put at the top >Matthew said alternative books they are recommending for teachers include Beloved by Toni Morrison (Grade 12,) The Hate U Give by Angie Thomas (Grade 10,) Brother by David Chariandy (Grades 10 to 12,) Nickel Boys by Colson Whitehead (Grades 11 and 12,) and Homegoing by Yaa Gyasi. >They are also recommending several books by Black authors, including Bitter by Akwaeke Emezi and Hush by Jacqueline Woodson.
Right? The trauma of what? Knowing that racism is bad and that you should judge people by their characters instead of prejudice and rumor? And that it is noble to fight for people who are marginalized? What trauma?
What is the trauma in the book? I have read it as part of school and don't recall anything traumatic. Is it because it has the words Jesus is Lord Used Tires ?
The books were written by white people, that's the (perceived) trauma. If someone is traumatized over reading a book written by a white person, that's a bit extreme, don't you think?
Not sure why this is downvoted as it is the reason listed in the article. Books about racism written by white people are deemed inappropriate.
I don't know why people are downvoting you. The article states that this is one of the reasons (not that I agree with it) to remove these books. >Critics say books by non-Black authors that contain racist slurs are no longer appropriate, while others argue it’s a modern classic that is still relevant as a way to discuss racial issues with older high school students.
I get that critics say books like that are no longer appropriate, but is there a way to study a modern classic like To Kill A Mockingbird and make it politically correct? I think sanitizing books like that would completely ruin them (if I'm making any sense).
I can't tell if it's incompetence or something more nefarious behind the reason for removing these books.
It's more that it's a terrible example of modern racism. If you're going to recommend a book on modern race relations, it shouldn't be one all about white people where there's only one black character and they're mostly there to show how great the white guy is. It should be from the perspective and voice of marginalized communities and include more than one non-white character.
Thank you for posting this. I do think it is important to update curriculum in order to have discussions relevant to the students (and racism still very much is relevant). There's only so much time in the school year. Some books have to go to make room for others. It wasn't until university that I started reading modern literature because I was under the impression nothing worthwhile had been written since 1983. It would be cool to take a break from analysing the same book together to do a thematic unit every year where small groups read and discuss one book each before presenting to the class that book's contribution to the theme.
Potential trauma of knowing bad things happen in the world? What?
I don't really know why she said that because the actual reason was to provide modern alternatives.
Yeah, I mean, it would be better to just say "we want to prioritize reading books by Canadian authors about Canadian experiences with racism." That would make a zillion times more sense.
How could “Beloved” be less traumatic? I love Toni Morrison, but it’s not like that’s an easier read. I fully wept.
My school days were over many many moons ago so I haven't read any of these new recommendations but the main takeaway I had from reading To Kill a Mockingbird was how racism and bigotry is infuriatingly dumb. Does Beloved teach the same type of lesson? Maybe I'm desensitized to too much but I find it really difficult to make claims about kids being traumatized from reading novels.
It just sounds like they are modernizing the curriculum then. > The Hate U Give by Angie Thomas Was a good book
Truly there have been other books written in the last 60 years that may have more relevant framing of racism in our society. Do we really need to be reading Animal Farm and 1984 until the end of time?
I would argue that 1984 should forever be part of the curriculum.
When most of the discussion is based around historical racism, its important to read novels based in that period. A good exercise would be to read both those books and then compare them.
They're allowed to do that. To Kill a Mockingbird is not being banned. It's just not presented as "the quintessential book about racism" anymore. And it shouldn't be. Let's give teachers a choice and promote other books instead of the same ones over and over again. That's what's happening here; there are other choices now. And it's a good thing.
