I think that at one time I would have been righteously outraged over news stories about the banning of obviously worthy books in the classroom by the champions of decency, like today's bleak little tale about the banning of Art Spiegleman's Maus by a group of 'educators' on a school board in Tennessee. (By the way, I promise to avoid any snide references to the oddities and limitations of third world countries, and the like, in relation to the particular nation involved.) But I honestly found myself unable to find this anything other than very funny, based on my suspicion that right-thinking youngsters of a Tennessean persuasion are more likely to get hold of the offending text now it's been torn from their metaphorical grasp and read it with a reasonable degree of attention if only to find the offending 'curse words' and 'nudity'. (I just can't remember any of this from when I read the offending text, which, I suppose, means I'm so corrupted I just didn't notice.)
Indeed, the whole scenario fits beautifully into my cunning master-plan to get youngsters really involved in the wonderful world of lit by banning all of it. I know this sounds a bit crazy, but think about it. Let's take Shakespeare as a test case. There's no problem in outlining a wide range of reasons for any of the great tragedies being banned from the classroom. King Lear, to take but one example, is so obviously beyond the pale in its extreme violence and demented sexuality to make one wonder how anyone ever thought it was a good idea to put it on a reading list. So once we sensibly make clear to students they should on no account corrupt themselves by reading it - or, worse still, watching it staged - I reckon sales of the Arden edition and various DVDs will go through the roof.
Job done!
No comments:
Post a Comment