User:Percymetcalfe/sandbox

Wikipedia user: Percy Metcalfe is also the name of an artist

additional details to introduction of censorship section
According to Marshall University, The Absolutely True Diary of a Part Time Indian was one of the top ten most challenged books in the United States from 2011 to 2015. (www.Marshall.edu) The American Library Association states that the reasons parents and community members most often took issue with the book were because of racism, offensive language, sexually explicitness, and references to controlled substances. (http://www.ala.org/bbooks/)

Yakima, Washington
Sherman Alexie’s novel was challenged in his home state of Washington, only a few hours' drive away from where the semi-autobiographical work is set. The dispute over the book’s appropriateness for high school students took place in the town of Yakima, in the West Valley School District. The book’s place in the syllabus was contested in 2012-2013.

The Newsletter on Intellectual Freedom, which records all instances of challenges to literature in the U.S., reports that The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian had been approved by the school district for grades 11 and 12, but was added to the 10th grade curriculum without undergoing the usual procedure (51). The book was studied by sophomores in conjunction with Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird, for a module on racism. The Newsletter on Intellectual Freedom records how this pairing – and the inflammatory language of The Absolutely True Diary – made Alicia Davis, an elementary school teacher with a daughter in the class, uncomfortable: she said that the subject matter of To Kill a Mockingbird (lynching and Jim Crow) was enough for one class (52).

The Newsletter on Intellectual Freedom discloses that Davis understood the need for a different cultural perspective, but argues that such offensive language has no place in a high school class; she suggests Alexie’s book should be reserved for colleges (52). The Newsletter adds that Davis’ friend, Katie Birley, joined her in protesting against the book because the school didn’t follow proper protocol – Assistant Superintendent Peter Finch admitted that this wasn’t right, but was “an honest mistake” (52). The book was removed from 10th grade classes and made supplemental literature for 11th and 12th grades, but not required reading.

Some residents of Yakima defended the book's place in the syllabus - In a letter to the editor of The Yakima Herald, Peggy Haskett voiced her opion, opposing the censorship of The Absolutely True Diary: “a book like this begs to be read and discussed” (Yakima Herald-Republic (WA) Jan 17 2013). Haskett goes on to write that she encouraged her daughters to read the book “to be exposed to the realities of life for people who grow up in a very different environment” (Yakima Herald-Republic (WA) Jan 17 2013).

Critical Interpretation

Nerida Weyland’s article, “Representations of Happiness in Comedic Young Adult Fiction: Happy Are the Wretched” describes how Junior/Arnold is an example of the complex, not-innocent child often presented in modern young adult literature (87). As detailed in Alyson Miller’s “Unsuited to Age Group: The Scandals of Children’s Literature” society has created an “innocence of the idealized child”; Alexie's protagonist is the opposite of this figure.

According to Weyland, Alexie "doesn’t play by the rules" – the use of humor in the book is directed at established “power hierarchies, dominant social ideologies or topics deemed taboo” (91). Weyland suggests that the outsized effect of this feature of the book is revealed in the controversy its publication caused, as it was banned and challenged in schools all over the country (91). Weyland states that Alexie’s book with Forney’s black-comedy illustrations explore themes of “racial tension, domestic violence, and social injustice” in a never-before-done way (91). As an example, Alexie uses the anecdote of the killing of Junior’s dog, Oscar, to expand on the idea of social mobility, or lack thereof – Junior states that he understood why the dog had to be killed rather than take to the vet, because his parents were poor and they “came from poor people who came from poor people who came from poor people, all the way back to the very first poor people” (Alexie, 15) (Weyland, 91). Weyland notes how readers are likely to be uncomfortable with Junior/Arnold/Alexie making light of topics of such importance (racism, poverty, alcoholism) through the use of dark comedy (91).

Percymetcalfe (talk) 01:54, 29 November 2016 (UTC)PercymetcalfePercymetcalfe (talk) 01:54, 29 November 2016 (UTC) '''I also don't understand what you mean by readers "making fun of topics of such importance." At what point do you indicate that this is a possibility? It is definitely a good idea to reference readers in a section about reception & interpretation, but I was confused when reading the end of this paragraph.'''

Dr. Bryan Ripley Crandall, director of the Connecticut Writing Project at Fairfield University, posits in his critical essay "Adding a Disability Perspective When Reading Adolescent Literature: Sherman Alexie's The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian" that the book presents a progressive view of disability.[20] Arnold has what he calls "water on the brain", which would correctly be referred to as hydrocephalus. Crandall points out that Arnold is never held back by his disability, but in fact laughs at himself "With my big feet and pencil body, I looked like a capital L walking down the road.".[1] According to Crandall, the illustrations by Ellen Forney, which are meant to be the cartoons that Arnold draws, represent a new way for the disabled narrator to communicate with the readers: they "initiate further interpretations and conversations about how students perceive others who are not like them, especially individuals with disabilities".[20] Arnold's hydrocephaly doesn't prevent him from becoming a basketball star at his new school. His disability fades as a plot device as the book progresses.[1]

David Goldstein in his paper "Sacred Hoop Dreams: Basketball in the Work of Sherman Alexie" analyses the importance of basketball in the novel. He suggests that it represents "the tensions between traditional lifeways and contemporary social realities".[21] According to Goldstein, Junior/Arnold sees losing at basketball as "losing at life," the Reardan kids are eternal winners because of their victories on the court: "Those kids were magnificent".[1] Goldstein notes how basketball is also a sport of poverty in America -"it costs virtually nothing to play" [21]- and so is appropriate for the reservation [21]

Above are the additions I made to the live page at the beginning of the course, unaware of the whole process Percymetcalfe (talk) 17:50, 30 November 2016 (UTC)PercymetcalfePercymetcalfe (talk) 17:50, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Dear Percy,

I was tasked with editing your article today.

'''In your sandbox, I bolded my suggested copyedits, and added brief commentary on word choice and sentence structure. Your assertions were clear, and your theses were structured well-- you introduce both sides of the censorship cases in an unbiased, neutral manner. In an area where the article lacks precision, your additions will set a concise tone. Your quotes are well-introduced, and you do a good job of referencing your sources by name. Make sure to italicize the titles of publications and/or news sources.'''

'''I'm not sure if you need to include your opening two sentences, or even the entire opening paragraph. I feel as though the introduction on the Wikipedia page, while it could use some polishing, adequately introduces the novel. By the time the reader reaches this portion of the article, he/she will already know about the book's place on the national "most-censored" list. In addition, I marked a few unsourced statements in your draft. I think your most important tool in editing will be an eye for your article's repetition within the greater context of the entire article.'''

'''In my own writing, I hope to emulate your ability to fully describe your censorship case. Instead of simply stating that people sought to ban Diary, you included the critics' goals, and eventual success/lack thereof.'''

Nice work!

-Will Rau

Dear Percy,

'''After looking at your drafts I think content wise and ideas are great. There are a few places where you could elaborate more and add one extra word to make the sentence flow better. At the end of your first draft I was a little confused at the end when you mentioned Peggy Haskshall. What was her exact significance? I think it was a great contributions to your addition but i think that if you go into a little more detail about it it will give readers a better understanding of the point you are trying to get across. I also agree with will when he said that possibly the two sentences are not needed because they are already stated in the beginning of the wikipedia page so it could be a little repetitive if you keep them.'''

'''Some minor changes I made were a few words here and there that you forgot to add and I believe that it would help some sentences clarity if they are added. Other than that everything looks great and I think this is going to be a very detailed addition to this site!'''

-Katie Hudson