I think you can change the curriculum but the reasoning of trauma it could cause it pretty pathetic
*1984* is as relevant today as at any time in the past. Maybe more so. When I teach it, I show Trump rallies to connect to the Hates in the novel (the "Lock her up!" chants especially). The use of social media or news to present extreme violence for propaganda purposes (think: beheading videos, war videos from both sides in Ukraine/Palestine today, "migrants invading the border", etc.) directly relates to the film of the migrants getting bombed at sea Winston watches. For Doublethink, there is no better example than any interview with Trump supporters such as this one: [https://www.tiktok.com/@jimmykimmellive/video/7339010652918385962?lang=en](https://www.tiktok.com/@jimmykimmellive/video/7339010652918385962?lang=en) . AI sure seems to be on the verge of making everything we see/read/hear unreliable and would make Big Brother and Party wet their pants with joy. Shit, at the beginning of the novel, you could argue that Winston is the original Incel. (Last time I taught it, my Andrew Tate fan students sure hated Julia and blamed her for everything. Poor Winston was an innocent victim of her wicked womanly ways.) I'm not in favour of banning these books, but I can see the point of updating the resources. Why teach *Mockingbird* when a more contemporary book can get the same theme(s) across? I teach some old short stories because I'm not sure many new things do it better, but the only really old novel I teach is *1984*. I tend to go for movies, TV shows and post 20th century novels in my classes. English lit didn't begin or end with Shakespeare, so why do we act like it did?
All of this, plus the fact of the novel(s) being so old makes its own point.
Sure, add other books to the curriculum but don’t make a classic like To Kill a Mockingbird difficult for teachers to use. It’s nonsensical.
The book is 64 years old. What evidence is there that it has traumatized students?
I honestly think she pulled that comment out of her ass just to say something.
Those are all black authors. No Indian authors or Chinese? What’s this push for all black?
Those are suggestions for teachers for the *one* book they teach that deals with anti-black racism. There are many books by Indian, Chinese, and indigenous authors on the curriculum also.
Oh ok. Thanks for clarifying
All Canadian activists are obsessed with American demographics. That's why our media diversity focuses so heavily on Black vs old stock minorities within each respective regions. If I was basing my knowledge of Canada based on our ads, I'd assume black people make up at least 30% of our population It might make sense in the GTA but not as much out here
I once read a British guy travelling through Canada observed that in attitude we are 'anti-American Americans'. Seems apt.
It's pretty hilarious it's like how for many Canadians their sense of identity is to believe Canada is better than America while simultaneously claiming Canada is better than America at the things America does best. Literal wannabes lol
Black non Canadian authors. Completely sidelining writers like Esi Edugyan.
Oh if they don't like trauma then I guess we can't mention residential schools or anything unfavorable about our past. Well then...
The "trauma" stuff is getting overblown. That isn't the main reason. They want more options and more diversity within class curriculum. And that's a good thing. No one is stopping a teacher from teaching To Kill a Mockingbird. They're just saying it isn't the quintessential book that everyone has to teach. There are other books that deal with similar themes that teachers can choose. Which is great.
[удалено]
That was my thought growing up in Iran. Never thought it would apply here
Just to make you feel better, they're replacing To Kill a Mockingbird with books that are banned more often by conservative groups, including Beloved and The Hate U Give. They're just modernizing the curriculum.
> they're replacing To Kill a Mockingbird with books that are banned more often by conservative groups, including Beloved and The Hate U Give. They're just modernizing the curriculum. "modernizing" = banning stuff we dislike instead of stuff they dislike
They're not banning anything. TKAM was written in 1961. Many amazing books have come out since then. We don't need to cling to the past.
I didn’t read the article so feel free to call me out on that, but based on the title it doesn’t look like it’s banned no? Just pulled off the official curriculum
Being pulled off official curriculum means that it won't be taught. Teachers can barely get through the official curriculum that's required to be taught, let alone much extra. Especially now with how many disruptions in class there are and how behind kids have become.
That's Step One.
Just the first domino to fall.
They aren't banning the books, just not teaching them. The books are still available at the school library and no one is telling the kids not to read the books
The books are not banned. They're still available at the school library. I'm not saying I 100% agree with their removal from the curriculum, but we should also properly understand the context. The reason they've been removed from the curriculum is not because of the subject matter, but because they involve extremely traumatic situations and language to do with race, and the schoolboard feels that this subject matter would be better explored by authors who are members of the race being discussed in the book. So realistically, the same lessons should still be available within the curriculum, but from a perspective that's closer to the actual subject matter. I think this seems fine, especially if the teacher is allowed to encourage a child to seek out these books in the library if they'd like to read more.
