Sherlock Holmes offends Mormon, school board pulls book

[_harmony]

Next thing we know, they'll be banning Mark Twain because of his chloroform in print comment. Oh wait... they already ban him for Huckleberry Finn...

[_consiglieri]

I can give a much better response, complete with lots of fun facts n' links, later, if anyone cares.

I would be very interested in learning more about this subject, Blixa!

I think one of the things that makes this novel problematic is that it is written as the backstory of a Sherlock Holmes case, which tends to give it an aura of authenticity.

That may sound strange regarding a fictional character, but I think everybody here will immediately know what I mean, and the power of Holmes' presence (and hence the presumed veracity of the account) is only increased at younger ages.

I remember reading this novel when I was 19-years old and shortly after joining the Mormon Church.

I was disturbed by it, and a lot of its power to disturb me was the fact it was in a Sherlock Holmes book.

Call me naïve, but I doubt I am the only one who would feel this way.

I remember reading in the novel an encounter between a gentile and the Mormon pioneers heading west, and being greeted with the proclamation, "We are the chosen of the angel Moroni" (or something like that--funny what sticks with you after three decades).

That rang false to my ears, but it didn't make much of a dent in the negative impression the story left me with.

So I can understand where this Mormon mother in Virginia is coming from.

Nevertheless, I am opposed on general principles to book banning, including "Huckleberry Finn."

But then, we would probably all agree that some books we could name should not be put on sixth-grader reading lists in a government education program.

The question becomes whether this particular book should be one of them.

"A Study in Scarlet" is no "Huckleberry Finn," and there are plenty of other (and better) Holmes stories to have sixth-graders read. (I seem to recall the two that showed up most often in my junior high anthologies were "A Scandal in Bohemia" and "The Speckled Band." Sometimes "The Dancing Men," or the one about the busts of Napolean.)

So, if we can grant that "Scarlet" is an example of anti-Mormon literature of the time, I suppose we have to ask whether it is appropriate for the government to put it on the reading list for sixth-graders.

I am not entirely convinced that it is appropriate.

And this brings up the other issue of whether it really constitutes "banning" to not have it on a reading list.

Here the government gets to have it both ways; the original inclusion of the book on the reading list was likely made unilaterally by a teacher (read: government agent), with input from nobody else, and certainly not from students or their parents.

But once this unilateral decision is made, it is automatically referred to as "banning" to simply reverse the teacher's decision and remove it.

I am not sure this is fair.

Well, I've given a lot of my thoughts on the issue and am not sure I have reached a personal decision one way or another.

I can see it from both sides.

It is an interesting subject, though.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[_consiglieri]

What would these fine folks say about Riders of the Purple Sage?

Pulp fiction?

[_Hoops]

I would be very interested in learning more about this subject, Blixa!

so would I, Blixa. Time to step up!

I think one of the things that makes this novel problematic is that it is written as the backstory of a Sherlock Holmes case, which tends to give it an aura of authenticity.

Or, maybe, it is the writing that gives it an air of authenticity. It's not the character, but the skill of the writer. So, you could say this about any well written piece.

I remember reading in the novel an encounter between a gentile and the Mormon pioneers heading west, and being greeted with the proclamation, "We are the chosen of the angel Moroni" (or something like that--funny what sticks with you after three decades).

Is this not an accurate representation of the attitude of, at least, some of these folks. Come on, man! Explain yourself!

So I can understand where this Mormon mother in Virginia is coming from.

So can I. It's not as if mountains of books haven't been written that are critical of folks of my religious stripe.

Nevertheless, I am opposed on general principles to book banning, including "Huckleberry Finn."

Me to.

But then, we would probably all agree that some books we could name should not be put on sixth-grader reading lists in a government education program.

Hence, the importance of local school boards. If there are, indeed, books that don't belong on a 6th grade reading list, they are best delineated by local authorities, thereby allowing Mormons or sbc or buddhists the opportunity to have their concerns addressed.

[_Hoops]

So, if we can grant that "Scarlet" is an example of anti-Mormon literature of the time,

I don't know that we can.

I suppose we have to ask whether it is appropriate for the government to put it on the reading list for sixth-graders.

We can ask that of any book. And appropriate for what? for whom?

I am not entirely convinced that it is appropriate.

I'm not enirely convinced it isn't.

And this brings up the other issue of whether it really constitutes "banning" to not have it on a reading list.

Using just the information in the article, this doesn't constitute banning. That is simply a buzzword used to incite fear.

Here the government gets to have it both ways; the original inclusion of the book on the reading list was likely made unilaterally by a teacher (read: government agent), with input from nobody else, and certainly not from students or their parents.

That's not quite how it works. But your point remains: the book was included by a small group of people who really don't have to answer to anyone. Until the mom brought up her objections