Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's the whole thread. People claiming Shakespeare is "racist." People freaking out at the suggestion that Biblical motifs and stories are appropriate to teach as literature. People making incoherent arguments repeatedly misspelling "canon." People suggesting we read White Fragility in English Lit. It's all ... ugh.

It's all pointing to an incredibly narrow view of he goal of education. But at least for me, it's opening my eyes to what DCPS middle and high schoolers are (not) learning in their curriculum. The idea that English literature should focus only on the legacy of US racism is terrifying.

Lady Cannon is just someone that mindlessly repeats what she heard within her social circle, twitter or faceboook, but these are not just a minority of fringe isolated extremists. Think about where these ideas originate and who is adopting and propagating them. These ideas find their cultural home in universities and their political home in the Democratic party. And it's not only Shakespeare, read the California math framework if you can stomach it, and it's not just the education.

Unfortunately it is about narrowing the curriculum that is being taught. The quote from the English Department at the University of Chicago was to state that for that academic year all English PhD students are required to focus their academics on Black Studies. Where’s the diversity in this?

What do you think students graduating from that department will teach at your child’s high school? Shakespeare? That’s akin to perpetuating white supremacy, as Lady Cannon suggested, albeit in a much less refined form.

Do you think an English PhD candidate might have already read and studied a diverse sampling of material over their lives to contrast to that one academic year?

Sure they would have sampled a diverse work, but you don’t find it odd at all?

In past decades, whole classes of students were admitted who worked on the canon of dead white men. So us white people don't get ONE SINGLE class of Chicago lit PhDs and that's a problem?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's the whole thread. People claiming Shakespeare is "racist." People freaking out at the suggestion that Biblical motifs and stories are appropriate to teach as literature. People making incoherent arguments repeatedly misspelling "canon." People suggesting we read White Fragility in English Lit. It's all ... ugh.

It's all pointing to an incredibly narrow view of he goal of education. But at least for me, it's opening my eyes to what DCPS middle and high schoolers are (not) learning in their curriculum. The idea that English literature should focus only on the legacy of US racism is terrifying.

Lady Cannon is just someone that mindlessly repeats what she heard within her social circle, twitter or faceboook, but these are not just a minority of fringe isolated extremists. Think about where these ideas originate and who is adopting and propagating them. These ideas find their cultural home in universities and their political home in the Democratic party. And it's not only Shakespeare, read the California math framework if you can stomach it, and it's not just the education.

Unfortunately it is about narrowing the curriculum that is being taught. The quote from the English Department at the University of Chicago was to state that for that academic year all English PhD students are required to focus their academics on Black Studies. Where’s the diversity in this?

What do you think students graduating from that department will teach at your child’s high school? Shakespeare? That’s akin to perpetuating white supremacy, as Lady Cannon suggested, albeit in a much less refined form.

Do you think an English PhD candidate might have already read and studied a diverse sampling of material over their lives to contrast to that one academic year?

Sure they would have sampled a diverse work, but you don’t find it odd at all?

Anonymous wrote:Hahahahahaha. Of course this is your list!!!! That’s why I dared you to write it down!

That’s it, next election I’m voting Republican. I’ve had enough of this nonsense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shakespeare is 'racist' is not trolling, there are numerous academic works making this claim to a various degree. Read this statement from last year from the English Department at University of Chicago:

"English as a discipline has a long history of providing aesthetic rationalizations for colonization, exploitation, extraction, and anti-Blackness. Our discipline is responsible for developing hierarchies of cultural production that have contributed directly to social and systemic determinations of whose lives matter and why."

This is just the surface, look into it if you still doubt it.

Sigh. This is not saying Shakespeare is racist. What is racist is having children read only white authors or when we do include POC it’s just about all the horrible things they had to go through. How do you think a black student might feel if they only thing they see themselves in is slavery??

Please stop being obtuse on purpose. It is absolutely trolling to say Shakespeare as a whole is racist.