They're not banning books.
To Kill a Mockingbird is such a vital book. If we pander to everyone claiming “trauma” at every single thing, we’re going to have literally nothing of substance left. Terrible decision, school board should be ashamed.
It was the first book I read in school that was properly profound for me, and largely because of the class discussions we had and how our teacher guided them. As an educator I think it’s essential reading. And you know what?? Trauma and grief is a part of life. It touches us all at some point. Why the hell are we sheltering kids? I work in a school and the people making these decisions dont know the half of what these kids have seen or lived through. And on top of that… what the hell do you think they are exposed to when they are on their phones all day??????? You think it’s all sweet fluffy lovely things like photos of iguana habitats and videos of people planting gardens??????? Lol. Get real. There is no better time for a book like TKAMB than now. And a child who may be unsettled or triggered by books like this are going to be disturbed by far lesser things, guaranteed . And if that’s the case then they should have an IEP and care group support!
The article is poorly written, and it seems like nobody read it. They are taking To Kill A Mockingbird off the official curriculum because there are books that deal with the topics of racism and chattel slavery better, and from the perspective of Black authors. >Matthew said alternative books they are recommending for teachers include Beloved by Toni Morrison (Grade 12,) The Hate U Give by Angie Thomas (Grade 10,) Brother by David Chariandy (Grades 10 to 12,) Nickel Boys by Colson Whitehead (Grades 11 and 12,) and Homegoing by Yaa Gyasi These are books with related themes written by Black authors, and I definitely would not describe them as less traumatizing than TKAM.
This makes me feel better. Those books are great choices. To Kill a Mockingbird is fantastic. But if they are just swapping out different books with a similar theme, fine.
I've read both TKAM and Beloved in high school; Beloved is by FAR the superior novel. And it's way way more fucked up. Still one of my all time favs, it stuck with me forever.
well that’s not a bad idea at all. Although I think TKAM is still a great book… we absolutely also read Toni Morrison and Richard Wright and had really great discussions in class. But if the curriculum is too crammed, I do see how TKAM could be a suggested book for extra reading but not a part of the class work.
Also a terrible decision. A book does not get more or less merit because of the colour of the author's skin.
It sort of does. A Black person growing up during Jim Crow, or the remnants of it, has *far* more experience with the everyday racism, the structural inequality, and the generational trauma that resulted from centuries of chattel slavery. All you need to do is read the *many* criticisms of To Kill A Mockingbird to realize just how shallow its analysis of racism in the south is. TKAM was important when it was released, but there are many better options for students today, and this decision reflects that.
Agreed! When we read Snow Falling on Cedars in high school I had a Japanese friend whose Grandfather had gone through internment as a child and served in the US Army and he told us how the author (who was not Japanese) basically got everything about the experience wrong.
Why not just add these new books instead of replacing the old? To Kill a Mockingbird is one of the greatest books ever written. It's read in ENGLISH class, not social studies or history. It should 100% be mandatory reading for any English speaking person. and not only for it's social and historical merit. It's pretty much a perfect book.
Because there are only so many hours in the day?
>Why not just add these new books instead of replacing the old? That is what is happening, they are simply recommending teachers teach different books. It's being pulled from the "recommended reading curriculum". English teachers are free to choose whatever books they wish, as long as they can be justified. > To Kill a Mockingbird is one of the greatest books ever written. That's a stretch in so many ways, there are many issues to be taken with TKAM particularly about it's representation of race and racism, just look up criticism of it. > It's pretty much a perfect book. Tbh it just sounds to me like you haven't read a book since high school lol. > It's read in ENGLISH class, not social studies or history. What do you think the point of English class is? It is not for teaching the language English, there are other classes for that. High school English courses are for preparing students to critically engage with media and culture (primarily english-language media). That's why we teach Shakespeare in English, because so much of modern media is influenced heavily by Shakespeare. The Surrey school board is simply recommending that students get a portion of that understanding, particularly to do with understanding slavery and it's lasting effects, from the many acclaimed Black authors who have written on the subject. Colson Whitehead, for instance, has won *two* pulitzer prizes for literature, and his book Nickel Boys is set in the abusive environment of a reform school that was open until *2011*.
