Careless book banning is seldom a good idea
Removing the book “Dear Martin” from a 10th-grade English class at Tuscola High School likely didn’t prevent students in that class from having a deep, meaningful discussion about race in America and their own attitudes about this issue. Hopefully the teacher found some other book that inspired students to have this kind of discussion, because it’s one today’s young Americans need.
More important for students, parents, faculty and taxpayers, the decision to pull the book reflected badly on the current leadership of the Haywood County school system. Banning a book is almost never a good idea, and the way this incident went down proves that point.
I will, however, stick up for the parent who lodged the complaint despite disagreeing with him about the merits of this book. If a parent has a problem with what is happening with their child’s education, they should ask for answers and go up the ladder — teacher, principal, administrator, school board member — until they are satisfied. That’s the process, that’s how public school systems work.
The book’s author, Nic Stone, said as much. “I don’t fault the parents at all,” Stone told The Smoky Mountain News. “We’re all just trying to do our best when it comes to raising our kids. I would just hope that they would be willing to read beyond the first chapter just to see what’s actually in there.”
And that’s the problem with, essentially, banning the book from the entire classroom instead of giving that particular student a different reading assignment. Did anyone at the administrative level “read beyond the first chapter just to see what’s actually in there” before making the decision?
Instead of using this parent’s grievances against the book to open a larger, wide-ranging discussion — one that could have involved the community, the teachers who are in the classroom every day, the school system’s own media/library professionals and others — Superintendent Bill Nolte said he made the decision to ask the teacher to assign a different book. He cited the book’s profanity and sexual innuendo as the primary reasons.
Related Items
We’ll get through this, but we’ll need help
Trump quote taken out of context
Election fraud claims are just that — a fraud
DEI creates its own controversies
This book is on recommended reading lists across this country for high schoolers, and for good reason. I mean, no disrespect to administrators or school board members who may not read much, but the protagonist in this novel wants to discuss — in the form of letters — his concerns about race with Martin Luther King Jr., the assassinated pacifist preacher who disavowed violence as he tried to right wrongs during the Civil Rights era. OK, so there’s some vulgar words. Anyone reading this column or this book remember how many cusswords they knew by age 15? Yeah, about all of them, I’d say.
Speaking of sexual innuendo, ever read “The Scarlett Letter” or “To Kill a Mockingbird?” Aren’t these books still read in high schools? I remember discussing the Nathaniel Hawthorn classic in 11th grade and was duly impressed that my wise, elderly Black English teacher, Mrs. Jackson, was able to deftly deflect the silly questions regarding Hester’s transgressions from a class of unruly 16- and 17-year-olds while keeping the discussion focused on the book’s larger themes of sin, guilt and redemption. That’s called getting an education, exploring new ideas and discussing important questions about life, dignity, retribution, honesty, honor and other themes. This is how the best teachers prepare students to succeed in life.
The removal of the book really hit home with teachers and parents. That’s how we heard about it — and from some parents who are also teachers — who were outraged that this happened in the system where they work. Many felt it was a slap in the face to teachers, that it reflects a larger problem in this school system about how classroom professionals are treated by administrators. The backlash from education professionals was plentiful and heartfelt. Many were reluctant to offer public criticism.
School administrators, principals and teachers have tough jobs. They make dozens of decisions a day they hope will help the students they are charged with educating. I understand that there is an inclination to err on the side of caution when some potentially controversial matter must be dealt with. It’s tough balancing the need to protect students from a dangerous world with the desire to prepare them for what they will encounter as they go through life, a point the book’s author — a mother of two teen boys — also made.
I suspect none of the students will forget that school leaders banned the book they were supposed to read in 10th grade English. Neither will parents and teachers throughout Haywood County. The superintendent — and let’s not forget the elected school board — lost the trust of many by making this decision.
Children are growing up faster than ever, and our schools have an important role to play in helping them face life’s difficult challenges. Despite the overused idiom, ignorance is not bliss. Never was.
(Scott McLeod can be reached at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.)