You are guilty of what you are accusing me of. Can you point where anyone said children should read only white authors, or only literature about horrible things happening to non-white people?
If you are saying there is no underlying current to change the canon, you are denying the obvious. think about it, why would anyone say English is responsible for cultural hierarchies? It is part of the post-modernism sweep that is fashionable academia, the focus on critical studies, it is how the phrase dead white men came about. It's also the next culture war, whether we like it or not. Unfortunately it will unfold at the voting booth and through the legal system.

Never accused anyone here of that lol. Only that the creation of this thread shows what you think is important. None (a general none so you don’t cry) of you have ever advocated for more diverse authors in this forum. And there are MULTIPLE responses in this and other threads stating things that have a racist undertone.

No teaching children about white privilege because it’ll teach my child that white people are alllll bad.
Suspend children with trauma (who are often poc) because I don’t understand the school to prison pipeline.
Keep schools with in boundary kids only in NW, ie majority white, even though the area is definitely gentrified.

Man, this thread is getting boring.

Actually, several of us have advocated for adding more diverse authors to the curriculum. I was one of them. Do you just not agree because I also stated we should keep a Shakespeare play?

We agree on one thing. This thread has gotten boring.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shakespeare is 'racist' is not trolling, there are numerous academic works making this claim to a various degree. Read this statement from last year from the English Department at University of Chicago:

"English as a discipline has a long history of providing aesthetic rationalizations for colonization, exploitation, extraction, and anti-Blackness. Our discipline is responsible for developing hierarchies of cultural production that have contributed directly to social and systemic determinations of whose lives matter and why."

This is just the surface, look into it if you still doubt it.

Sigh. This is not saying Shakespeare is racist. What is racist is having children read only white authors or when we do include POC it’s just about all the horrible things they had to go through. How do you think a black student might feel if they only thing they see themselves in is slavery??

Please stop being obtuse on purpose. It is absolutely trolling to say Shakespeare as a whole is racist.

You are guilty of what you are accusing me of. Can you point where anyone said children should read only white authors, or only literature about horrible things happening to non-white people?
If you are saying there is no underlying current to change the canon, you are denying the obvious. think about it, why would anyone say English is responsible for cultural hierarchies? It is part of the post-modernism sweep that is fashionable academia, the focus on critical studies, it is how the phrase dead white men came about. It's also the next culture war, whether we like it or not. Unfortunately it will unfold at the voting booth and through the legal system.

Never accused anyone here of that lol. Only that the creation of this thread shows what you think is important. None (a general none so you don’t cry) of you have ever advocated for more diverse authors in this forum. And there are MULTIPLE responses in this and other threads stating things that have a racist undertone.

No teaching children about white privilege because it’ll teach my child that white people are alllll bad.
Suspend children with trauma (who are often poc) because I don’t understand the school to prison pipeline.
Keep schools with in boundary kids only in NW, ie majority white, even though the area is definitely gentrified.

Man, this thread is getting boring.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shakespeare is 'racist' is not trolling, there are numerous academic works making this claim to a various degree. Read this statement from last year from the English Department at University of Chicago:

"English as a discipline has a long history of providing aesthetic rationalizations for colonization, exploitation, extraction, and anti-Blackness. Our discipline is responsible for developing hierarchies of cultural production that have contributed directly to social and systemic determinations of whose lives matter and why."

This is just the surface, look into it if you still doubt it.

Sigh. This is not saying Shakespeare is racist. What is racist is having children read only white authors or when we do include POC it’s just about all the horrible things they had to go through. How do you think a black student might feel if they only thing they see themselves in is slavery??

Please stop being obtuse on purpose. It is absolutely trolling to say Shakespeare as a whole is racist.

You are guilty of what you are accusing me of. Can you point where anyone said children should read only white authors, or only literature about horrible things happening to non-white people?
If you are saying there is no underlying current to change the canon, you are denying the obvious. think about it, why would anyone say English is responsible for cultural hierarchies? It is part of the post-modernism sweep that is fashionable academia, the focus on critical studies, it is how the phrase dead white men came about. It's also the next culture war, whether we like it or not. Unfortunately it will unfold at the voting booth and through the legal system.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shakespeare is 'racist' is not trolling, there are numerous academic works making this claim to a various degree. Read this statement from last year from the English Department at University of Chicago:

"English as a discipline has a long history of providing aesthetic rationalizations for colonization, exploitation, extraction, and anti-Blackness. Our discipline is responsible for developing hierarchies of cultural production that have contributed directly to social and systemic determinations of whose lives matter and why."

