To kill a mockingbird at SR

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Here is a “taste” and here is the problem with white people they refuse to educate themselves, they put the burden on others. DO.THE.WORK.YOURSELF

WORK ON YOURSELF.

"The problem with white people"????

Really?

What if I said "the problem with black people is....." Wouldn't I be immediately accused of being racist?

I am quite prepared to be educated, to learn, to "educate myself" if that's what you prefer.

But you can't make a generalized assertion, and when asked to explain, simply say "educate yourself, don't put the burden on others."

Seriously, that's not how it works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Here is a “taste” and here is the problem with white people they refuse to educate themselves, they put the burden on others. DO.THE.WORK.YOURSELF

WORK ON YOURSELF.

"The problem with white people"????

Really?

What if I said "the problem with black people is....." Wouldn't I be immediately accused of being racist?

I am quite prepared to be educated, to learn, to "educate myself" if that's what you prefer.

But you can't make a generalized assertion, and when asked to explain, simply say "educate yourself, don't put the burden on others."

Seriously, that's not how it works.

No it’s not racist. Just go educate yourself and come back and have an informed discussion.

Really you made it through the whole summer of BLM articles/protests/book recommendations and here you are asking to be “educated”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

No it’s not racist. Just go educate yourself and come back and have an informed discussion.

Really you made it through the whole summer of BLM articles/protests/book recommendations and here you are asking to be “educated”.

OK, I get it: you can't debate, you don't know shit, you learned a few BLM slogans off Twitter, and you're a racist.

Good luck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Google it, educate yourself. But the whole point of not teaching it is because it will most likely be taught the way you understand it, which is old and out of date.

No, that's not good enough. That is not an adequate answer in the context of a debate.

Explain your premise. Nobody knows what you mean by an "80s idea of the novel". You need to explain what you mean by using facts and examples.

There are many thoughtful posts in this thread that show a willingness to listen and learn.

Conversely, there are posts like yours which are insulting, generalized, and ignorant.

Telling someone to Google something is the usual response of those who either don't know or can't explain.

Here is a “taste” and here is the problem with white people they refuse to educate themselves, they put the burden on others. DO.THE.WORK.YOURSELF

WORK ON YOURSELF.

I'm the poster who was initially told to "educate" myself. I haven't responded until now, and I thank the other posters who tried to ask for an explanation to the "80s" comment. I see now we aren't going to get anywhere. I was sincerely interested in finding out why my interpretation was "old." I understand a newer interpretation may be that Atticus is the "white savior," but we discussed that back when I read it... in the 90s, not 80s... and dismissed it. Atticus learns in the novel. He grows. He doesn't save anybody. If anything, his experiences save him and he handles the Boo Radley narrative at the end better because of them.
I'm willing to learn. I'm not willing to be treated rudely. I also see *major* misinterpretations in these responses. Tom Robinson is not pushed to the side of the story, as little as a mockingbird. We don't shoot mockingbirds because they are innocent and do nothing to harm society. When Tom is shot, innocence was shot. It's a symbol... a major one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You know Atticus is not the moral, kind, etc person you describe.

Atticus is a racist... he says the KKK is a political organization, he says they don’t exist anymore in his town.

He’s not a good guy, he’s a bad guy who did a good thing.

Plus it’s a white savior role, which is a flaw in the whole narrative of the book. All classics are flawed. You didn’t learn why TKAM is flawed?

What is the major flaw? It’s a white savior book who dehumanizes and ignores all black characters. The story is about a black man falsely accused, but he is on the fringe of the story... portrayed as helpless, stupid and as useful as a mockingbird.

How is that a problem/flaw in the writing of the book?

Did you learn any of that in the 80’s?

Dp Ok but if Harper Lee as a white person wrote more of from the Black perspective you would say "what does a white lady know what she is talking about Black people's thoughts and feelings?" So she wrote it from the white perspective. If you want Tom Robinson's view a Black person needs to do it.
\
This is a classic damn if you do and damn if you don't, pp

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You know Atticus is not the moral, kind, etc person you describe.

Atticus is a racist... he says the KKK is a political organization, he says they don’t exist anymore in his town.

He’s not a good guy, he’s a bad guy who did a good thing.

Plus it’s a white savior role, which is a flaw in the whole narrative of the book. All classics are flawed. You didn’t learn why TKAM is flawed?

What is the major flaw? It’s a white savior book who dehumanizes and ignores all black characters. The story is about a black man falsely accused, but he is on the fringe of the story... portrayed as helpless, stupid and as useful as a mockingbird.

