Political Correctness vs My Nephew's School

See what you make of this little tale.

In an era where the wolf in the Three Little Pigs goes away unharmed, the troll in Three Billygoats Gruff gets some wooly earmuffs instead of being killed by the largest goat, and the little poor boy Ling in The Magic Paintbrush doesn't murder the emperor at the end anymore, the teachers at my 7 year old nephew's school have set a piece of homework to write about the blitz.

I'm on the school's side on this one. I think its not just important, but absolutely essential that kids are taught about WW2. Its essential that we don't let people forget what happens when two factions, both extremely powerful, and both fairly evenly matched, let things get to the point where the whole world is at war. That way there's a chance it might not happen again.

But when you have the PC brigade sanitising all the kids stories, it seems a bit odd to also teach that not so many years ago, in their own country, ordinary families were being bombed to death in their own homes, sometimes as they slept.

 

Too right Dave Most of us have still got family who can relate first hand experience of WWII. My mum watched Coventry burn.

But the little ones growing up now will have no idea what we, as a nation, went through. Bit like us trying to picture the Civil War, no direct connection.



I sometimes sit in the pillbox wondering what was going thru the heads of the guys back then, beaches covered in rolls of barbed wire & getting ready to fight the invaders along the river valleys, must have been terrifying.

 

If you want to present a sanitised version of an altercation between 2 similarly equal parties over the right to decide the future direction of Europe, I would suggest the School DOES NOT take a field trip to Auchwitz and Birkenau.

It would take a small miracle to sanitise the storyline, once the camps have been visited.
How would you explain that nearly 70 years since the "incident" the sites are visited by hundreds of people EVERY DAY and, irrespective of age, visitors are profoundly moved by the experience.

Having no direct personal familial involvement in the war, or Jewish background, did not prevent a long-lasting impression being made on me and my family.

Sorry if the tome is heavyweight, but even in England, Nov. 11th Armistace Day means a lot to those involved and the families that still remember.

 

Unfortunately that is happening also today, albeit not called WW2 and not close to home.
I do think that children should learn the historical implications of why some events came about, without too many details about the horrors of it, but not at the age of 7, I would think more at the age of 10.
Altough many lost their life during the war, if there weren't wars in the first place, that would not have happened.

 

I always tell my kids about WW2. The signs of it are all around us.. the stumps of metal railings all round the park and a memorial to a bomber which landed on our park during a training mission. Their grandma was evacuated from London and my Great Uncle died over France in a Lancaster Bomber. My Son is only 5 but he knows that there were big wars and many people died. Schools can do so much but their parents have to fill in facts for them. Sadly I guess not many parents have those stories to pass on.

Not seen any sanitized stuff come out of my kids school... yet!!! But if one of them comes home with ba ba rainbow sheep I'll be rather annoyed!

 

"Oh the grand old Duke of York
He had ten thousand men
He marched them up to the top of the hill
And crushed all the nations of the world and
brought them under the rule of Satan our master"

 

I think the point here is that the stories you've cited (and others) are probably meant for children much younger than your 7 year old nephew, and although I personally think it's a load of baloney, there are those who feel the need to 'protect' very young children from 'nasty things' - small girls in red cloaks witnessing wolves being hacked to pieces by woodcutters for example. Experience - at least with my 3 daughters (and subsequent Godchildren) - has taught me that even very young children actually love a good hacking to death! They'll wield imaginary axes, 'kersplash' wolves into boiling water and push wicked witches into ovens with such enthusiasm you'd be forgiven for thinking you're in danger of raising mass murderers. The point of course, is to teach them (in a perhaps less than subtle way) that if you're 'bad', bad things will happen to you. Children however, being far more astute than most adults generally give them credit for, soon realise, that like Santa Claus, these are just made-up stories and, thus the 'death' (however violent) whilst mentioned as the ultimate punishment, is - for want of a better phrase - 'one pace removed'.

By the time they reach the age of 7, (often sooner) children, particularly these days, tend to be very aware of the world and, although I don't personally agree with it, some do have access to, or witness, very violent computer games or TV programmes, again with that element of 'removal' which can put death into an 'entertainment' category.

I think it unlikely that your nephew's school is expecting 7 year olds to focus on the deaths and horrific injuries received during the blitz (although of course these would have to be mentioned), but more to think about what it would be like to get out of a nice warm bed and spend time in an Anderson shelter or share a tube station with hundreds of others, the noise of the sirens, waiting for the 'all clear', where you'd go if your house or school was flattened, what it would be like to be evacuated, etc., etc.

Personally, I see no problem in teaching these things to 7 year olds. I was born after the war, my daughters (obviously!) even later, to us it's history - to my daughters almost 'ancient' history - so none of us has any first-hand experience of what it was really like, the sounds, the smells, the destruction and death - and I don't see 7 year olds suddenly having nightmares because they're learning about the blitz anymore than they would learning about kings and queens being beheaded or people being burnt at the stake.

 

I don't think these stories are modified because of a desire to sanitise them, so much as generations of storytellers have always sought to innovate resulting in the stories evolving into something new. It's common for children's authors to take familiar tales and rewrite them with a twist, but they're just doing it for fun rather than a desire to bowdlerise them in any way. It's true that some of them do reflect modern ideas about the rights of women, the desirability of living without aggression and living without material wealth. As long as the stories aren't too preachy or worthy I'm fine with that.

I'm not keen on traditional stories being modified to suit religious groups. In many schools, Hallowe'en (or any story involving witches, even) has been wiped off the map by pressure from fundamentalist Christians who have decided it was devil worship. Harrumphh!!

I think it's fine to talk about the everyday social aspects of WW1 to 7 year olds, but talking about the political background and the persecution of the Jews in more than general terms would not be suitable for that age group.

FWIW I remember having terrible nightmares about nuclear war for years as a teenager after my father had outlined the Cold War situation to me. So there is a case for protecting much younger children from the harsh realities of life.

 

It seem all is not
Below is a link to todays Evening Paper, a timely report

Tyneside students to see horror of Auschwitz - Chronicle News - News - ChronicleLive

 

I don't think writers feel they are accountable to anybody for the stories they write. They probably don't perceive themselves as part of a trend towards PC innovation, although people on the outside might see them differently. Artists are a rule unto themselves - and I don't think we can legislate as to whether children respond well to their work.

Situation 1 - traditional stories are taught to children both in their original forms, and in new forms which are often witty, entertaining and suggest new ways of thinking. But it's all OK and everybody can choose which they like best, with no rights or wrongs.

Situation 2 - traditional festivals are ousted from the curriculum on the say-so of a relatively small group of individuals. It's hard to oppose when the religion card is played but the result is that part of our own cultural tradition is denied.

 

it's sad that they just focus on the past .... perhaps after the students see Auschwitz, it may be good to fly them to Palestine for a week

 

I agree with miraflores that 7 years old is too young, aged 10 onwards is plenty soon enough!!

The rules here should be quite simple, this is England, we are a Christian country and we have Christian festivals, if you don't like it p**s off!!! :yess:

Val