To kill a mockingbird at SR

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually, he’s not saved.

I think you miss the point of the pp. It's the male white savior narrative. He clearly didn't have a female, black, Hispanic, and or Asian lawyer.

I understand that, but I find it interesting that the fact that Atticus Finch is an ineffectual, would-be white savior whose client dies horrifically is often overlooked.

Pp He didnt fail because he was ineffectual. He failed because those were the times. The fact that they almost freed him was considered progress in changing the racist minds of the jury!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Students of color learn nothing from being forced to read this white savior narrative. Worse yet they are forced to listen to the n word over and over. Just because it meant something to you once upon a time as a white person does not mean that it is a good choice for students today. This is well documented. I am white FWIW. Stone Ridge is moving in the right direction. Well done.

+1 Holton also.

+1 Norwood also.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like to provide some food for thought on the matter for those who have a problem with this. Imagine being a black student and constantly reading these "classics" which shows a history of time, in which blacks were treated sub-human and the author makes no apology, but writes it from a perspective of it is what it is. Page by page, you have to read words that cut deep to your race. However, rather than an awakening of morale taking place, you have an educated white lawyer that takes on a case because of his daughter. The poor uneducated black is once again saved by the educated white man, who takes pitty on him. But wait, this is a classic, to hell with others, it's written well.

np But in the book the white man is unable to save the Black man. Maybe you didn't read it either?

First of all, what adult over 40 hasn't read this book. The savior narrative doesn't require actual saving, its a figurative analogy.

[Anonymous]

So here is a question for all of the parents who feel this is censorship of history. What books are read in schools that make white students uncomfortable? Not one, but provide many as what minorities are required to read. As someone pointed out earlier, maybe all students need to read the "Murder of Emmett Till" and talk to us afterward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So here is a question for all of the parents who feel this is censorship of history. What books are read in schools that make white students uncomfortable? Not one, but provide many as what minorities are required to read. As someone pointed out earlier, maybe all students need to read the "Murder of Emmett Till" and talk to us afterward.

Anyone in independent school who is reading from a school supplied summer reading list is uncomfortable. That's ok. Kids can be uncomfortable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:+1. Our school dumped Macbeth for The Bluest Eye. Just silly.

The Bluest Eye is an amazing work. I read it in the 90’s in a public high school in Texas. There is so much to be gained from books like that being the curriculum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So here is a question for all of the parents who feel this is censorship of history. What books are read in schools that make white students uncomfortable? Not one, but provide many as what minorities are required to read. As someone pointed out earlier, maybe all students need to read the "Murder of Emmett Till" and talk to us afterward.

Anyone in independent school who is reading from a school supplied summer reading list is uncomfortable. That's ok. Kids can be uncomfortable.

Apparently not. Discomfort must be avoided at all costs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So here is a question for all of the parents who feel this is censorship of history. What books are read in schools that make white students uncomfortable? Not one, but provide many as what minorities are required to read. As someone pointed out earlier, maybe all students need to read the "Murder of Emmett Till" and talk to us afterward.

Anyone in independent school who is reading from a school supplied summer reading list is uncomfortable. That's ok. Kids can be uncomfortable.

Apparently not. Discomfort must be avoided at all costs.

dp To Kill a mockingbird didn't make you feel uncomfortable? It made me uncomfortable not only how they treated Tom Robinson but, Boo as well. Are you saying it didn't to you?

[Anonymous]

The SR decision wasn’t only about the text of tkam. The memo from SR said it was bc the author is white and therefore shouldn’t be speaking to the black experience. To me thats way worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The SR decision wasn’t only about the text of tkam. The memo from SR said it was bc the author is white and therefore shouldn’t be speaking to the black experience. To me thats way worse.

I don't know what the memo said.

I would never say that a white author cannot speak to the Black experience. But if my kids are only studying one or two books that address the Black experience, I would certainly prefer that they be by Black authors.

[Anonymous]

Considering the entire Admin is white (except for the DEI Director and the Admissions Head), this seems like window dressing.

Not a single POC as a division head or assistant head.

Not one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like to provide some food for thought on the matter for those who have a problem with this. Imagine being a black student and constantly reading these "classics" which shows a history of time, in which blacks were treated sub-human and the author makes no apology, but writes it from a perspective of it is what it is. Page by page, you have to read words that cut deep to your race. However, rather than an awakening of morale taking place, you have an educated white lawyer that takes on a case because of his daughter. The poor uneducated black is once again saved by the educated white man, who takes pitty on him. But wait, this is a classic, to hell with others, it's written well.

The book is an accurate historical reflection of the times. Life back then was a whole lot different from today. Should we ignore history, or learn from it?

It isn’t accurate. I loved TKAM in high school, if was my favorite book. I just re-read it because I bought it for my son in 8th grade. Atticus tells Scout the KKK is harmless. He tells Scout that Walter Cunningham’s dad is just misunderstood when he goes with a mob to the jail to lynch Tom Robinson. He tells Scout it isn’t OK to hate Hitler. I decided not to give it to my son.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't a book like To Kill a Mockingbird be used to teach all of the issues being brought up against it? Seems like a very good platform to approach all these issues.

I agree with this. We read primary texts from different periods in history in order to have a lens on those time periods. Why not read TKAM and Bluest Eye? And discuss how TKAM gives only the white characters a voice and significant agency. More enlightening, IMO, than tossing the book out entirely.

This is like when people tell me (a science teacher) that I should "teach the controversy" about things like climate change and evolution.

Just... no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Would you want to walk past a statue of the man that raped your mom?

Nobody has to ever walk past a statue of a man who raped their mother. Literally nobody.

Yes. Black peoples walk past statues of men who raped and killed their family. Literally all of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Would you want to walk past a statue of the man that raped your mom?

Nobody has to ever walk past a statue of a man who raped their mother. Literally nobody.

Yes. Black peoples walk past statues of men who raped and killed their family. Literally all of them.

Literally all black people walk past statues of men who raped and killed their family.

Is that so?