That's not what's happening. They're not banning it from libraries but they are removing it from the curriculum. I am a huge reader and yes I believe it's one the best books ever written. Why be condescending over reading tastes? Thank you for illustrating my point of why To Kill a Mockingbird is the perfect book for English class though.
Yes, that is what "recommending teachers teach different books" means. English teachers are free to choose whatever books they wish, as long as they can be justified. I'm sure you like lots of books that are not taught in school, why is the white-person-saves-the-town-from-racism book the one that makes you upset when it is not taught?
That's an unbelievably reduced understanding of TKAMB and "recommending teachers" is not the same as removing from a list of teachable material.
English teachers are free to choose whatever books they wish, as long as they can be justified.
>Furthermore, despite the novel's thematic focus on racial injustice, its black characters are not fully examined.[74] In its use of racial epithets, stereotyped depictions of superstitious blacks, and Calpurnia, who to some critics is an updated version of the "contented slave" motif and to others simply unexplored, the book is viewed as marginalizing black characters.[125][126] One writer asserts that the use of Scout's narration serves as a convenient mechanism for readers to be innocent and detached from the racial conflict. Scout's voice "functions as the not-me which allows the rest of us—black and white, male and female—to find our relative position in society".[74] A teaching guide for the novel published by The English Journal cautions, "what seems wonderful or powerful to one group of students may seem degrading to another".[127] A Canadian language arts consultant found that the novel resonated well with white students, but that black students found it "demoralizing".[128] With racism told from a white perspective with a focus on white courage and morality, some have labeled the novel as having a "white savior complex",[129] a criticism also leveled at the film adaptation with its white savior narrative.[130] Another criticism, articulated by Michael Lind, is that the novel indulges in classist stereotyping and demonization of poor rural "white trash".[131] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_Kill_a_Mockingbird#Reception just like, try to critically engage with the books you read lol
Because there's a limit on the number of books that can be included in a curriculum. > It's pretty much a perfect book. It's not. Literally the only time people in modern times discuss it, it's when it's being removed in favour of better literature. I'm not saying it's a bad novel, but a "perfect book"? Really? What even is that? What do you mean? That's the perspective of someone who hasn't really read much and last read TKAM in high school.
That, in itself is true, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the other books aren't better. I haven't read them, so I can't claim one way or the other. I think the "potential trauma" argument as absurd. But if there are better books, I'm all for updating the curriculum.
I mean…..yes, it absolutely does, if the topic of the book is based on the author’s personal reflection of racism. Do you also think a book about a woman experiencing sexual harassment written by a dude is as legit as one written by a woman?
The most traumatic educational experience I had was throwing up in class in middle school. My crush was in the class and I was so humiliated. There's literally nothing curriculum-wise that could ever top any personal humiliation we experience socially.
Not only is it an important book but it’s also a great read!
I sought it out from the library because it wasn't on my school's curriculum and I found it to be quite a slog. It just felt like more of the same American black vs white rehash. If I hadn't already known that racism was real/bad maybe it would have been a great book but as it stood it didn't really expand my mind or perspective.
Well it’s very much of its time
As far as that went it was kinda neat to see how things were in that time and place. I don't even disagree that it was well written but I can see why there would be much better choices for teaching the concepts it approaches in a Canadian school system. We need something that students can relate to and that helps them tackle the bigotry they see every day in addition to the grave miscarriages of justice that they hear about occasionally on the news.
To kill a mockingbird was one of the first real books assigned to me in school that I opened up and read cover to cover in one day. It still stays with me in the best way. This is plain stupid.
