Is there a place for Twilight in the classroom?

Yes, I'm one of those giddy and annoying fans of the Twilight series. I used to be ashamed that I liked the book so much; it was full of teenager lovers declaring sappy affections for one another. BLAGH! But it was so addicting! I read the entire series during my week long vacation to the Outer Banks this summer, and if you've read the novels, you know that Twilight is the shortest of the series. It wasn't until the release of the first movie that I came out of the closet and declared my love for this modern day Romeo and Juliet tale of forbidden love.

Even after I came out, I couldn't put my finger on what it was about the novels that I liked so much. They weren't written exceptionally well, the plot was far from original, why the heck did I like these things so much? It wasn't until I began observing the Team Edward/Team Jacob rivalry amongst the GROWN ADULTS in my life (okay maybe I'm one of them, don't judge) that I realized why I like the novels so much- I was, and still am, invested in the characters in the novel. I feel bad for Edward, and SPOILER ALERT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

in the next few novels, I am sympathtic to Rosalie's situation. I worry that Bella is going to get into some kind of trouble, I worry that her and Edward will split up, I kind of wish that she and Jacob would become closer. I worry about the characters in these novels the way my grandmother worries about the characters in her "stories" (soap operas). I discuss the plot line and the characters actions with my sister, and I find that everyone who has read and enjoyed the novel is more than happy to discuss the characters as if they were real people.

Kelly Bull's article "Analyzing Style and Intertextuality in Twilight" articulated all of the things that I liked about Twilight, but was never able to put into words. Stephenie Meyer does a fabulous job of characterization, and her style of showing rather than telling paints an almost tangible picture of the novel.

As much as I love the novel and see value in it, I'm not sure if there is enough "meat and potatoes" to teach it in the classroom. I have alot of issues with the portrayal of gender roles in Twilight. Bella is a fragile female who needs the protection of a strong and capable male. She does all the grocery shopping and cooking for her dad, who is so stereotypically reserved, with his hobbies including drinking beer, watching the game, and fishing. Bella's mother is even less capable of self-preservation than Bella, needing Bella or her new husband to keep her afloat. I really don't like the neat boxes labeled "male" and "female" that most of Meyer's characters fit into.

Overall, while I do enjoy the novel and think that students can learn from Meyers simple yet effective style, I don't think this novel is one that I would use in the classroom. Anyone want to convince me otherwise?

Harry Potter

When I began reading Perr Glanzer's article "In Defense of Harry . . . But Not His Defenders: Beyond Censorship to Justice Author(s)", I found myself immediately agitated. I didn't really have a good reason; I love the Harry Potter series and was thrilled that a scholar was writing an essay defending the right of students to read the novels. Instead, Glanzer put me on the defense when he wrote "Sadly, though, I find most defenses of reading the Potter series in public schools deeply flawed".

What what what?!? My thoughts raced and my heart pumped; surely I was not going to have to hear a bunch of right wing conservative attacks on my beloved Harry AGAIN! As I continuted reading, Glanzer's purpose became obvious. He was writing not only to defend Harry Potter, but also to observe that most of the arguments in favor of the novel are self-serving and flawed.

My reaction to one sentence of Glanzer's article is indicative of a much larger problem; I would argue that it parallels the same flawed rationalization that gives supporters of Harry Potter fuel for their fire. I like Harry Potter and see value in the story; because I like the work, I find every excuse I can to talk to other people about the novel, convincing the "non-believers" that it has merit, and I would venture to say that if possible I would find a place for Harry in my own classroom.

But my motives are selfish and biased. Glanzer is spot-on when he says that Harry Potter does not attack one specific worldview, nor does it promote a specific worldview. While it may seem to someone like me that Harry Potter is a neutral novel, it is perfectly reasonable for a parent to be concerned about the worldview that, while not promoted, is portrayed as an exciting place. I myself like the worldview(s) presented in Harry Potter. I see the value in challenging authority, choosing friends for their inner qualities and not their social status, following the path to self-discovery/identity no matter where it takes you, and finding value in the marginalized realms of society. However, not everyone agrees with my values, and not everyone wants to raise their children the way that I do.

