Spring Break
Define "harmful material"
Our View
Daily Vidette Editorial Board
Issue date: 10/24/07 Section: Viewpoint
The cliché tale of a teacher losing his job over a banned book has appeared yet again in Tuscola, TX.
Third year English teacher, Kaleb Tierce, has been put on paid leave when a student's parents reported to police that Tierce's 9th grade reading list contained the Pulitzer Prize winning novel by Cormac McCarthy, "Child of God," according to the Associated Press.
Tierce is currently being investigated for "distributing harmful material to a minor." Said minor had chosen the novel from Tierce's reading list. The book is considered "harmful material" because it tells the story of a town outsider who is falsely accused of rape and, subsequently, begins to kill people. Additionally, there are details in the novel in which the main character has sex with his victims' bodies.
While the subject-matter of McCarthy's novel seems somewhat violent and grotesque, who can say that it is harmful? Although the members of today's opinions council have not read this particular piece by McCarthy, we all had to wonder what could a Pulitzer Prize winning book possibly contain that might get a teacher charged with a misdemeanor and pay possible fines of up to $4,000, or spend up to one year in prison? Yes, this book is probably very violent. However, with films like Saw IV being released and video games like Grand Theft Auto becoming household names, how can a parent start pointing fingers at a novel that is meant to provoke thought?
It is understandable that parents would like nothing more than to protect their children, but they must also think of what they are depriving them of when prohibiting the reading of novels that might be violent or sexually explicit. Additionally, if McCarthy's novel is overwhelmingly violent or grotesque, perhaps there is a reason for it. Usually novels that merit Pulitzer Prizes have some kind of substance beyond the type of senseless violence that adolescents are ironically exposed to when they play games like Grand Theft Auto. Pulitzers aren't given out like free cheeseburgers for the McDonald's monopoly game.
If the student chooses the novel from Tierce's reading list, he or she should be commended for wanting to read something so renowned. Parents who hope Tierce is charged with distributing harmful material should ponder the question: Have any of you actually read "Child of God"? How can a parent make complaints and allegations if they have not read the "harmful material" themselves? How do they actually know it is harmful if they do not read it? If they did in fact read the McCarthy novel and still found it unsuitable for their 9th grade student, what do they propose to do to fully ensure their child will not read it? Are they going to march to every library and bookstore within 50 miles and demand the book be taken off the shelves? Either way, just like most of the students at Jim Ned High School, we hope Kaleb Tierce is allowed back to teach.
Third year English teacher, Kaleb Tierce, has been put on paid leave when a student's parents reported to police that Tierce's 9th grade reading list contained the Pulitzer Prize winning novel by Cormac McCarthy, "Child of God," according to the Associated Press.
Tierce is currently being investigated for "distributing harmful material to a minor." Said minor had chosen the novel from Tierce's reading list. The book is considered "harmful material" because it tells the story of a town outsider who is falsely accused of rape and, subsequently, begins to kill people. Additionally, there are details in the novel in which the main character has sex with his victims' bodies.
While the subject-matter of McCarthy's novel seems somewhat violent and grotesque, who can say that it is harmful? Although the members of today's opinions council have not read this particular piece by McCarthy, we all had to wonder what could a Pulitzer Prize winning book possibly contain that might get a teacher charged with a misdemeanor and pay possible fines of up to $4,000, or spend up to one year in prison? Yes, this book is probably very violent. However, with films like Saw IV being released and video games like Grand Theft Auto becoming household names, how can a parent start pointing fingers at a novel that is meant to provoke thought?
It is understandable that parents would like nothing more than to protect their children, but they must also think of what they are depriving them of when prohibiting the reading of novels that might be violent or sexually explicit. Additionally, if McCarthy's novel is overwhelmingly violent or grotesque, perhaps there is a reason for it. Usually novels that merit Pulitzer Prizes have some kind of substance beyond the type of senseless violence that adolescents are ironically exposed to when they play games like Grand Theft Auto. Pulitzers aren't given out like free cheeseburgers for the McDonald's monopoly game.
If the student chooses the novel from Tierce's reading list, he or she should be commended for wanting to read something so renowned. Parents who hope Tierce is charged with distributing harmful material should ponder the question: Have any of you actually read "Child of God"? How can a parent make complaints and allegations if they have not read the "harmful material" themselves? How do they actually know it is harmful if they do not read it? If they did in fact read the McCarthy novel and still found it unsuitable for their 9th grade student, what do they propose to do to fully ensure their child will not read it? Are they going to march to every library and bookstore within 50 miles and demand the book be taken off the shelves? Either way, just like most of the students at Jim Ned High School, we hope Kaleb Tierce is allowed back to teach.
Be the first to comment on this story