Scrotumgate Lives On
Debra Lau Whelan -- School Library Journal,02/21/2007
Who knows if librarians would have reacted differently if Susan Patron used the word "nuts," "balls," or even "cojones" in her Newbery Medal–winning book. But the word "scrotum" on the opening page of The Higher Power of Lucky (S & S, 2006) certainly created a buzz on many discussion boards and blogs—and even landed the novel on the front page of the New York Times.
The main questions being asked on LM_NET, an online discussion group for school librarians, was if "scrotum" was really necessary in a book written for tweens and whether media specialists should buy it for their libraries. Most school librarians answered no to both, but little did they know that their comments were being scrutinized as fodder for a very juicy story.
A place in the library?
The controversy, first reported last week in our sister publication, Publishers Weekly (PW), later appeared in the February 18 Times, which said some librarians "pledged to ban the book from elementary schools." The book, awarded the Newbery Medal on January 22, is about a motherless 10-year-old named Lucky Trimble, who searches for a higher power to gain control of her life. The scrotum belongs to a dog, who is bitten there by a rattlesnake.
Rocco Staino, director of the Keefe Library in the North Salem School District in New York and a frequent contributor to SLJ, was so annoyed with his peers after reading the Times article that he wrote a letter to the paper. "Single words or the possibility of angry telephones calls should not affect the overall selection of a book," he says, adding that all school libraries have a selection policy, which guides the purchases of materials.
The whole brouhaha intensified when Dana Nilsson, a librarian at Sunnyside Elementary in Durango, CO, asked her colleagues on LM_NET how they felt about the word. "I just read the new Newbery book The Higher Power of Lucky and am wondering how anyone feels about the scrotum discussions," she wrote on February 5. Nilsson added that she couldn't "possibly read this as a read aloud and am thinking it will be challenged big time." The book is in Nilsson's library.
By February 8, Nilsson had received 25 responses from librarians in places such as Illinois, Montana, and Oklahoma—and all but one elementary school librarian said they would not buy the book. Media specialists like Betty Klein of Avery Coonley School in Illinois were also concerned about complaints from parents and whether they could justify having the book in their collection if it didn't support the school curriculum.
Patron shocked by response
Patron, a senior librarian in charge of children's collection development at the Los Angeles Public Library, says she's "shocked and horrified" to read that some school librarians are choosing not to include her book in their collections because they object to the word "scrotum" or fear parental objections to the word.
"If I were a parent of a middle-grade child, I would want to make decisions about my child's reading myself—I'd be appalled that my school librarian had decided to take on the role of censor and deny my child access to a major award-winning book," Patron wrote in a letter to PW. "And if I were a 10-year-old and learned that adults were worried that the current Newbery book was not appropriate for me, I'd figure out a way to get my mitts on it anyway."
Let the kids decide
Michele Nokleby, a librarian at Hawthorne Elementary in Montana, was definitely in the minority on LM_NET when she wrote that she enjoyed the sweet, funny, and hopeful book. "It's an important book for my student population, as many of them will identify strongly with the characters and the situations they find themselves in," she wrote.
"There are so many things that are touched on in this little book that deserve attention," including issues of addiction, abandonment, absentee and incarcerated parents, and the quest for personal strength, Nokleby wrote.
Pat Scales, an SLJ columnist on First Amendment issues and a former member of the American Library Association's Intellectual Freedom Committee, says kids won't get to form their own opinion about the book if they don't have access to it.
"School libraries should be about inclusion and not exclusion of good literature," she says. "This book has already passed the criteria for good literature. A selection decision shouldn't be based on one word—a word students probably already know.
"If they don't know the word, they should. It is an anatomically correct word, and I much prefer that word over the slang usage."
Post a comment Return to article View other article discussions
| Submitted by: | Rebecca Bridges (bridgesb@anderson1.k12.sc.us) 2/28/2007 7:54:09 AM PT |
| Location: | Piedmont, SC |
| Occupation: | school media specialist |
I live in one of the most conservative areas of South Carolina. I have ordered the book for my school library. I feel that the fact that the book won the Newbery Medal requires me to have it in my collection and will help to defend it if parents bring objections. I have not yet read it, but can''t wait for it to come in.
| Submitted by: | Linda C Brennan 2/28/2007 6:47:43 AM PT |
| Location: | Coventry Public Library |
| Occupation: | YA Program Coordinator |
I have been on hold for the book for weeks, and still haven't had a chance to read it--unfortunately!
That said, I support the author's right to write the book.
I support the publisher's right to publish the book.
I support librarians, teachers, and school administrators in their right to decide whether or not to include the book in their collections.
This is not "banning" or "censorship." We live in a pluralistic society and different people will make different choices, based on their community's special needs. The book will still be available to those who want to read it.
| Submitted by: | Anthony Doyle (tdoyle@muhsd.k12.ca.us) 2/27/2007 9:18:50 AM PT |
| Location: | Livingston, CA |
| Occupation: | Library Media Teacher |
A "majority" of the librarians on LM_NET did not say they would ban the book. There are around 15,000 librarians on the list and the overwhelming majority did not comment on the book at all. In a community of that size you are bound to find people on every side of any issue. Only a few vocal individuals indicated that they would not purchase it. SLJ, of all publications, should be more accurate in its reporting.
| Submitted by: | Bethany Lafferty 2/26/2007 1:46:09 PM PT |
| Location: | Las Vegas |
| Occupation: | Children's Librarian |
I have not yet read Lucky, but I plan on doing so to form my own authentic opinion, but it sounds like some people are using the presence of the word scrotum as the basis for their dislike of the book, when in reality they just don't like the story for whatever reason. If you don't like a book, just say you don't like or its not worthy of an award and support your argument with real literary criticism, not just some flaky excuse that there is inappropriate language, that's just plain cowardly and lazy.