While I think Harry Potter is a valuable novel that inspires kids to pick up a book, I will think twice next time before blindly insisting on the quality of my favorite novels. Glanzer got me to re-think my argument for Harry, and I think he did a great job defending him. Maybe one day Glanzer can argue Harry's case for the school board in my district....

Before the Book Thief

I still have about 50 pages left in The Book Thief, so I'll post later tonight or early tomorrow morning. What I can say about it so far is this:

I really like the book's perspective on discrimination. When reading, it's always easy to empathize with the victim, but since the book is about a German girl who is not Jewish, I found myself asking other questions. What would I do if I was in the Hubermann's shoes? How much power did the German people have to fight the Nazi's? Who much power did they have to save the Jewish people?

My favorite part (so far!) is when Liesel and Rudy throw the breadcrumbs into the street for the Jews to find. What a creative, heroic, yet even childish thing to do!

I do think that the book is a bit lengthy- it's been difficult for me to find time to finish it, so I think that it would be hard for adolescents to find time to finish it. If I did teach it I would pair it with a non-fiction piece or maybe even a documentary so that the lesson about discrimination is more concrete.

On another note, I have been thinking about how this would work as a film, and I think that Alan Rickman (it may be spelled wrong, but think Severus Snape from Harry Potter), would be perfect to play Death! Any thoughts?

American Born Chinese/ Constructing a Teaching Life

I loved this book! I liked the format; the storyline and images were tastefully and artfully done, although I personally could've done without the picture of the spear through Wong Lai-Tsao. This is an approachable text that I would love to use in my classroom.

The book also contains alot of positive messages as well as food for thought. The struggle and rewards that come when you construct your own identity, dealing with prejudice, and how to recognize some of our own stereotypes are a few of the lessons that can be learned from reading this novel.

To continue on the topic of identity construction, I gained perspective from Gaughan's first chapter in his book Cultural Reflections. The three examples of teaching styles that he gave were helpful because I have had teachers who fit every category, and then some in between. It was easy to remember what was effective for me as a student, and the more traditional approach executed by Mrs. Keller was NOT it!

Gaughn writes on page 8 that "students won't explore their place in and influence on society if they aren't confident writers in the first place". This is such a relevant quote for me because my goal as a teacher is to help students think critically and write effectively so that they can be active and informed participants in our society. Isn't that what education is meant to do? To prepare students to function within our society? And I couldn't agree more- when students, heck, when people in general, are confident with their skill level they are more likely to participate in society and in their own lives. I like the style of teaching where students are writing something everyday.

As always, there is lots to think about and discuss with this article and with the text!

Monster and Teaching Multiculturalism

What to say about Monster? Some things I liked: it was a quick read, it was suspenseful, its theme of racial inequality was obvious. I wasn't necessarily a big fan of the script format, however, I would teach this book- but why?

The book's main character, Steve Harmon, is a sixteen-year-old high school student with a love for film, who may or may not have been involved in a crime. Steve is on trial for felony murder charges associated with this crime, and is facing 25 years to life in prison. I think it would be easy for students to put themselves in Steve's shoes and relate to his experience, thus making the book worth teaching because I think students would have alot to say about it.

Would Steve's life have been different if he had been white? Would he even be on trial? Did he get a fair trial because he was black? Was his lawyer prejudiced against him? Was the jury? What does it mean to be black and caught in the judicial system in America? These are all great questions that could be discussed. However, what I don't like is that at one point in the book the author mentions that Steve went into the store to get some mints; in the trial Steve denies ever being in the store. This raised some questions in my mind about what message the author was sending about race and adolescence. When should people be responsible for their actions? When are they old enough to serve a lifetime in jail for a mistake?

I really liked Hades' article and his ideas about semiotic reading. Students do interpret literature, movies, and music through a lense that is shaped by our culture. We shouldn't impose our own ideas, but we should ask them questions that force them to reevaluate their own beliefs about race, gender, and class. I loved the part where Hade says that his eldest daughter said that he was ruining the pleasure of the lion king for her, because it points to a bigger issue- should children's literature be nothing more than entertainment, or is it meant to teach our students how to critically think about issues dealing with culture, etc.? I think we'll have alot to talk about in class, can't wait!

