Controversy over the contents of recently released novel, "Edgewise: An Assignment to Remember".
April 25, 2007 (Press Release) --
Quite a bit of controversy has arisen over the recently published novel, Edgewise: An Assignment to Remember. An international organization wanted to promote the novel but after reading it they recommended the author tone down a particular scene in the book. They feared some may be offended and said the author had taken a "G" rated book and given it an "R" rating with that one segment. The scene igniting the controversy involves the female protagonist as a teen victim of date rape. The novel is based on true events, and the author states this as an account of what actually happened.
The concerned author polled her readers to ask how they would rate the book: G, PG, PG-13, R, or NC-17? Over four dozen rated it "PG-13". Only one gave it an "R" rating. When asked whether they would allow their teenage daughter/granddaughter to read the book, all but one responded "yes,” indicating not only would they allow it, but would encourage it as a precautionary step. The consensus was: "If that could happen to someone like Delaney, it could happen to anyone!" When asked if that scene should be toned-down, the unanimous response was "Absolutely not! It would not be as effective and carry the same impact."
Sadly, teens of today are much less naïve than my generation. In the 1960s, most young girls were not allowed to date until they were sixteen or older, whereas today's statistics reflect teenagers become sexually active as early as 13 years of age or even younger. As result, teenage pregnancies are off the charts. So what IS too graphic for teens? What should responsible parents prevent their teens from viewing? Are they protecting them from the movies with extreme violence and gratuitous sexual situations? Are they preventing them from watching videos with near-naked bodies, over-exposed breasts and scantily-clad hips as they gyrate to the provocative, obscene lyrics to songs? Perhaps the question shouldn't be "Are the parents protecting them?" but rather should be "Can the parents protect their teens from the world--from life?" The answer carries a double-edged sword. On one hand, parents could encourage them to read books/see movies where sexual situations are not glamorous or satisfying, come with consequence, and the overall picture is not a pretty one. On the other hand, if the parents do encourage this, they're not protecting them from the cruel world.
There is no question parental guidance is the much needed missing link in today's society as teens approach adulthood. As parents, we raised our two sons to become responsible men who respect women. We were never like so many parents today who stick their heads in the sand, hoping the world’s ugliness will go away before their teens have to face it on their own? It makes more sense to take some precautionary steps. Allowing teens to be exposed to things of graphic nature in a fictional sense for their own good just may prevent the teen from experiencing it in non-fictional real life.
The concerned author polled her readers to ask how they would rate the book: G, PG, PG-13, R, or NC-17? Over four dozen rated it "PG-13". Only one gave it an "R" rating. When asked whether they would allow their teenage daughter/granddaughter to read the book, all but one responded "yes,” indicating not only would they allow it, but would encourage it as a precautionary step. The consensus was: "If that could happen to someone like Delaney, it could happen to anyone!" When asked if that scene should be toned-down, the unanimous response was "Absolutely not! It would not be as effective and carry the same impact."
Sadly, teens of today are much less naïve than my generation. In the 1960s, most young girls were not allowed to date until they were sixteen or older, whereas today's statistics reflect teenagers become sexually active as early as 13 years of age or even younger. As result, teenage pregnancies are off the charts. So what IS too graphic for teens? What should responsible parents prevent their teens from viewing? Are they protecting them from the movies with extreme violence and gratuitous sexual situations? Are they preventing them from watching videos with near-naked bodies, over-exposed breasts and scantily-clad hips as they gyrate to the provocative, obscene lyrics to songs? Perhaps the question shouldn't be "Are the parents protecting them?" but rather should be "Can the parents protect their teens from the world--from life?" The answer carries a double-edged sword. On one hand, parents could encourage them to read books/see movies where sexual situations are not glamorous or satisfying, come with consequence, and the overall picture is not a pretty one. On the other hand, if the parents do encourage this, they're not protecting them from the cruel world.
There is no question parental guidance is the much needed missing link in today's society as teens approach adulthood. As parents, we raised our two sons to become responsible men who respect women. We were never like so many parents today who stick their heads in the sand, hoping the world’s ugliness will go away before their teens have to face it on their own? It makes more sense to take some precautionary steps. Allowing teens to be exposed to things of graphic nature in a fictional sense for their own good just may prevent the teen from experiencing it in non-fictional real life.
Email
Print
SPAM
