"They left having an image of Indian people as being criminals," she said when interviewed on KUOW. "That we're to be feared. That we're scary. That we hold these ceremonies that are animalistic and brutal and violent."

What--like a big bonfire of books?

Fucking hilarious. It's this kind of overwrought political correctness that makes liberals look like retards.

The scenes of stoned 6th graders having sex on the playground didn't give Ms. Sense-Wilson (for reals? that's really her name?) pause, but how Indians were depicted did !?!

She says whats wrong with this better than I can: http://www.dearcoketalk.com/post/1593075…

Yet again, real life trumps fiction.

@2 probably a libertarian nutter.

*brain snaps*

Maybe if people actually READ books these days they'd develop some comprehension. Then, maybe they'd realize WTF satire is and how it should be taken. FUCKING CRAZY I KNOW.

Let's ban all books, just to be safe.

She must be a Gamma or Delta - this is all probably the result of a botched Bokanovsky embryo-splitting. Give her another dose of Soma and she'll forget all about this in a few hours.

I would argue the opposite, that the white character raised as a Native American demonstrates the trope of the noble savage, which can also be a damaging stereotype, but still isn't remotely what this woman is describing.

Never mind.

All Native Americans stole the land from the Peruvians who lived here first.

Word to Westside @2. I love it when the weight of ideology becomes so great as to form a sort of ideological black hole, warping thought in its vicinity and requiring adherents to assert the exact opposite of the values they originally purported to favor. (See: campus speech codes, porn wars, et al.)

Where was that Philip-Pullman-defends-free-speech video clip? ...Oh, I just realized I could look it up on YouTube. Hang on a sec.

Here we go.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQ3VcbAfd…

These are the same batshit parents who assume that billy isn't beating off for two hours after school......he's just playing video games or praying......

Either the Seattle P-I has misrepresented Ms. Sense-Wilson, or she's decided to go further. She wants the book removed from curriculum in Seattle high schools.

Ms. Sense-Wilson is a Native American, and her daughter showed her the 1930 satire. Ms. Sense-Wilson has already succeeded in removing the book from the required reading list at Nathan Hale because of "racially offensive derogatory language and misinformation on Native Americans. In addition to the inaccurate imagery, and stereotype views, the text lacks literary value which is relevant to today’s contemporary multicultural society."

Yeah, because book readers who don't watch TV don't already feel like outcasts? Because there is no mindless consumption of entertainment?

I wonder what American History high school curriculum sources would look like with the white settlers/explorers' depiction, racially offensive derogatory language and misinformation on Native Americans removed. Huxley's intent is to show that the small-minded bureaucrats who run the future society are the ones who refer to the Native Americans on reservations as "savages".

Did Ms. Sense-Wilson read the whole book? The Lexile reading level of Brave New World is 870. That's ninth grade level, and her daughter's in tenth grade. Did she have "Tintin in America" banned too when her daughter attended elementary school? Does Ms. Sense-Wilson or her daughter read banned books? How about historical novels where other racial minorities are described or addressed in offensive derogatory language?

If Ms. Sense-Wilson doubts that her daughter's class can distinguish between the author's viewpoint/message and the society he ridicules or warns against in a work of fiction, she might investigate the failure of the Nathan Hale teaching staff to build on critical thinking skills. How does she extrapolate or project her own lack of critical thinking or understanding of the novel to the failure of the Seattle Public Schools?

So, since the Bible has slavery, racism, adultery, and murder, should we ban that?

(waits)

Oh. I read Catcher in the Rye during HS (Banned book in Snohomish) and it was possibly the best book I read in High School.
The only reason I had the chance was that my modern fiction teacher spent her own cash and bought the class a set.

It shouldn't be banned, but it is a piece of shit book.

I know it's a slippery slope, but can't we at least try a pilot pogrom of idiot burnings?

I heart Sargon Bighorn's comment @ 12.

