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 at ilstu.edu>
> Reply-To: rmnicol at ilstu.edu
> To: ENGDEP-L at LISTSERV.ilstu.edu
> References: <45DA3D09.80101 at 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.
> “I don’t want to start an issue about censorship,” she said. “But you
> won’t find men’s genitalia in quality literature.”
>
> 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