Melinda's Closet: Queer Struggle?

I think that David Latham makes an important parallel when he asserts that Melinda's the struggles that Melinda goes through in the novel Speak are similar to those of the gay community.

Melinda has a secret (her rape) that she is afraid to tell anyone. Her fears are not completely unfounded; she is afraid of the reaction that may confront her if she tells anyone. Rape is a subject that still carries a level of taboo in our society, and rape victims often face alot of controversy when they do "out" their secret because most times the truth is impossible to prove for certain. In Melinda's case, no one saw the rape happen, it's just her word against her rapist's, Andy Evans, and it's understandable that she feels people may not believe her or may have mixed feelings about this. She instead retreats to her closet because it provides her with a level of security.

I'm not gay, so I can't say for certain, but I think that homosexuals face the same sort of struggles. Latham mentions that the metaphor of the "closeted homosexual" closely mirrors the struggles of Melinda. They, too, have a secret that is surrounded by a certain amount of controversy, and I'm sure they worry about the reaction they may get when they are "outed". Latham's point is that both Melinda and homosexuals are find different ways of fitting into society's gender roles, thus making them both queer struggles or sexualities. From my interpretation of Latham's article, I think he raises a good point.

Boy Meets Boy: Is the Utopian setting appropriate?

Boy Meets Boy by David Levithan stimulates alot of interesting discussion about the role of the novel in homosexual culture. The book takes place in utopian town, where people of all sexual fantasies are embraced and celebrated. The main character, Paul, is caught in a stereotypical YA romance novel situation as he finds caught between the affections of two boys, Kyle and Noah. In the end of the novel, Paul ends up with Noah, and the reader is given the same satisfactory feeling that most YA romance novels give as they neatly tie up all of the loose endings into a big happy bow.

The novel is relevant because it serves as a template for new homosexual or bisexual fantasy YA novels. Until recently, anyone with a sexuality other than "hetero" didn't have very many examples for what a relationship could be. Levithan's novel tells readers that gay relationships do not have to be taboo, secretive, shallow; they can be romantic, fulfilling, and/or passionate just like any other relationship. I think this sends an encouraging message to young people of marginalized sexualities.

There are some things that raised questions in my mind thought. Was it necessary for the novel to be set in a utopian setting? Does that subliminally tell readers that non-hetero romantic relationships are only possible in an idealized world, and not in the real world? Could the novel have been set in a non-utopian setting and achieved the same goals?

Also, Tony comes out to his parents in a non-utopian town nearby, but his journey is much more difficult than Paul's because his parents are religious zealots and do not respect his right to choose his own sexuality. Tony's location outside of a utopian town suggests that his situation is closer to reality than Paul's, who has loving and accepting parents. I think Levithan made the right choice with Tony's location; his situation suggests to the reader that his circumstance may closer echo real life, and although he has difficulties, he overcomes them (though not quite entirely) by the end of the novel.

All in all, I liked the book and think it would stimulate good discussion in a classroom.

Forever

I finished reading Forever, by Judy Blume last night, and after reading it I was forced to down a glass of wine and watch a bit of Conan O'Brien before going to bed just so I could forget what I had just read. Dramatic? Maybe. Let me explain.

Forever is about an 18 year old girl, Kath, who is a high school senior involved in her first, dare I say meaningful, romantic relationship. The book explores Kath's decision to have sex with her boyfriend, Michael. Taught in the classroom, I think the book succeeds at opening the conversation about sex between adolescent girls. And this is where the problems begin.

First- the book opens conversation about sex for girls. What about the boys? I don't know how any male could possible make it through this book. What male wants to read about a teenage girls inner conflict about sex? Unless you're teaching at an all girls school, exclude this book. Not to mention that the questions the book raises about sex are questions that girls already discuss anyways- when to have it? Who to have it with? How do you NOT get pregnant? The big questions that require a level of maturity that only an adult can introduced are mentioned in the book when Kath's mother gives her the pamphlet with the four important questions about sex on it, but I feel that the rest of the book minimizes the importance of these questions. Only once, at the end when Kath has discovered that she has feeling for Theo, do we find these questions being explored again.