In the original article KUOW says:

"Huxley gave his characters a choice between life in a Native American village he referred to as primitive, or a society where people are kept comfortable through genetic engineering, brainwashing and drugs."

Of course anyone who's actually read the book and paid attention knows that genetic engineering is nowhere to be found in Brave New World. Strangely, everyone after a first reading seems to think it's the entire point of the book. But Huxley, as Steven Pinker notes in The Blank Slate, has created an environmental, not a genetic, hell.

Aldous Huxley is, of course, the grandson of Thomas Henry Huxley, the original iconoclastic Darwinist (of which Richard Dawkins is merely a cheap imitation), so he was self-consciously not writing a novel about the future evolution of the human species.

It's pure social critique, not science fiction. And in the book, the savages are the heros and the advanced society is the antagonistic force. This family has gotten things precisely ass-backwards. It's like reading Huckleberry Finn and deciding the black guy is the villain.

If a single one of this "offended" family had understood a modicum of the author's intent, they would quickly grasp that the book in spirit supports their liberal sensibilities. The Savages, after all, were the ones who read books, unlike the Europeans.

Frankly I'm disgusted KUOW gave this Philistinic pseudo-intellectual a forum for her misguided ranting, while their English professor was given less than a paragraph of rebuttal. I'm disgusted the school immediately bended and removed the book, in this, the most literate city in the country...

I think we all know who the real savages are!

I went to Hale and read that book on my own and later it was assigned in my class sophmore year. It is written at an accessible reading level and actually provoked some decent discussion (from what I remember, this was a long time ago). Banning it is fucking stupid.

Now where's my soma and pussy?

Sherman Alexie should give a special lecture at Nathan Hale High on how to read fiction. Or, rather, on how not to be a total idiot victimhood douchebag.

'You read about this shit happening in Alabama and you think, "Oh, well; those crazy Alabamians sure do hate books." Then you read about this happening in your city and you're all, "Holy fucking shit! This is ridiculous."'

It's true! Maybe it's long past time for people to re-examine their pathetic prejudices against their own fellow citizens.

SPOILER ALERT: Did you know there are good-minded, progressive folks in the South, and evil conservatives that live in Seattle? Join us again next week for HOLY SHIT: STATING THE OBVIOUS

I was on a weeks long road trip and Brave New World was one of the books in the vehicle. I tried to read it, I was offended by it's repetitiveness. I made it like 30 pages in and that's all.

"They left having an image of Indian people as being criminals," ... "That we're to be feared. That we're scary. That we hold these ceremonies that are animalistic and brutal and violent."

No shit. Because maybe the book was making a point about people living within a completely fabricated and controlled environment being scared of those that lived outside the socially-controlled gated-communities, out in --you know-- nature and stuff.

Goddamn if this isn't the backlash from collapsing educational standards.

@25 - boo hoo?

@21,

The entire society was stratified according to intelligence, which was determined in utero (or rather in test tube). It may not technically be genetic engineering, but it's close enough.

Oh good. Because "inoffensive" is truly the highest goal to which any literary work can aspire.

Required reading in 9th grade at Okanogan High School in 1992. Only one Mormon girl's parents asked that she be allowed to read something else, so she did, no big whoop.

I have a hard time accepting that someone has successfully had this book removed from the classroom - 18 years later in Seattle. It's bullshit!

What. The. Fuck.

I am a Junior at Ingraham High School. I read this book of my own volition over the summer, and loved it. The points it brings up are interesting and thought provoking, and the way the "savages" are portrayed is a literary device, and Huxley uses it to pull a "who are the real savages?" on the reader.

A direct quote:
"...students in her daughter's class were only able to grasp a more simplified interpretation of how the native people are depicted."
So wait, we shouldn't be allowed to read this classic book because some kids are too stupid to understand literary devices? What's the point of even having an English class then? The teacher should show the students how this creates a contrast, and how Huxley uses that to create certain feelings about the Civilization.