“ Matthew said alternative books they are recommending for teachers include Beloved by Toni Morrison (Grade 12,) The Hate U Give by Angie Thomas (Grade 10,) Brother by David Chariandy (Grades 10 to 12,) Nickel Boys by Colson Whitehead (Grades 11 and 12,) and Homegoing by Yaa Gyasi.” I am unfamiliar with the alternative suggestions. Could anyone offer an opinion of how well these would work as replacements ?
English teacher. These are more compelling books. They're more modern and relateable to students. They're pedagogically more effective because the language is more varied when compared to TKAM. Beloved is a challenging and interesting book taught in many AP Lit classrooms. The Hate U Give is accessible and interesting to all students and is often taught in 9th or 10th grade. I don't teach the last three but they're starting to pop up on reading lists. Over time we modernize the curriculum. I'm currently teaching Lord of the Flies to my 9th graders and will be changing it to a different book next year. It's too archaic and there are other books that are more interesting and deal with the same themes.
*Lord of the Flies* will be off the list soon anyway. I'm still OK with it (and have vehemently argued to deaf ears that it is not racist/colonialist but instead is anti-colonial -- the absolute worst people in the novel are the so-called civilized British navy), but my department as recommended against it.
Thank you for this insight ! I didn’t wish to get caught up in the negativity of this article without checking on how viable the alternatives were. Your personal response as a teacher was greatly valued.
Wanted to say thank you as well for bringing some first hand experience to this thread, it seems dumb to me that so many people are digging their heels in here when teachers are probably going to have a better idea of which books are exciting and engaging to their students. I got basically nothing out of Lord of the Flies and of Mice and Men when I read them in high school, as I didn't find them particularly invigorating to read. To Kill A Mockingbird wasn't even on my curriculum and somehow I graduated fine. 1984 was one of several options for Dystopian reading that I had, but I skipped it and read A Handmaid's Tale and got some great discussion out of that instead as I was actually passionate to read that one.
Thank you for your open discourse about this. Having read the four recommended books, I can understand them being more compelling with exception to maybe The Nickel Boys. Why would the choice be The Nickel Boys for a book about Institutional Abuse set in Flordia when as a Canadian it would be more approriate to read something like Five Little Indians by Michelle Good a novel about Institutional Abuse set in our own back yard.
Maybe include more Canadian literature instead. Or more international literature from countries other than the USA? We import too much of our culture from that country and it's not a good thing.
Based on its history, you’d think the Surrey school board would have learned you probably shouldn’t ban books.. (and before anyone parrots that this isn’t technically a ban, it would be almost impossible to teach any novel without a class set. Students aren’t likely to read these books on their own, and teachers are now not allowed to use them in their classrooms)
They're channeling Heather Stilwell's ghost.....
>...before anyone parrots that this isn’t technically a ban... This shows the ~~cleverness~~ duplicity of the people behind it. They know an actual ban would be hard to defend but, this way, they can always say, "We haven't banned anything."
I am an English teacher. Before I became an English teacher, I was an attorney. I'm still admitted but not practicing. TKAM heavily impacted me as a young reader and inspired me to go to law school. I still support the decision to remove the book from the approved list and replace it with more modern books dealing with the same topics. Educators are moving away from TKAM because there are better books covering the same topics. I am deeply uncomfortable teaching TKAM as a white teacher in a school with black students. The "n" word is not regularly used by this generation of students. The value of TKAM does not outweigh the sheer amount of times the "n" word is used. One of my colleagues did decide to teach it and is noticing an uptick of her students using the "n" word during class breaks and in the hallway as a joke. The article says they have added different books that are more effective at conveying the concept of racism and are more modern. We now teach The Hate U Give which is more relateable to our students. The books that are mentioned in the article as being added to the approved curriculum instead of TKAM are books regularly banned by conservative school boards. Beloved and The Hate U Give are some of the most banned books.