This is just the surface, look into it if you still doubt it.

Sigh. This is not saying Shakespeare is racist. What is racist is having children read only white authors or when we do include POC it’s just about all the horrible things they had to go through. How do you think a black student might feel if they only thing they see themselves in is slavery??

Please stop being obtuse on purpose. It is absolutely trolling to say Shakespeare as a whole is racist.

Anonymous wrote:Shakespeare is 'racist' is not trolling, there are numerous academic works making this claim to a various degree. Read this statement from last year from the English Department at University of Chicago:

"English as a discipline has a long history of providing aesthetic rationalizations for colonization, exploitation, extraction, and anti-Blackness. Our discipline is responsible for developing hierarchies of cultural production that have contributed directly to social and systemic determinations of whose lives matter and why."

This is just the surface, look into it if you still doubt it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's the whole thread. People claiming Shakespeare is "racist." People freaking out at the suggestion that Biblical motifs and stories are appropriate to teach as literature. People making incoherent arguments repeatedly misspelling "canon." People suggesting we read White Fragility in English Lit. It's all ... ugh.

It's all pointing to an incredibly narrow view of he goal of education. But at least for me, it's opening my eyes to what DCPS middle and high schoolers are (not) learning in their curriculum. The idea that English literature should focus only on the legacy of US racism is terrifying.

Lady Cannon is just someone that mindlessly repeats what she heard within her social circle, twitter or faceboook, but these are not just a minority of fringe isolated extremists. Think about where these ideas originate and who is adopting and propagating them. These ideas find their cultural home in universities and their political home in the Democratic party. And it's not only Shakespeare, read the California math framework if you can stomach it, and it's not just the education.

Unfortunately it is about narrowing the curriculum that is being taught. The quote from the English Department at the University of Chicago was to state that for that academic year all English PhD students are required to focus their academics on Black Studies. Where’s the diversity in this?

What do you think students graduating from that department will teach at your child’s high school? Shakespeare? That’s akin to perpetuating white supremacy, as Lady Cannon suggested, albeit in a much less refined form.

Do you think an English PhD candidate might have already read and studied a diverse sampling of material over their lives to contrast to that one academic year?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's the whole thread. People claiming Shakespeare is "racist." People freaking out at the suggestion that Biblical motifs and stories are appropriate to teach as literature. People making incoherent arguments repeatedly misspelling "canon." People suggesting we read White Fragility in English Lit. It's all ... ugh.

It's all pointing to an incredibly narrow view of he goal of education. But at least for me, it's opening my eyes to what DCPS middle and high schoolers are (not) learning in their curriculum. The idea that English literature should focus only on the legacy of US racism is terrifying.

Lady Cannon is just someone that mindlessly repeats what she heard within her social circle, twitter or faceboook, but these are not just a minority of fringe isolated extremists. Think about where these ideas originate and who is adopting and propagating them. These ideas find their cultural home in universities and their political home in the Democratic party. And it's not only Shakespeare, read the California math framework if you can stomach it, and it's not just the education.

Unfortunately it is about narrowing the curriculum that is being taught. The quote from the English Department at the University of Chicago was to state that for that academic year all English PhD students are required to focus their academics on Black Studies. Where’s the diversity in this?

What do you think students graduating from that department will teach at your child’s high school? Shakespeare? That’s akin to perpetuating white supremacy, as Lady Cannon suggested, albeit in a much less refined form.

Do you think an English PhD candidate might have already read and studied a diverse sampling of material over their lives to contrast to that one academic year?

Sure they would have sampled a diverse work, but you don’t find it odd at all?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's the whole thread. People claiming Shakespeare is "racist." People freaking out at the suggestion that Biblical motifs and stories are appropriate to teach as literature. People making incoherent arguments repeatedly misspelling "canon." People suggesting we read White Fragility in English Lit. It's all ... ugh.

It's all pointing to an incredibly narrow view of he goal of education. But at least for me, it's opening my eyes to what DCPS middle and high schoolers are (not) learning in their curriculum. The idea that English literature should focus only on the legacy of US racism is terrifying.