In conclusion, this is entirely stupid. If your child is too weak-minded to understand a book, that's fine. Give her a copy of Dick and Jane, but don't take my thought-provoking literature from me.

Well we can't ban ALL books, but we really should ban all books written before the year in which we are currently living, to ensure the best possible chance that the writer's thinking will match our own. It's the only way.

Isn't the banning of books that might upset people one of the very examples presented by Huxley in Brave New World? Christ I hate humanity.

On a (semi) related topic, I'm related to Nathan Hale!

Oh, and COMTE @7 is, of course, the best comment in this thread.

The funny thing about attempting to ban a book, a movie, or a rock-and-roll recording is that the attempt to ban it tends to create a curiousity to see what it contains that is so bad. This curioustity tends to lead to increased sales.

For example, I had absolutely NO desire to read or see "The DaVinci Code" until I learned that my nephew was punished for having a copy of the book on the campus of his Catholic school.

So for all who are offended by the attempt to ban "Brave New World," may I suggest that it would be the IDEAL holiday gift for that book-loving student in your family. Especially if you live in Seattle.

#34: This is true. At dinner I asked my child "does being told that certain reading material is not suitable for you or kept away from you make you want to read it more?" "Yes, I delight in all things inappropriate," was the child's response.

BTW I once brought porn to read in my Catholic high school's reading hour. The teacher asked me for it, I submitted it to her, and the next day she gave it back to me, with only a slight smile. I also brought to that same school The Hotel New Hampshire which offended my grandmother severely. Reaction from staff? "OOOH I LOVE THIS BOOK!"

Are the "savages" even supposed to be genetically Native American? It's been a long time since I read the book, but my impression was that they were simply people who lived without advanced technology and so ended up being Native American-esque.

Some people will do anything to get into the news, even if it means banning books you clearly don't understand and refuse to pursue further, I tried getting out of book reports, but not like this! And goodness, what does it say about the teacher who was obviously incapable of clearly stating that the term "savages," does not refer Native American, but a disenfranchised underclass viewed negatively through the lens of those under the impression that they were the societal elite. Get a life!

If your education is all about protecting you from "offensive" ideas, then it's not much of an education.

contact the principal, Jill Hudson
jshudson@seattleschools.org

When I was in high school, a keen-on-Jesus mother made a fuss about Lord of the Flies and got her own kids exempt from studying it. I'm still not sure what she had against it.

If I recall, the main lesson of the book is that we humans are morally depraved, and without external rules and authorities to civilize us, we'd all be running around hitting each other with sticks and letting the fire go out like idiots.

But that's not at all inconsistent with the "original sin" Christian worldview I grew with - humans are born sinful, and can only be moral if they listen to religion.

Maybe this mother just didn't like the nastiness in the book, i.e. the running around and hitting people with sticks. But Romeo and Juliet had running around and hitting people with swords AND teenage horniness AND teenage suicide, but that was OK.

Sarah Sense—Wilson - what is wrong with you???

Think about it...if you are incapable of rational thought...you don't belong in civilized society.

If you don't agree, please consider moving to a trailer in Maple Valley or some other outpost of non-civilization.

"So Seattle" !!!! Political Correctness Libtardistan Progressiveland!

@39--writing the principal is a good idea.

My letter:

Dear Principal Hudson,

I just read in The Stranger's "Slog" column that your school may ban "Brave New World."

Please reconsider this decision. "Brave New World" has a great deal to say to us today about all kinds of important issues--including the issue of banning books. I feel as though it would be a huge mistake on the part of the school to deprive the student body of an important text

I say this as an English teacher with 27 years experience. Very often, classics become classics specifically because they are challenging, and even potentially offensive. A highly incomplete list of such works includes The Merchant of Venice, Paradise Lost, Gulliver's Travels, The Awakening, Animal Farm, 1984, Lord of the Flies, Adventures of Huckelberry Finn, The Color Purple, and even Shakespeare's comedy, The Tempest, which deals with slavery, colonialism, imperialism, alcohol abuse, attempted fratricide, attempted rape, implied cannibalism, and which supplies the quotation from which Brave New World takes its title.

