Re: [Fwd: Re: newbery medal controversy: the power of “scrotum”]

On Feb 21, 2007, at 4:53 PM, Carrol Cox wrote:

——– Original Message ——– Subject: Re: newbery medal controversy: the power of “scrotum” Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 12:48:58 -0600 From: Rhonda Nicol rmnicol@ilstu.edu Reply-To: rmnicol@ilstu.edu To: ENGDEP-L@LISTSERV.ilstu.edu References: 45DA3D09.80101@ilstu.edu

I love this passage from the NYT article:

Ms. Nilsson, reached at Sunnyside Elementary School in Durango, Colo., said she had heard from dozens of librarians who agreed with her =

stance. =93I don=92t want to start an issue about censorship,=94 she said. =93But= you won=92t find men=92s genitalia in quality literature.=94

Um, okay. I didn’t know that was a defining characteristic of =

“quality literature.” Good to know

But, of course, it was a dog’s scrotum. So there was never any =

question of men’s genitalia in this book.

No genitalia in quality literature? Really, some of the most ardent =

defenders of the canon haven’t read a word of it, have they? They =

should all be forced to listen to a dramatic reading of The =

Canterbury Tales.

Doug

Leave a Reply