Lady Cannon is just someone that mindlessly repeats what she heard within her social circle, twitter or faceboook, but these are not just a minority of fringe isolated extremists. Think about where these ideas originate and who is adopting and propagating them. These ideas find their cultural home in universities and their political home in the Democratic party. And it's not only Shakespeare, read the California math framework if you can stomach it, and it's not just the education.

Unfortunately it is about narrowing the curriculum that is being taught. The quote from the English Department at the University of Chicago was to state that for that academic year all English PhD students are required to focus their academics on Black Studies. Where’s the diversity in this?

What do you think students graduating from that department will teach at your child’s high school? Shakespeare? That’s akin to perpetuating white supremacy, as Lady Cannon suggested, albeit in a much less refined form.

Do you think an English PhD candidate might have already read and studied a diverse sampling of material over their lives to contrast to that one academic year?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's the whole thread. People claiming Shakespeare is "racist." People freaking out at the suggestion that Biblical motifs and stories are appropriate to teach as literature. People making incoherent arguments repeatedly misspelling "canon." People suggesting we read White Fragility in English Lit. It's all ... ugh.

It's all pointing to an incredibly narrow view of he goal of education. But at least for me, it's opening my eyes to what DCPS middle and high schoolers are (not) learning in their curriculum. The idea that English literature should focus only on the legacy of US racism is terrifying.

Lady Cannon is just someone that mindlessly repeats what she heard within her social circle, twitter or faceboook, but these are not just a minority of fringe isolated extremists. Think about where these ideas originate and who is adopting and propagating them. These ideas find their cultural home in universities and their political home in the Democratic party. And it's not only Shakespeare, read the California math framework if you can stomach it, and it's not just the education.

Unfortunately it is about narrowing the curriculum that is being taught. The quote from the English Department at the University of Chicago was to state that for that academic year all English PhD students are required to focus their academics on Black Studies. Where’s the diversity in this?

What do you think students graduating from that department will teach at your child’s high school? Shakespeare? That’s akin to perpetuating white supremacy, as Lady Cannon suggested, albeit in a much less refined form.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's the whole thread. People claiming Shakespeare is "racist." People freaking out at the suggestion that Biblical motifs and stories are appropriate to teach as literature. People making incoherent arguments repeatedly misspelling "canon." People suggesting we read White Fragility in English Lit. It's all ... ugh.

It's all pointing to an incredibly narrow view of he goal of education. But at least for me, it's opening my eyes to what DCPS middle and high schoolers are (not) learning in their curriculum. The idea that English literature should focus only on the legacy of US racism is terrifying.

Lady Cannon is just someone that mindlessly repeats what she heard within her social circle, twitter or faceboook, but these are not just a minority of fringe isolated extremists. Think about where these ideas originate and who is adopting and propagating them. These ideas find their cultural home in universities and their political home in the Democratic party. And it's not only Shakespeare, read the California math framework if you can stomach it, and it's not just the education.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are thinking from the perspective of an older person or mom. I highly doubt if you are on this forum you have access to high society, where absolutely knowing Shakespeare’s work is a must, along with other works of literature, art, etc.

I hope you can see times are changing, Shakespeare will surely continued to be read but will no longer be the staple. And yes, we do need to read other works from Asian, black, hispanic, etc authors.

Foundational English lit? The United States does not even have an official language, so the idea of ‘English lit’ is just becoming ‘literature.’

This literally makes no sense.

I’m sorry you don’t get that we can expand literature to include a more diverse set of authors, and that a little less Shakespeare won’t ruin your child’s life.

Oh the horror of having an opinion as a mom, or gasp! while being older. Oh, wise 23 year old with a newly minted college degree, I beg you, share your wisdom with the plebeians.

Your post is a perfect example of why we need rigorous instruction in English composition and literature.
Your expression is a rambling of confuse ideas, a mishmash of incoherent borrowed snippets, poor vocabulary choice, and an appalling lack of critical thinking.
You clearly don’t grasp that staple denotes consumption of a commodity or you wouldn’t use it to describe Shakespeare’s works. You don’t seem to know the meaning of foundational, fyi according to the dictionary definition it means ‘denoting an underlying basis or principle; fundamental’. You don’t have critical thinking skills, otherwise you’d realize that English literature must have a foundation, it didn’t just came into existence while you were in high school. The works written as the language was developing are the foundation of English literature.

