Comments on: >Yes, it’s a book, but . . .

By: Amy

Amy — Mon, 03 Jan 2011 01:36:36 +0000

>I think the author is trying to have it both ways. He's made his little joke, and he can't then blather about the word "jackass's" being in there so that the final page doesn't end with the same word as the others. Right, and Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds doesn't stand for LSD.

I also think the "everything we stand for" line is over the top (do you think he was sobbing as he said it?)--much like the hysterical reaction to the Beatles' singing about tripping--but the fact is that the punch line of the book is an insult. (And a double entendre; they don't have to be sexual.) If kids get the joke, they'll get the insult, and I appreciate that they're trying to teach the kids that it's not nice to call someone a jackass.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 13 Dec 2010 03:48:40 +0000

>Liz, some of the comments on the piece seem to come from way far out on the fringe, but I didn't think the principal quoted in the article itself sounded hysterical. I think it would be really frustrating to spend your day telling first graders not to be mean to each other and not to call each other names, and then have 340 copies of Jackass! handed out.

I think we can expect kids to read stuff in books and know that they can't reproduce that language in a school environment, but for first graders, this language, given as a gift from an authority figure, really seems to send a mixed message that I think many little kids would struggle to interpret.

By: Roger Sutton

Roger Sutton — Sun, 12 Dec 2010 15:18:36 +0000

>Emay, I think it is the perfect binding that makes it hard for people to throw NGs away. Too much like a book. Plus, it's so educational and all.

The thing that bugs me about the controversy around It's a Book is that people are reacting to the word "jackass" as if it were a sexual term of some kind (the article even referred to it as a double-entendre). That's just embarrassing.

By: emay

emay — Sun, 12 Dec 2010 03:42:49 +0000

>What is it about National Geographic, anyway? Why are those stacks of old copies so ubiquitous? Why not some other magazine? Was it because no one could bear to throw them out?

By: MotherReader

MotherReader — Sat, 11 Dec 2010 16:40:24 +0000

>I don't know why the literacy group thought that would be a good book to give to a class of first graders. Didn't the last line even give anyone pause to wonder if it was an appropriate choice? As you know, I'm not a fan of the "jackass" line – but have also seen that school libraries are choosing not to purchase it – and public libraries are putting in with their children's fiction, not picture books.

As to your point as to whether any one book would be a good choice to hand out to every kid, well it's certainly not the best approach. But if they were going to try it, they could have picked a book that was age-appropriate and non-controversial. (Like say, 99% of picture books.)

By: Liz B

Liz B — Sat, 11 Dec 2010 14:51:09 +0000

>While I agree with you about donations & choice (I may be the lone librarian who isn't a fan of One Book reading programs!), the comments at the article struck me as almost hysterical. It "violates everything" the school stands for?