| Submitted by: | Barbara Ashby (GJWL@aol.com) 2/22/2007 2:09:41 PM PT |
| Location: | Providence, Rhode Island |
| Occupation: | Library Media Specialist |
I read The Higher Power of Lucky and must admit that I did a doublt take when I read THE word on the first page but I finished it and gave it to my principal to read. He enjoyed the book and reminded me that the word (along with other human body parts) is included in the 5th grade health education curriculum. I started thinking about all of the human body books I have on my library shelves and whether I would remove them from my collection. Of course not. Perhaps this realization helped me to make the decision to keep the two copies that I had already purchased. I am interested to see how long it will take before a student asks for the book. I work in an urban environment and would prefer that students use the correct term than some of the slang that I hear every day. The whole issues has brought up other concerns as well. When I emailed the New York Times article to my colleagues on our district librarian listerv they were unable to open the document because of filtering on our network. This has been a much bigger topic of discussion than the new Newbery Award book and it''s use of THE word.
| Submitted by: | Karla Phillippe 2/22/2007 9:19:33 AM PT |
| Location: | Helena, MO |
| Occupation: | elementary school librarian K-6 |
I read the Lucky book the week-end before the announcement was made that it had won the Newbery award. At first I felt uncertain aboutthe honor but later after thinking it over, decided it was a great book! People that are thinking this body part shouldn't be mentioned in a book should decide why the words he##, dam#, pis#, etc. are ok words to include in a book. I'd much rather see a correct mention of a male body part than curse words in an honor book.
I've objected to many very good books because of their language and other have said, "that's the way kids talk today". Well, I don't let my students talk that way and others shouldn't either. What ever happened to respect!
So for me, the book stays on the shelf until someone tells me it's unsuitable for reading! I'd say only 4th-6th graders at my school would be wanting to check it out.
| Submitted by: | Rebecca Shull (rshull@greenapple.com) 2/21/2007 8:26:40 PM PT |
The impression I got from reading all the posts on LM_Net was that the word scrotum was not the only problem with the book. The vast majority did not seem to think that the book was particularly good. Now having read the book I agree. Unfortunately, I had to force myself to finish the book. If the book had been exceptional (as a Newberry winner should be) then the use of the word scrotum would not have made any difference, Librarians would have bought it for their libraries. Then again, if the book were the literature classic the award implies the author would not have had to rely on the twelve year old "giggle factor" to get the point across.
| Submitted by: | MARGARET ADAMS 2/21/2007 7:05:16 PM PT |
| Location: | Brighton, MI |
| Occupation: | Elementary SLMS |
It saddens me that any school librarian who has actually read The Higher Power of Lucky can say they would not have it in their collection. I read the story, enjoyed the story, posted a review on our Book Review blog for our students and never gave the word scrotum another thought. After reading the LM_NET postings, two of my colleagues contacted me since I read the book (and they did not read it yet) to ask me if the author actually used scrotum in the book. I had to think about it for a bit, since it was not a pertinent part of the book. Taken out of context that passage is a bit crude, in context, it is appropriate and NOT the key to the story. If you are running scared because of one word, you are missing a good story. Many kids in today's world can, and do relate to Lucky. My students who have read the book really enjoyed it, and NOT ONE of them mentioned that the author used scrotum in the telling of Lucky's story.
| Submitted by: | LIB ADA KENT (agkent@columbus.rr.com) 2/21/2007 3:02:38 PM PT |
| Location: | Worthington, OH |
| Occupation: | School Librarian |
Imagine my surprise as I heard the announcement in Seattle of the 2007 Newbery Award. As Honor books were announced, I was certain that _The Miraculous Journey of Edward Tulane_had won. I was crushed that Edward did not win. I believe this book will stand as a classic because the language is perfect, the adventure is riviting, and the characters are so well developed. The children I've shared it with loved it. So, my initial decision was to wait to order the _Higher Power of Lucky_with my school's funds. On Sunday, after the New York Times article, I went to the bookstore and purchased the book. I was prepared to hate it. I did not hate it. In fact, I liked it very much. The characters are just off-beat enough that the French woman might very well have accepted the responsiblity of her ex-husband's child and yes, there are many AA members who in a meeting would say scrotum instead of a more colloquial term. Yes, the story seemed a bit formulaic, but I found myself loving this little Lucky character who is very much a scientist and who has found a use for all those Altoid tins. I donated the book to my school library and I checked it out to one of our best readers this morning. I'm eager to see how our students react to the book. I still think Edward Tulane might be the book of the century and deserved the Newbery for 2007.
| Submitted by: | Sharon Hrycewicz (Sharon@downersgrovelibrary.org) 2/21/2007 2:10:58 PM PT |
| Location: | Downers Grove Public Library |
| Occupation: | Children's Services Librarian |
{deep deep sigh}
In my undergraduate training and in my experience in working in public schools, in bookstores and later as a degreed public children's librarian, it has always been my understanding that an acceptable reading strategy is to read over words you don't understand and see if the author uses that term later. (She does.) Why not tell children, scrotum is a body part, let's see if the author uses that term later in the story? This type of teaching goes on all the time, I hope. I learned to be a good reader using it and used it with my students as well.
This is the Newbery, we could second guess the committee all we want. I remember thinking Kira Kira, really? Holes, funny but distinguished? Shiloh, really? Because it is the Newbery winner, it is absolutely appropriate for school libraries and public libraries to have this title in their collection. You need to defend it? It's the Newbery.
Next »
Post a comment Return to article View other article discussions
