+- SFL Forum (http://www.stufffundieslike.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Fun Stuff (/forumdisplay.php?fid=19)
+--- Forum: Book Talk (/forumdisplay.php?fid=11)
+--- Thread: Dangerous Literature (/showthread.php?tid=3016)
Dangerous Literature - Jenni - 11-24-2011 08:05 AM
So, were you ever told, while a Fundy, that a certain book was dangerous for some reason or other? This is just one example of a time someone told me a book was dangerous: http://frenchizal.blogspot.com/2011/11/wild-things.html
I could list others. How about you?
RE: Dangerous Literature - pastor's wife - 11-24-2011 12:07 PM
Growing up, my mother told me that the Narnia series was bad and scary (there was a witch). Later, she said that "To Kill a Mockingbird" was a bad book. Today those are among my favorite books of all time.
I've heard warnings about many other books, although usually not personally. I've tended to be in smaller churches/Christian schools where the majority of constituents were pretty involved in the world (public school, etc.) not complete isolationists like some fundies tend to be.
I'll confess that when "The Golden Compass" came out as a movie and I saw one of my students reading the book, I sent home a brief letter to the parents, NOT telling them not to read it, but letting them know the philosophy of the author. My letter consisted primarily of quotations from the author himself. Although I suppose I could have come across as a censor, my goal was to fully inform parents about the underlying suppositions of the book and let them make the decision for themselves.
Jenni, loved the blog article. I'd heard that same interpretation of "Where the Wild Things Are", but I agree with your interpretation which was beautifully written, btw.
RE: Dangerous Literature - Jenni - 11-24-2011 12:44 PM
I heard that Harry Potter was dangerous because it would make kids practice witchcraft.
I heard that daVinci Code was dangerous because it was blasphemous.
I read both, and I enjoy HP very much. I'm not a fan of daVinci Code, but that's just my personal opinion. I also read the first Twilight book, and wasn't impressed, but didn't think it was nearly as dangerous as everyone said.
PW, there was a school parent at Fundy Christian School where I taught who took her kid's copy of To Kill a Mockingbird and blacked out all the cuss words. Then, because she was worried that he'd just read someone else's copy, she did the same with all the other books for the whole class. This would NOT have happened in my classroom, but there was nothing I could do about it happening in another class.
I thought of this whole topic because of a book trailer we saw in class: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4BK_2VULCU. We watched this trailer, and then the professor asked, "After seeing this trailer, would you include this book in your library's collection?" Pretty much everyone agreed. Then she said, "What if I told you the last line of the book is, 'It's a book, [insert word for donkey].'" [note: one of the animals in the video actually IS a donkey] We had mixed results on that one.
While I don't think I would put that book in my own personal collection, I can understand why it belongs in a public library or should be allowed in a public library. The professor mentioned that reading a book like that would provide a "teachable moment" for a parent and child, and that it would remove the power that we have given to certain words. I definitely agree that talking about a word and why we do or don't use it would be preferable to just saying, "Don't ever say that. It's bad."
RE: Dangerous Literature - NotUnderLaw - 11-24-2011 07:21 PM
Did she black out piss and ass and "emissions" from his Bible?
RE: Dangerous Literature - bean - 11-24-2011 09:04 PM
I am embarrassed to admit that I did not let my kids read Harry Potter because of all the hype in the church about it. I'm sorry kids. Read away.
Books that have expanded my outlook on life that were on other people's list: 1984, Fahrenheit 451, Catcher in the Rye. Love those books. I try to revisit them once and awhile....
RE: Dangerous Literature - Jenni - 11-24-2011 09:42 PM
(11-24-2011 07:21 PM)NotUnderLaw Wrote: Did she black out piss and ass and "emissions" from his Bible?
Somehow I doubt it. I think she should have just asked for an alternate book for him and had him sit in the library during English class until they were done with TKAM, but it wasn't my decision to make.
My students used to react with shock when I told them that every "objectionable element" is also present in the Bible. We'd have a huge class discussion about what we should and shouldn't read and who should be responsible for what books are available and what is censorship and what is discernment, etc. etc. It took a whole week of class and made their heads hurt and was totally worth it.
RE: Dangerous Literature - C_Fresh - 11-25-2011 08:26 AM
(11-24-2011 12:44 PM)Jenni Wrote: I heard that daVinci Code was dangerous because it was blasphemous.
I saw the movie and wasn't particularly impressed with it. I thought Angels & Demons was much more interesting.
RE: Dangerous Literature - Jenni - 11-25-2011 09:30 AM
I agree, CFresh. I enjoyed Angels and Demons more than dVC.
RE: Dangerous Literature - lucrezaborgia - 11-26-2011 04:34 PM
(11-24-2011 12:44 PM)Jenni Wrote: I also read the first Twilight book, and wasn't impressed, but didn't think it was nearly as dangerous as everyone said.
Beyond the horrific writing, the relationship dynamic between Edward and Bella is very unhealthy. A lot of young girls truly believe that the relationship is an ideal one and don't see anything at all wrong with how controlling Edward is or how Bella is willing to kill herself for him.
Quote:If a boy is aloof, stand-offish, ignores you or is just plain rude, it is because he is secretly in love with you — and you are the point of his existence.
It’s OK for a potential romantic interest to be dimwitted, violent and vengeful — as long as he has great abs.
If a boy tells you to stay away from him because he is dangerous and may even kill you, he must be the love of your life. You should stay with him since he will keep you safe forever.
If a boy leaves you, especially suddenly (while telling you he will never see you again), it is because he loves you so much he will suffer just to keep you safe.
When a boy leaves you, going into shock, losing all your friends and enduring night terrors are completely acceptable occurrences — as long as you keep your grades up.
It is extremely romantic to put yourself in dangerous situations in order to see your ex-boyfriend again. It’s even more romantic to remember the sound of his voice when he yelled at you.
Even though you have no intention of dating an alternative male who expresses interest in you, it is fine to string the young man along for months. Also, you should use him to fix things for you. Maybe he’ll even buy you something.
If the boy you are in love with causes you (even indirectly) to be so badly beaten you end up in the hospital, you should tell the doctors and your family that you “fell down the steps” because you are such a silly, clumsy girl. That false explanation always works well for abused women.
Men can be changed for the better if you sacrifice everything you are and devote yourself to their need for change.
Young women should make no effort to improve their social skills or emotional state. Instead, they should seek out potential mates that share their morose deficiencies and emotional illnesses.
RE: Dangerous Literature - amyrose5 - 11-26-2011 05:51 PM
Yeah...Lucrezia, I had female students who were not yet allowed to date that would go on and on about wanting a BF that was just like Edward. I pointed out the stalkerish behaviors and they told me that he only did that because he loved her so much he was trying to keep her safe. Interestingly enough, I once had a friend who began dating a guy who came to her work at the end of the day to follow her home. I told her that was stalkerish and she told me that he loved her so much he was just making sure she got home safely. Hmm. She married the guy and he abused her physically and emotionally until she finally left, bankrupt, four years later.
So I really can't get on board with the underlying messages of Twilight.