Also, alot of the language surrounding sex is outdated- VD? I definately laughed outloud when I read this, because when I was in high school we joked about VD since it was an outdated term then (late 90's if you're wondering).

Not to mention all of the other problems that I have with the characters in the novel. Kath is well off and so are her friends- a ski lodge in Vermont, Erica's beach house, how many students are wealthy enough that they can relate to this kind of lifestyle? Kath also mentions that she knows that people from happy homes with happily married parents are more likely to have happy marriages. WHAAAATTT?!?! What message is this sending to our students, many of whom come from broken homes? They are destined for a life of solitude or unhappiness? Also, Kath is so completely one dimensional. The whole book never really develops the relationship between her and Michael- most of their interactions include him trying to persuade her into having sex, her saying no, and then her finally giving in only to discover that she loves it. Yeah, that's a healthy message to send to teenage girls. Oh wait, did I mention Sybil, who has sex with lots of guys to give herself a sense of self-worth, gets pregnant, and after giving birth says she is still not giving up sex. Wow. Later on in the novel, Erica briefly mentionst that Sybil got more than she bargained for with the birth of her baby, but I still get the overall message that sex is so much fun that not even the unplanned pregnancy can stop it.

I think it's crucial to start a healthy, open conversation about sex with students, only because the conversation that should be taking place with the parents most likely isn't. However, Forever is outdated and sends all the wrong messages. The overall message of the book is that your first love won't last forever, so don't let them pin your wings down. I have to say it, I hate this book.

Entwicklungsroman and The Chocolate War: What a Disappointment!

Among various other themes, Robert Cormier's novel, The Chocolate War, explores how adolescents react when confronted with the existence of evil. There was alot about the book that I liked- the melodrama surrounding otherwise mundane events that occur in the life of the high school boys reminded me of how it felt to be a teenager. Everything was a big deal, even if it wasn't, and Cormier really took me back in time and reminded me of how teenager's look at the world. I also liked the way in which he wove HUGE questions into the everyday workings of a typical high school- How, why, and when do we leave the herd mentality behind? Or more succintly- Do we dare disturb the universe?

I have learned that when presented with the truth about the corruption of an institution (be it government, church, a job) that most people have the cliched "flight or fight" response. They either choose to ignore it, hoping that by being apathetic and forgetting about the problem that the problem will in turn, forget about the individual and leave that person out of the path of their corruption. Or, an individual becomes enraged by the corruption and fights against it. I love Jerry Renault's reaction in The Chocolate War- he doesn't want to use violence so instead he stands his ground and accepts the consequences of challenging the school and the Vigils. Jerry chooses the most noble path that was available to him, and I love that Cormier wrote the novel this way. What I don't love is that he chose to end the novel in a way that in my opinion, does not validate Jerry's choice. The message Cormier is sending is that the individual can choose to fight, which may get him respect for a while, but in the end, the institution is bigger than the individual and will crush him. Cormier's ending may be appropriate for an adult novel (though I still love the happy ending promised by most Bildungsromans!), but the message I think it sends to adolescents is that it's not worth fighting the power of an institution. The ending trivializes what little power Jerry had at his disposal and sends the message that he really has no power at all. To be a little more accurate, the ending conveys the message that Jerry didn't have the power to save himself, nor did he have the power to save Goober. Disturbing the Universe argues that Goober knows that Jerry died for his sins, but does Goober become empowered by this act? Will the individual triumph over the institution in the end? No one knows since Cormier ends his novel before I have a chance to enjoy the warm fuzzies that come with a romantic ending.

Really Cormier? I don't think we should force our children to look at the world through rose-colored glasses, but I do think that we should allow them to maintain some hope and sense of justice. Creating a story where good battles evil and good always wins big is a bit lame, I'll agree. But it's the way in which the evil is confronted that makes the story interesting; and it's the way in which good is validated, no matter how minimally, that reminds the reader why fighting back is always worth it. I was with you 'til the end Cormier, but this is where I jump ship.