How is that a problem/flaw in the writing of the book?

Did you learn any of that in the 80’s?

What exactly do you think is the point of a literature class?

[Anonymous]

The whole point of the novel is that it is being written from a white perspective.

"You never really understand a person until you consider things from his point of view…until you climb into his skin and walk around in it."

In its folksy way, this could stand as a motto for literature as a whole. But it would appear that we are now being told that the color of our skin is precisely the barrier at which our powers of empathy become useless.

A sad day indeed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No it’s not racist. Just go educate yourself and come back and have an informed discussion.

Really you made it through the whole summer of BLM articles/protests/book recommendations and here you are asking to be “educated”.

OK, I get it: you can't debate, you don't know shit, you learned a few BLM slogans off Twitter, and you're a racist.

Good luck.

NP. I think part of the problem is that most people aren’t coming here for a “debate.” You seem to be itching to argue. If that’s what you want, start a thread in politics or off topic that explicitly asks for a debate. You’ll get better response from people who want to play in whatever game you’re trying to set up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No it’s not racist. Just go educate yourself and come back and have an informed discussion.

Really you made it through the whole summer of BLM articles/protests/book recommendations and here you are asking to be “educated”.

OK, I get it: you can't debate, you don't know shit, you learned a few BLM slogans off Twitter, and you're a racist.

Good luck.

NP. I think part of the problem is that most people aren’t coming here for a “debate.” You seem to be itching to argue. If that’s what you want, start a thread in politics or off topic that explicitly asks for a debate. You’ll get better response from people who want to play in whatever game you’re trying to set up.

Actually, if you read the entire thread with care, with you will see that plenty of people are coming here for a good faith debate about the merits or otherwise of a piece of American literature.

I don't apologize for taking exception to the comment "the problem with white people is...."

I'm sure you would be the first to jump on me if I wrote "the problem with black people is........[insert your favorite stereotype]"

Oh, and this isn't a game.

Let's talk about literature shall we?

[Anonymous]

This thread is exhausting.

When I read TKAM in 8th grade at SR, the book was less than 30 years old and highly culturally relevant to how we talked about race. It’s a good book, don’t get me wrong, but it’s not the most relevant or even important piece of literature written since 1960. It just isn’t. It’s a great read but our kids, in 2021 deserve better and there is plenty better out there that will tell diverse stories reflective of the world we live in.

Honestly, the whole US literature curriculum is distressingly close to what it was 30+ years ago. There have been improvements and the girls are certainly being taught to read and write critically but they should absolutely be introduced to more diverse voices.

[Anonymous]

There are some very thoughtful opinions on both sides of this argument about what tkam means. This is the exact reason it should be taught. There’s a lot there.

Otoh, I can see a teacher not wanting to teach tkam bc it’s too easy to say the wrong thing in class or even just imply that you have the wrong opinion on a racial issue. Some kids are just waiting for a teacher to slip up so they can bask in the woke glory of getting an adult in trouble. It’s not like SR admin will back the teacher up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Google it, educate yourself. But the whole point of not teaching it is because it will most likely be taught the way you understand it, which is old and out of date.

No, that's not good enough. That is not an adequate answer in the context of a debate.

Explain your premise. Nobody knows what you mean by an "80s idea of the novel". You need to explain what you mean by using facts and examples.

There are many thoughtful posts in this thread that show a willingness to listen and learn.

Conversely, there are posts like yours which are insulting, generalized, and ignorant.

Telling someone to Google something is the usual response of those who either don't know or can't explain.

Here is a “taste” and here is the problem with white people they refuse to educate themselves, they put the burden on others. DO.THE.WORK.YOURSELF

WORK ON YOURSELF.

I'm the poster who was initially told to "educate" myself. I haven't responded until now, and I thank the other posters who tried to ask for an explanation to the "80s" comment. I see now we aren't going to get anywhere. I was sincerely interested in finding out why my interpretation was "old." I understand a newer interpretation may be that Atticus is the "white savior," but we discussed that back when I read it... in the 90s, not 80s... and dismissed it. Atticus learns in the novel. He grows. He doesn't save anybody. If anything, his experiences save him and he handles the Boo Radley narrative at the end better because of them.
I'm willing to learn. I'm not willing to be treated rudely. I also see *major* misinterpretations in these responses. Tom Robinson is not pushed to the side of the story, as little as a mockingbird. We don't shoot mockingbirds because they are innocent and do nothing to harm society. When Tom is shot, innocence was shot. It's a symbol... a major one.

