CCBC-Net Archives
Scatalogical humour
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Zbaracki, Matthew <matthew.zbaracki>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 16:35:54 -0600
I apologize for the delay in this post. I've been off campus teaching courses, but have been able to stay abreast with the topics. One topic in particular that has me troubled is the dismissive attitude towards humorous books, with "bathroom humor" receiving the brunt of the rejection. I'll do my best to not write a dissertation on the topic
(since I already have) but I would like to bring up a few key points.
1.) Humor is subjective. There are many things that all of us will find funny or not even remotely humorous. The example of Dumb and Dumber was used, and I think that works very well. Some adolescents might term it, the best movie ever made, while adults will roll their eyes in disbelief. The point though, is that while we don't always agree, we shouldn't dismiss it.
2.) Choice. If children are choosing to read these types of books why can't we respect that? One of the most challenging things in regards to the teaching of reading is with allowing choice. I think Jon Scieszka sums this up best when he likens giving children a choice in what they read after they have read the "required book" to having choice in what you read only after you've read all the books your spouse likes first.
3.) Humorous books have no literary quality. I understand this is most associated with "bathroom humor" in the posts, but it's still troubling. First of all, who decides what has "literary quality or value". Why does that overrule the idea of choice yet again? Comparing this type of literature to cookies or junkfood really doesn't make sense to me. Again, I think it judges what appeals to children, which is a point that was brought up about someone's children loving this type of humor. As Dennis Miller used to say, I don't want to get off on a rant here, but... And I won't rant too much more. My main point is this. Give humorous literature some respect. It does have many redeeming and believe it or not educational qualities. It motivates readers, and it does require thought, idioms are not nearly as funny if you don't understand multiple meanings of words, and that does happen a lot with
"bathroom humor", to name just a couple of qualities. So please, give humorous literature a chance.
Matthew Zbaracki Ph.D. University of Northern Colorado
Message----From: Monica Edinger [mailto:monicaedinger at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 8:42 AM To: Judith Ridge Cc: Subscribers of ccbc-net Subject: Re: [ccbc-net] Scatalogical humour
On 6/27/05, Judith Ridge wrote: in Day My It's
I must admit I was pretty dismissive at first of this book because of the title, but figured I needed to read it anyway because it was so clearly the sort of thing attractive to many of my 4th grade boys. So I read it and can totally see why Judith uses it as she does (and now have it in my classroom library at school.)
A new picturebook which features many of the...um...aformentioned topics... is Meg Rosoff and Sophie Blackall's MEET WILD BOARS. I think it is a hoot, but know that there are others who feel very differently.
Moving to a different medium, I can think of films where tthe gratuitous use of scatology, sex, and violence was completely off-putting and others where none of it felt gratuitous at all, but rather funny, appropriately disturbing, and/or moving. Seems pretty much the same situation as ours here.
Monica
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ To post to the list, send the message to...
ccbc-net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu
To leave the list, send the TEXT-ONLY message...
To: listserv at lists.education.wisc.edu
Body: signoff ccbc-net
Received on Thu 30 Jun 2005 05:35:54 PM CDT
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 16:35:54 -0600
I apologize for the delay in this post. I've been off campus teaching courses, but have been able to stay abreast with the topics. One topic in particular that has me troubled is the dismissive attitude towards humorous books, with "bathroom humor" receiving the brunt of the rejection. I'll do my best to not write a dissertation on the topic
(since I already have) but I would like to bring up a few key points.
1.) Humor is subjective. There are many things that all of us will find funny or not even remotely humorous. The example of Dumb and Dumber was used, and I think that works very well. Some adolescents might term it, the best movie ever made, while adults will roll their eyes in disbelief. The point though, is that while we don't always agree, we shouldn't dismiss it.
2.) Choice. If children are choosing to read these types of books why can't we respect that? One of the most challenging things in regards to the teaching of reading is with allowing choice. I think Jon Scieszka sums this up best when he likens giving children a choice in what they read after they have read the "required book" to having choice in what you read only after you've read all the books your spouse likes first.
3.) Humorous books have no literary quality. I understand this is most associated with "bathroom humor" in the posts, but it's still troubling. First of all, who decides what has "literary quality or value". Why does that overrule the idea of choice yet again? Comparing this type of literature to cookies or junkfood really doesn't make sense to me. Again, I think it judges what appeals to children, which is a point that was brought up about someone's children loving this type of humor. As Dennis Miller used to say, I don't want to get off on a rant here, but... And I won't rant too much more. My main point is this. Give humorous literature some respect. It does have many redeeming and believe it or not educational qualities. It motivates readers, and it does require thought, idioms are not nearly as funny if you don't understand multiple meanings of words, and that does happen a lot with
"bathroom humor", to name just a couple of qualities. So please, give humorous literature a chance.
Matthew Zbaracki Ph.D. University of Northern Colorado
Message----From: Monica Edinger [mailto:monicaedinger at gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 8:42 AM To: Judith Ridge Cc: Subscribers of ccbc-net Subject: Re: [ccbc-net] Scatalogical humour
On 6/27/05, Judith Ridge wrote: in Day My It's
I must admit I was pretty dismissive at first of this book because of the title, but figured I needed to read it anyway because it was so clearly the sort of thing attractive to many of my 4th grade boys. So I read it and can totally see why Judith uses it as she does (and now have it in my classroom library at school.)
A new picturebook which features many of the...um...aformentioned topics... is Meg Rosoff and Sophie Blackall's MEET WILD BOARS. I think it is a hoot, but know that there are others who feel very differently.
Moving to a different medium, I can think of films where tthe gratuitous use of scatology, sex, and violence was completely off-putting and others where none of it felt gratuitous at all, but rather funny, appropriately disturbing, and/or moving. Seems pretty much the same situation as ours here.
Monica
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ To post to the list, send the message to...
ccbc-net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu
To leave the list, send the TEXT-ONLY message...
To: listserv at lists.education.wisc.edu
Body: signoff ccbc-net
Received on Thu 30 Jun 2005 05:35:54 PM CDT