Do not allow one disgruntled parent to remove an important text from the curriculum.

I was at the hearing and you have it wrong. She doesn't want the book banned; she wants the teachers to have professional development to give nuance and context to the book. The district's own staff says the teachers haven't had this yet, are mostly white and don't get it and that they are working on it.

So basically the district agrees it's not being taught properly.

Maybe the district needs to make sure the teachers know how to present the material before the material is used.

#45: Aha, it's just not being TAUGHT properly! Some kids might read it and draw their own conclusions, rather than being TOLD what to think about it. That's MUCH better.

westello, if this is true, then shame on the media for making this sound worse than it is. Even NPR made this sound like she was seeking to have the book banned.
Still, as much as context may need to be explained in the classroom, this issue would not have occured if Ms. (no)Sense-Wilson and her daughter had some clue about putting things in context.
I personally think this is a case of someone who has been victimised, or at least feeling victimised, due to their race for most of their life finally snapping at something that is actually quite benign.
At least she has taken this on herself instead of involving her local ethnically appropriate activist group.

This is exactly why I didn't comment on this when it was posted. I kinda had a funny feeling there was more to the story.

Yes, yes @42 we know - at no time previously in the entire history of the world has any society, civilization, nation, or community ever tried to ban a piece of literature EXCEPT IN SEATTLE!

How's that gross over generalization thing working out for you these days?

Wouldn't reading the book and writing a report on it that points out that there are out-dated cultural perceptions in it be more constuctive?

I saw this on the news the other night. And they specifically stated that the family wanted the book removed from Nathan Hale's 'Required' reading list. Not banned altogether.

Someone is giving the wrong information...

@46: Being "taught properly" means providing some historical context and documented/established interpretations, from which the kids can draw their own conclusions.

Being taught particular interpretations isn't shutting down your brain; it's showing you that there's history and communities behind lots of issues, and they're worth exploring. Whether that exploration results in a reaffirmation or a rearrangement of your sentiments is up to you.

I mean, what are you supporting? That we teach kids that their views should be unchallenged and uninformed by others? Oh wait, that'd be brainwashing them or something, and not letting them think for themselves.

Sigh. In the good old days way back when I was in high school in California, we actually spent a sizeable chunk of our 11th grade English class on Catch-22. Try getting that one past the correctness wardens nowadays. And one of the odder field trips that we took in high school was to a philosophical conference where a bunch of us spent several hours being lectured to by a high priest of the Satanic Church. Seriously. I'm not being sarcastic, here. It's so weird to get older and watch the tideline of fundamentalism creeping higher and higher.

Why do schools allow the banning of any books, particularly classics? Why didn't they throw this dumb bitch out on her tuckus where she belongs? If I was principal at a school, I'd say "Bring it on." You can't censor reality, you idiot.

Isn't one of the points of reading and education, to teach children to think, discriminate, interpret, develop opinions and construct their argument in a way that is grasped by others? Let's say there is no interpretation, as in some later theorists of text interpretation, so the point is to detail impressions of the text. The mother is then surely providing a deficit in the child's education by not A) making her child develop that interpretation and arguing it in a classroom, B) making a considerate effort to disseminate and understand other arguments for the book. How is her kid ever going to learn how to deal with difficult material of all types? Every time some loudmouth Mrs. Brovlofskvi skips the conversation and turns to democratic tyranny you can hear Dewey moan in the wind from beyond the grave.

I read Brave New World years ago and look at me now,

How STUPID!!!
That orgy scene at the end of chapter 5 is child's play! PPL are such PRUDES!!! Really ought to introduce it in pre-school....ya know, get them ready for the coming Brave New World.