Regarding people still reading, none of your business what they chose to do with their time, if they read for pleasure or not. On thing I can assure you of, most decent jobs today require good reading and writing skills, and sharp critical thinking, and that’s across all careers and industries. We want our children to develop those skills to be successful in life.

This is a mommy forum, please tell me why I should put in effort into my posts here?

I have stated my stance in multiple different ways and others have shared similar responses. Rather than a lack of ‘critical thinking,’ it’s more people like you don’t want to hear the opinion. I’m sorry you do not understand that their are other works one can read to develop better literacy skills.

And the fact that you are adding to my words or purposely misconstruing them tells me that you do not have people around you who challenge you and live in a bubble. Friends who look like you, talk like you, and have a similar background. I’m sure you are a wealth of knowledge and have very strong ‘critical thinking skills.’

I’ve never stated Shakespeare shouldn’t be read, it just doesn’t need to be read in abundance. I also mostly still just make fun of this post, like I keep having to repeat. Is memory loss becoming more prevalent? Perhaps lower your sugar intake and make sure to eat fruits and vegetables.

Just stop with the pseudo psychological analysis. You went after me, my supposed husband (lol), my kid, now my friends. Go back at being enraged we use the word “cannon” on k-12, that was priceless. You have already proven to be completely incompetent in this discussion, now you want to lecture what my child should learn in school. Ok, list the authors you’d like to add to the curriculum.

Fine. Here is my reading list:

How to Be an Anti-Racist by: Ibram X. Kendi

White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism by: Robin Diangelo

So You Want to Talk About Race by: Ijeoma Olou

Stamped from the Beginning: The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America by: Ibram X. Kendi

Being White, Being Good: White Complicity, White Moral Responsibility, and Social Justice Pedagogy by: Barbara Applebaum

Why I’m No Longer Talking to White People About Race by: Reni Eddo-Lodge

So while I 100% know white privilege and white supremacy is real, I think that these books in particular are better save for a sociology class. I do think it is important for kids to understand their actions have consequences, like white kids stealing tik tok ideas from minorities blowing up and then not giving the original creators credit is wrong. Things like blackfishing or saying you are a trans racial Korean when you are White is wrong. Those things to need to be learned by not in a lit class.

Here’s my basic idea for some to add, FYI this is from the ‘23 year old’ lol not sure who guessed my age but I am actually 22.

The Tale of Genji
The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle by Haruki Murakami
The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho
Plum Bun by Jessie Redmon Fauset
The Color Purple by Alice Walker

Bonus - Cyrano de Bergerac and yes the author is white, I never have advocated for ‘no white people.’ Let’s just add a few others…and some modern things too.

And I’ll say it again, Shakespeare should be read just not ONLY his works.

Interesting list. I did not like Haruki Maurakami’s work but I can see why it’s on the list.

Sigh. No one is saying only read Shakespeare.

The level of stupidity of the person who is voting Republican because some DCUM people want to supplement Shakespeare with other authors is truly pstaggering.

It's the whole thread. People claiming Shakespeare is "racist." People freaking out at the suggestion that Biblical motifs and stories are appropriate to teach as literature. People making incoherent arguments repeatedly misspelling "canon." People suggesting we read White Fragility in English Lit. It's all ... ugh.

Well I think people are trolling in that regard. But what is racist is suggesting that only white predominantly British authors should be read. And the creation of this thread suggests that at the very least what people in this forum care about is not any kind of diversity, there would never be a post this popular with a suggestion of more diverse reading. (That is not white fragility, as I said before that should be saved for a different class)

I know if you are white you may not understand, but children consciously and unconsciously realize when all the authors/main characters they are made to read are white. When they do talk about people who look like them it’s in terms of slavery, the bombing of Hiroshima, their land being stolen, etc.

Certainly Shakespeare is great but we can add some other authors.