PRO AND CON

* EDITOR’S NOTE: The Newport-Mesa Unified School District board will

discuss tonight whether two books, “Snow Falling on Cedars,” by David

Guterson, and “Of Love and Shadows,” by Isabel Allende, should be removed

from the reading list of Newport Harbor High School. The following

letters offer two ideas of how the board should proceed.

PRO -- School standards need to be higher

The vitriolic diatribe and hysterical cries of censorship directed

against school board member Wendy Leece are not only shocking but

indicate that these readers 1) failed to understand the nature and

premise of Leece’s request, and 2) failed to notice or chose to ignore

that board President David Brooks agreed with Leece. Not one of the

letters printed accused Brooks of censorship nor did any call for his

removal from the board, as they did Leece. It appears that what we have

is not an honest belief in any real threat of censorship, but rather

thinly veiled, preexisting rancor and animus toward Leece.

The Pilot asked on Jan. 25: “What standards should the Newport-Mesa

Unified School District have for classroom books?” I would suggest that

we need to raise, rather than lower, the bar for standards for all

curriculum: textbooks, academics and demeanor in the classroom.

“Snow Falling on Cedars” fails to meet appropriate standards due to

its numerous passages of an explicit sexual nature, which, while

tastefully done, place the book in the adult-reading category. No one is

condemning the book or calling for banning it. Equating the objections to

it as a textbook as such, and characterizing Leece as a fascist or

would-be book burner, is not only patently unfair, it is totally without

basis in fact.

There is no doubt that “Cedars” does not compare in the least to the

objectionable material young people can readily access elsewhere.

However, we’re talking about the school district, responsible for the

material it approves for children. That material certainly needs to be

more than a cut above what prevails elsewhere in today’s permissive

society.

In addition to the sexual content contained in “Cedars,” there are

also numerous passages containing profanity and obscene language which,

although they may represent an accurate description of the real-life

situations depicted, nevertheless have no place in the approved school

curriculum.

The major plot of the book deals with the fear, ignorance, hatred and

prejudice of a community toward Japanese American citizens and residents

during and after World War II. This results in a rush to judgment of a

Japanese man in a murder trial and the efforts of two journalists to

counteract it.

However, there is a subplot involving the clandestine love affair

between two teenagers. Therein lies the rub. The explicit sex scenes, no

matter how tastefully or delicately presented, are by their explicit

nature unsuitable for teenagers who, in general, are notoriously

unreliable when it comes to handling their passions and impulses in a

responsible manner.

This issue is about adult authority figures on our school board and in

the classroom putting their stamp of approval on material of a

potentially titillating nature, capable of arousing passions in young

readers, whose lack of maturity and experience in exhibiting self-control

puts them at risk of acting on those passions. Most parents, for good

reason, do not want their children to be sexually active. Why make it

more likely by romanticizing it in a novel used as a text in English

class?

Steve Smith has it right when he says students need at least one place

that can be a “‘safer harbor from all that adults have wreaked on

society” (“Trustee Leece’s action far from being censorship,” Jan. 27).

It is incumbent upon the Newport-Mesa school board to provide such a

place.

The community owes a debt of gratitude to Leece for her unwavering

commitment to quality, age-appropriate education for all the district’s

students. Her willingness to put in the time, energy and research to that

end sets her apart as a person of extraordinary dedication and moral

courage. Those who criticize and vilify her for her stand need to step

back, examine their motives and take a deep breath.

I appeal to the community and the Daily Pilot not to make a religious

issue of this. It is not about religion. It is about age-appropriateness

of adult material being advocated for children. The school district is

charged with protecting our children while in the classroom. Whether or

not children are exposed elsewhere to such material (and worse) every day

is not the issue.

I also ask the Daily Pilot, how representative of the total letters

received are those they printed? The printed letters were 9 to 1 against

Leece’s stand. A poll taken by another publication reported that of 174

responses, 66% would not like to see the books approved for use. In

another Letter to the Editor (Daily Pilot, Jan. 30), the 78-year-old

writer said she had been reading since she was 3, and she saw no problem

with this book. I dare say she did not have access to material of this

nature through her school when she was growing up.

As trustee David Brooks said: “It’s very simple . . . there are other

things out there that make the same points without giving such graphic

depictions of the sexual type” (Daily Pilot, Jan. 25). Whatever socially

redeeming or literary qualities “Cedars” may be deemed to possess, it is

no masterpiece by any stretch, and it reaches beyond the boundaries of

acceptability for inclusion in a high school English class.

ILA JOHNSON

Costa Mesa

CON -- Students can’t afford to be sheltered

As a former librarian, I was most disturbed to read of Newport-Mesa

Unified School District trustee Wendy Leece’s suggestion that two novels,

“Snow Falling on Cedars,” by David Guterson, and “Of Love and Shadows,”

by Isabel Allende, be removed from the high school reading list because

she disapproved of their sexual content.

If perhaps we lived in another area -- perhaps a small Midwestern town

or in the Bible belt -- where new ideas and ways of interpreting social

problems might be viewed with suspicion, then Leece’s opinions might be

understandable. But this is Newport Beach, an upscale community with a

socially diverse population.

Taken as a whole, neither novel focuses entirely on sex, and each has

redemptive qualities when the entire work is read. The struggle to

survive and triumph against corruption that would stifle their humanity

is a theme present here, as in other works of literary merit. Allende is

an internationally known author, and Guterson is a contemporary writer.

If Leece objects to these two books, what else on the reading list will

she go after next? Were Leece an avid reader, then she would recognize

that sexual themes in literature often mirror life. Should novels such as

“Anna Karenina,” “Madame Bovary,” “Return of the Native” or “The Catcher

in the Rye” be stricken from present or future reading lists because they

may contain passages of which one disapproves?

The prohibition and censorship of books is not a hallmark of an

educated society. A good book widens our perception of the human

experience, entertains us, challenges our viewpoints and permits us to

appreciate the power of the written word. The students who may opt to

read these books are future citizens, who in the span of a few short

years will vote, defend our nation and raise families of their own. Some

may even serve as future trustees or school board members.

Many will go on to college, where their minds will be challenged with

ideas that will expand their universe. Why protect, shelter and create an

intellectually restrictive atmosphere in our schools that will turn out a

generation of small-minded and prudish high school graduates?

If one person can effect the removal of even one title, he or she will

be back for more books and ideas they find fault with. These titles are

worthy of being read, by young adults, their parents and grandparents.

The true lesson to convey to students of all ages is to read. You

don’t have to agree with everything that you read nor even like it. But

don’t close your mind or attempt to prohibit others from reading anything

that may not mirror your values. That is a far more dangerous attitude

than objecting to a few offensive passages.

ANDREW AROS

Balboa Island