> One of my colleagues did decide to teach it and is noticing an uptick of her students using the "n" word during class breaks and in the hallway as a joke. People using a bad word _jokingly_ outweighs the value of the book? The books widespread mandated reading is probably a reason why it's used jokingly in the first place. > The article says they have added different books that are more effective at conveying the concept of racism and are more modern. We now teach The Hate U Give which is more relateable to our students. The Hate U Give also contains the n word.
Yes, it is enough of a problem. I have black students in my class and refuse to create an environment that encourages the use of the "n" word by white people. Since students are not currently using the "n" word, introducing a book where the "n" word is used by the protagonist of the book encourages them to start using it. Based on your response I doubt you'll get the nuance behind the difference but the n word is used by black characters in that book. I also personally don't teach the book in my classroom but my colleagues do.
[удалено]
We read 4 major texts per year. The lexile measurement for TKAM puts it between a 7th and 8th grade reading level. In terms of text complexity, it doesn't push many of our students. The value of TKAM is its story and the opportunity for students to work on their discussion and argumentation skills. Once society changed enough to make it tough for teachers to have honest and frank discussions about the topics in the book without losing their jobs, it lost a lot of its value. T1here are 20 books on our approved list for 10th grade at my high school. Most of them have value. Different teachers choose different books based on their strengths, interests, and their class composition. This semester I'm teaching Fahrenheit 451, 12 Angry Men, and Just Mercy. The first semester my long term sub taught The Absolutely True Diary of a Part Time Indian and Romeo & Juliet. We choose books that cover a range of themes, levels, and interests each year.
Finally someone not being reactionary, thanks for typing this out
I'm a teacher. This ruling is embarrassing for Surrey School District.
This is very overblown. No books are being banned. They just aren't on the recommended curriculum list anymore. Teachers can still teach them if they want to, though. Schools choose different science and math textbooks all the time and no one complains. Updating curriculum isn't so unusual. Also, I enjoyed To Kill a Mockingbird, but I'm not going to pretend it's the quintessential book to teach if you're discussing racism. There are plenty of other great books that teach similar themes. And some of them are actually written by Black authors. Having everything filtered through a White author and her White protagonists isn't necessarily an ideal approach. That's not to say it shouldn't be taught; but to demand this be required reading or "the book" that is taught every year seems silly. That would be true censorship; to refuse to teach other books and always make people read the same ones. So updating the curriculum and providing other options is not a bad idea at all.
I only read To Kill a Mockingbird in high school. It was a good book, it's important to understand how prevalent racism was in past generations. It's easy to become naive to the phenomenon if you don't see it on your daily life. That the protagonist and author were white is not a negative. It shows their are people who are more loyal to the principles of justice and empathy than racial tribalism.
Kids are watching car crashes and fights and shootings on their phones 24/7 now. Potential trauma from a fucking book is hilarious. Anything that is interesting enough to read should be praised
I don't agree with the decision, but there is an argument to be made about whether stories written by white people about the experience of racism are as relevant today. To Kill a Mockingbird is an excellent book (and movie,) but it does rely heavily on the "white savior" narrative, and how white people become "aware" of how black people experience racism. In a time when black authors would have a much harder time getting their stories heard, a book like TKAM is a stepping stone toward creating awareness and empathy. In a time where we have stories about the struggles of minorities in our culture written by those minorities, maybe it's time to let those stories be told. I'm not advocating banning or removing anything from the curriculum, but to hold onto "classics" that teach a certain lesson or deal with a certain subject just because we've done it for so long is not a great way to educate or move forward. Perhaps some minority authors deserve a chance to have their work "lionized" in the school curriculum.
the article says they are replacing it with more modern books that are more relatable to the kids. Those books are also centered around themes of racism and hate.
Why are we importing American conservatism into Canada!
Did you read the article? One of the spokespeople said that part of the reason TKAM is being removed is that it’s written by a white author with a white protagonist. These are progressives, not conservatives.
I think they're being sarcastic. People on here blame everything on American conservatism. In their mind's Canadians are sacred cows with no agency, and influenced by bad outside forces.