Google why white women turn every lesson about racism into them being the victim and act indignant like you are right now. Stop pretending you are a victim here. Being educated may feel uncomfortable but stop with this I’m am feeling attacked BS. You could start with White Fragility and “educate yourself”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know Atticus is not the moral, kind, etc person you describe.

Atticus is a racist... he says the KKK is a political organization, he says they don’t exist anymore in his town.

He’s not a good guy, he’s a bad guy who did a good thing.

Plus it’s a white savior role, which is a flaw in the whole narrative of the book. All classics are flawed. You didn’t learn why TKAM is flawed?

What is the major flaw? It’s a white savior book who dehumanizes and ignores all black characters. The story is about a black man falsely accused, but he is on the fringe of the story... portrayed as helpless, stupid and as useful as a mockingbird.

How is that a problem/flaw in the writing of the book?

Did you learn any of that in the 80’s?

What exactly do you think is the point of a literature class?

Wow, someone really has a wrong take on the mockingbird, IMHO. It's not about useless or helpless or stupid.

You don't kill mockingbirds because they are pure and innocent and beautiful. You shouldn't judge or harm anyone, white or black, when they are also mockingbirds. For me, TKAM takes a round shot at anyone who succumbs to prejudice or ignorance on any side. But the final death in the book is well-deserved, and the sheriff makes sure that no one pays a price for the destruction of evil by good.

You could do a lot worse in terms of messaging.

OK, now everyone pile on.

PS Having grown up in the South with relatives who could have been characters in TKAM, it was a very valuable way to bring Jim Crow racism to life for 21st century kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are some very thoughtful opinions on both sides of this argument about what tkam means. This is the exact reason it should be taught. There’s a lot there.

Otoh, I can see a teacher not wanting to teach tkam bc it’s too easy to say the wrong thing in class or even just imply that you have the wrong opinion on a racial issue. Some kids are just waiting for a teacher to slip up so they can bask in the woke glory of getting an adult in trouble. It’s not like SR admin will back the teacher up.

Me thinks this would not be a problem if there were more black teachers but if it was taught the right way a bunch of moms will March into the principal’s office crying fowl that white peoples/students are being attacked.

^^^ just look at poor little me “educate me” poster. She literally posted once a question. Then when answered came back all boo boo I won’t be treated this way.

They aren’t teaching TKAM not because black students can’t handle it, it’s because white parents can’t handle it taught the correct way... that Atticus is a racist snd part of the problem. That the writer is short sighted and racist too.

Could you imagine the Washington post article of all the poor Stone Ridge girl being traumatized by the truth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Google it, educate yourself. But the whole point of not teaching it is because it will most likely be taught the way you understand it, which is old and out of date.

No, that's not good enough. That is not an adequate answer in the context of a debate.

Explain your premise. Nobody knows what you mean by an "80s idea of the novel". You need to explain what you mean by using facts and examples.

There are many thoughtful posts in this thread that show a willingness to listen and learn.

Conversely, there are posts like yours which are insulting, generalized, and ignorant.

Telling someone to Google something is the usual response of those who either don't know or can't explain.

Here is a “taste” and here is the problem with white people they refuse to educate themselves, they put the burden on others. DO.THE.WORK.YOURSELF

WORK ON YOURSELF.

I'm the poster who was initially told to "educate" myself. I haven't responded until now, and I thank the other posters who tried to ask for an explanation to the "80s" comment. I see now we aren't going to get anywhere. I was sincerely interested in finding out why my interpretation was "old." I understand a newer interpretation may be that Atticus is the "white savior," but we discussed that back when I read it... in the 90s, not 80s... and dismissed it. Atticus learns in the novel. He grows. He doesn't save anybody. If anything, his experiences save him and he handles the Boo Radley narrative at the end better because of them.
I'm willing to learn. I'm not willing to be treated rudely. I also see *major* misinterpretations in these responses. Tom Robinson is not pushed to the side of the story, as little as a mockingbird. We don't shoot mockingbirds because they are innocent and do nothing to harm society. When Tom is shot, innocence was shot. It's a symbol... a major one.

Google why white women turn every lesson about racism into them being the victim and act indignant like you are right now. Stop pretending you are a victim here. Being educated may feel uncomfortable but stop with this I’m am feeling attacked BS. You could start with White Fragility and “educate yourself”

Nope. I reread everything I wrote and not once did I claim to be a victim or say I’m being attacked. It’s almost as if your response here is meant for someone else. I said I won’t be treated rudely. That’s it.