It's almost like two sides can play that game. Who started the game anyway?
I remember some statues being toppled last year by very progressive minded people. Maybe you know destroying art wasn't the progressive thing to do after all.
I remember some statues being toppled last year by very progressive minded people. Maybe you know destroying art wasn't the progressive thing to do after all.
The book banners started centuries ago. the origins of the word "Bowdlerized" are about cutting unsuitable language from Gibbon's 'decline and fall of the roman empire' [0] Thats 1820s.
"Lambs Tales from Shakespeare" was an earlier instance. They cut all the good bits, to make it suitable for kids. [1]
> I remember some statues being toppled last year by very progressive minded people. Maybe you know destroying art wasn't the progressive thing to do after all.
There really isn't linkage. One is about teaching materials and how to expose young minds to written ideas and expression. The other is about memorialising the past and how its treated. Personally?? I think context panels on the statues to explain why we no longer think they deserve memorialising is better, but thats just my take.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Bowdler [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tales_from_Shakespeare
At least to me, the values of those in favor of keeping southern memorials and banning Maus seem pretty odious.
It is relativism to equate taking down the statues and banning this book, unfortunately.
Are we going to tear out pages in books these same people were mentioned in, to erase any positive memory of them. I don't see how that would be different.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2018/08...
It certainly didn't start last year.
I remember conservatives being grumpy about Dogma and The Simpsons decades ago, and that's hardly the start either. Hell, Socrates got "canceled".