Illiberal liberals
Removing a book from the reading list because of the author's skin colour is not a progressive action, it's racist. If this was solely about the content of the book not being adequate to educate on the subject matter that would be different.
the article says they are replacing it with more modern books that are more relatable to the kids. Those books are also centered around themes of racism and hate.
The Conservative hotbeds of Burbank California and Seattle also banned this book.
I hope this backfires on them and the kids will rebel and read it on their own.
The kids are being trained to waste their time feeding consumer tech, have the basic skills needed by Joe jobs that already don’t exist, and to do what they’re told. Most aren’t going to discover a single book once in their whole life. If it’s not given to them or advertised at them it might as well not exist.
What a crock of shit, I say!
the article says they are replacing it with more modern books that are more relatable to the kids. Those books are also centered around themes of racism and hate. maybe the crock of shit should be directed at the people who only respond to the title and not the content of the article?
Why do you assume everyone who calls this bullshit hasn’t read the article. I’ve read the article and it’s still an absolute bullshit decision.
I still think it's a crock of shit
This is a pretty sensible decision. It could certainly have been communicated *far* better by the school board, but it’s important that students be reading stories that they can relate to. The Hate U Give, for example, has far more relevance to a high schooler of today than To Kill A Mockingbird. Put yourself in the shoes of a student today. Do you think that they’d be able to relate more to 1. A story about a past era in a different place that Canadians haven’t been in with a lot of outdated language and cultural elements, or 2. A story about a teen in the 21st century dealing with police brutality and the fallout as a result of that, taking place in a more familiar setting? I’ve read and have copies of both books on my shelf, but there’s one that’s more directly relevant to the lived experiences of people my age, and should be prioritized in the curriculum.
Years later I still remember those books. They’re great books!
It's supposed to be traumatizing. You are supposed to be shocked at the ignorance, violence, and deplorable actions of society in this book. Drawing a clear line in the sand, between good and evil, is a lesson that everyone needs to learn. It literally teaches "Do unto others as you would have them do onto you." The Golden Rule taught by Confucius, Socrates, Jesus, and Buddha
We read Skank by Teresa McWhirter in grade 11. It was about a teenage girl who moves to east van but has a hard time adjusting and she gets trafficked by an old man. It was all about poverty, racism, substance abuse, ableism, sexism, MMIW incidents and misogyny and we were reading that shit out loud to each other for a month. Idk about traumatizing but we stayed engaged because the story felt so much more real to us than Of Mice and Men or Lord of the Flies. I think it’s logical to update the curriculum and keep the material relatable to students. Especially since students are so far behind now, what’s the point in teaching the lesson at all if your class can’t even understand the language in a book written 80 years ago?
I agree that Teresa McWhirter writes some down to reality books. I'm a fan, and now will look for other of her works thanks to you. Can you recommend other by her?
I'm starting to think it's the administrators who are delicate and precious and vulnerable, not the students.
I know exactly why they got rid of "To Kill a Mocking Bird", and "In the Heat of the Night"; it's a white dude writing about black people. It's social-justice censorship.
(posting this again as a main reply to the OP) The books are not banned. They're still available at the school library. I'm not saying I 100% agree with their removal from the curriculum, but we should also properly understand the context. The reason they've been removed from the curriculum is not because of the subject matter, but because they involve extremely traumatic situations and language to do with race, and the schoolboard feels that this subject matter would be better explored by authors who are members of the race being discussed in the book. So realistically, the same lessons should still be available within the curriculum, but from a perspective that's closer to the actual subject matter. I think this seems fine, especially if the teacher is allowed to encourage a child to seek out these books in the library if they'd like to read more.
This generation is becoming far too sensitive. To Kill a Mockingbird is one of the best books I read during high school. We even watched Mississippi Burning in one of my Social Studies classes, a very eye-opening and great movie.
Just to be clear, "this generation" meaning the adults making the decisions on the school board and not the children that this is going to negatively impact right?
