Literature, belles-lettres, letters refer to artistic writings worthy of being remembered. In the broadest sense, literature includes any type of writings on any subject: the literature of medicine; usually, however, it means the body of artistic writings of a country or period that are characterized by beauty of expression and form and by universality of intellectual and emotional appeal: English literature of the 16th century. Belles-lettres is a more specific term for writings of a light, elegant, or excessively refined character: His talent is not for scholarship but for belles-lettres. Letters (rare today outside of certain fixed phrases) refers to literature as a domain of study or creation: a man of letters. (dictionary.com)
Now that you've read the above, please tell me if you think these books qualify:
These books are written entirely in AIM format. Each page looks like a chatbox, complete with usernames and emoticons that substitute complete sentences. Its as bad as you think it is; instead of "you" she writes "u," the only dialouge is what is written after someone's username and any actions are typed out by the person with asterics at the end. *she shows then an example.*
All three books have made the list of censored books, yet the issue in question is the actual content, not the way it was written, but "because the book includes "curse words, crude references to the male and female anatomy, sex acts and adult situations like drinking alcohol and flirtation with a teacher that almost goes too far" (http://www.marshall.edu/LIBRARY/bannedbooks/books/ttyl.asp).
I myself am a fan of banned books. I think they have the best morals to learn from, and they're the ones that really leave an impact on you after you read them. Yet this one I have to make an exception. I know graphic novels in the classroom is pushing it, but text talk? Teachers all over are trying to keep their students from writing this way, and this book says its ok. Sure, I guess it can be seen as cultural with our high-tech generation, but the fact that these were on the REQUIREMENT LIST FOR SUMMER AND SCHOOL YEAR READING IS RIDICULOUS.
It would fit in well with a sort of meta-curriculum on what language is, how it's used, and what constitutes legitimate language. I don't know if you ever had to read Malcolm X or Frederick Douglass in school, but part of the premise of both is that standard written English is the domain of the White classes, and that the lack of access to education for minority underclasses means that their language is often viewed as illegitimate - essentially, standard English is a weapon against the underprivileged and downtrodden.
ReplyDeleteI think there's some substance to that, even in the case of txttlk. Use of that language doesn't mean the user is stupid, and to judge a person based on their language use is, in some ways, to reinforce a systemic structure that chronically disadvantages certain groups. Maybe the kid is a lazy ass, but maybe the kid never learned how to spell because his mom wouldn't help him with his homework or his school district was terrible, or both.
And, on a different note, a lot of teachers just want to get through to kids however they can. Those books probably relate directly to the teenage condition in a way that The Great Gatsby and Jane Eyre just don't.
I'd be more opposed to kids having to read, say, Ellen Foster and The Bridge to Terabithia. Or however you spell it. :P Those books are not particularly good, and they take themselves seriously. There's not all that much to learn from them, at least not that anyone in my classes could see.