Este tópico está presentemente marcado como "adormecido"—a última mensagem tem mais de 90 dias. Pode acordar o tópico publicando uma resposta.
You gotta think like Dana Carvey's Church Lady here, people.
It helps to believe that everything associated with covered-up body parts is bad as well.
I just put on my other glasses, and now I see the typo. Guess it's really true your eyes change a lot when you get old.
Well, anyway, that's why "The Gropes" have often been challenged.
If you're looking to ban a book, Gene's desire to harm Finney is either an attempt to weaken him to have him once and for all OR it's his need to destroy his attraction to Finney because it's unnatural. Voila - you have yourselves a filthy sex novel.
I'm not saying it's right, but the codependency that Gene and Finney share can be construed many ways...
I do wonder what the meetings are like when the "concerned citizens" get together to come up with the reasons for the banning. Can you imagine? Everyone sitting around, scouring through books for anything the least bit overtone-ish in hopes of presenting this to the local school board. (Of course, I'm sure there are already major groups with pre-done talking points, but the picture of it all cracks me up.)
My tenth-grade English teacher had us play "find the sex scene" with The Scarlet Letter.
Someone could write a book about the shenanigans going on behind the scene, but it probably would be banned...
Some of the conversations that go on when kids get these "chastity rings" to advertise their sexual continence become long and somewhat explicit about what can/can't be done in order to continue wearing said ring.
Cool teacher! I bet everyone read the book through to the end, very carefully. ;-)
So, in the interest of scientific and literary research, did you and your classmates grow up to be a bunch of over-sexed, anti-social deviants? Or perhaps it was a good outlet for the adolescent hormones common at that age, and you grew up to be normal, happy, healthy adults? And passed your English exam?
Well, she eventually told us that there are some theories about how to interpret a particular scene in the woods.
So, in the interest of scientific and literary research, did you and your classmates grow up to be a bunch of over-sexed, anti-social deviants?
Well, I didn't. ;-)
As for banning A Separate Peace-I read it in 10th grade and remember it as being a story about two teenaged boys, but don't remember anything about homosexual overtones. I guess sometimes you have to read things with a cynical adult's eye to see the smut in literature...
By the way, the book is pretty good, and a quick read.
There are many more examples of similar challenges and bans for material that is even less "explicit."
Evidently that's not supposed to be the case in Tess of the D'Urbervilles, seeing as how the rest of the plot turns on what happens in that scene in the woods. But, when I read it in high school, I totally did not see that interpretation. Everyone else in my class did, and they tried to convince me for an entire period, but in the end what "convinced" me is that certain subsequent events make no sense unless you accept that particular interpretation of the scene in the woods.
I understood Animal Farm had been banned due to political overtones in the book, rather than the talking animals. It has been a very long time since I read that one though. Am I confused, or just missing the sarcasm?