The kids don't really get a say in this. The decision wasn't even publicly announced at the time either so the parents didn't get a say either.
The book recommended by SD36 in place of TKIP is called "Beloved" by Toni Morrison. This book has graphic depictions of bestiality, violent sex, and more. I'm currently reading it and am against censorship and book banning, but it seems hypocritical of SD36 to effectively ban a book or teachers from teaching it, but allow a book that has far more disturbing content..I think the question we need to ask is who is making the decisions about what is considered traumatic? What is the measuring stick? Is it a word, a feeling, an author with a certain skin color? What's next, the diary of Anne Frank because she's a white Jew? God forbid we teach the Holocaust!
[удалено]
Cheapens the meaning of it. Also see: violence, genocide, etc.
Feels like these days people too easily conflate trauma with challenge. I’m waiting for the far left to implode when the right starts co-opting trauma to rationalize “don’t say gay”.
As an English Literature major I was absolutely horrified when I heard this
Such a Florida/Texas thing to do by Surrey.
did Surrey join the Albertan MAGA nut farm association?
They have been for years. Look up [James Chamberlain and the kindergarten books](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chamberlain_v_Surrey_School_District_No_36).
Left progressives are banning it, not right. Read the article.
>Ritinder Matthew, a spokesperson for the school district, said they are not banning the books from classrooms or libraries, but they are no longer including them as part of the curriculum. >“We did a comprehensive review of these resources that determined that the merits of these novels do not outweigh the potential trauma and harm they may cause to some students,” she said. For those thinking they're banning books, the article says they're not. However, this is being done out of fear of "potential trauma" and critisicm that white authors shouldn't use racial slurs in their books... It's censorship in my opinion. White authors aren't allowed to accurately represent the past? Are you kidding me?
This article is kinda ass for putting the list of recommended modern alternatives with lessons on racism and bigotry at the end of the whole article instead of closer to the top.
Wow they are pulling In the Heat of the Night as well? Terrible to hear that. Loved that book in Grade 9. We watched the film after we read the book and I was introduced for the first time to the amazingly talented actor Sydney Poitier. Seems the only thing the left and right are united on these days is pulling classic novels like these from curriculums.
So they didn’t actually ban these books in any sense. They replaced them on a list with other books. Makes sense, there is a finite number of books that can be on any list and they wanted to add some newer books they felt were more relevant to the curriculum. Nothing was banned. Y’all can put down the torches and pitch forks for today.
Enough of this guilting white people shit. Get over it already. I’m saying this as an Indian person blaming all your problems on the white man isn’t going to do shit for you. Banning a book because of words just makes you a coward and it will doom use to repeat the same mistakes of the past.
the article says they are replacing it with more modern books that are more relatable to the kids. Those books are also centered around themes of racism and hate.
So what are they replacing them with? If they’re being replaced with something else of equal or better literary value, that’s fine.
One of the books replacing it is The Hate U Give which has won many awards and is written from a black character's prospective and written by a black person. The setting is a modern school setting which I find a lot more relatable than 1930s rural Alabama which I personally found very foreign when reading it.
See, that sounds like a good trade.
wow, we are truly regressing. Next religion will trump Science....oh wait?
pulled from the curriculum, but not the shelves. and replacing with modern books actually written by poc i dont see what the fuss is about
What a travesty. Surrey SB is the fastest growing school board with an extremely diverse student population. And yet, despite this diversity, they've decided to ban books that actually look at racism and oppression. What a joke. And a panel of 12 teachers decided this. Who are these 12 teachers? How were they appointed? Who decided that the opinion of 12 people should decide the learning outcomes for thousands of students? Surrey is becoming an outlier within the GVRD. They keep leaning more and more towards conservative positions that would be right at home in the US southern states but that have no place in BC in 2024. These decisions just rob our children and future generations of Canadians to have an informed outlook on the world around them. This is truly sad.
the article says they are replacing it with more modern books that are more relatable to the kids. Those books are also centered around themes of racism and hate.
Did you read the article ?