海角大神

Last fall it was voted America鈥檚 best-loved book. This winter it made it to Broadway, grossing more at the box office in its first full week than any other play in history.

Harper Lee鈥檚 鈥淭o Kill a Mockingbird鈥澛燽ecame a classic the moment it was published in 1960 鈥� a tale of racial injustice set in Depression-era Alabama told through the eyes of 6-year-old Scout. It garnered the Pulitzer Prize in 1961, and its movie adaptation won three Oscars in 1963.聽That it has smashed theater records and risen to the top of a PBS nationwide popularity poll of American literature nearly 60 years later speaks to the lasting power of the narrative of a little girl making sense of racism and hypocrisy around her, as her father Atticus Finch defends Tom Robinson, a black man falsely accused of raping a white woman.

But its endurance is not just its clear-eyed depiction of a moment in time in the American South. It is the book鈥檚 evolution itself, from a groundbreaking text in its time to one today that raises complex questions about how the story is told 鈥� who tells it and, notably for some, who doesn鈥檛.聽As 鈥淭o Kill a Mockingbird鈥澛爂ets adapted for the stage, giving more voice to the black characters that were secondary or silent in the original novel, and gets re-examined in classrooms across North America, some are asking if a time comes when a book should be retired despite the impression it made on generations of students and the nostalgia many still feel about the work. That discussion gives it even more staying power.

鈥淲e all know that it鈥檚 a book that is beloved,鈥� says Lois Adamson, the education director at Canada鈥檚 renowned Stratford Festival, which staged a new production of 鈥淭o Kill a Mockingbird鈥澛爈ast year. 鈥淏ut I think it鈥檚 also, and rightly so, a controversial text that educators, parents, artists, and community members are talking about 鈥� whether or not it is the right story to keep telling and about maybe what other stories or perspectives we might want to be looking at.鈥�

鈥淭o Kill a Mockingbird鈥澛爃as faced controversy since it was published and remains one of America鈥檚 most challenged texts, says Deborah Caldwell-Stone, deputy director of the American Library Association鈥檚 Office for Intellectual Freedom. The most recent challenge came from Biloxi, Miss., in 2017, when parents complained about its problematic language, particularly the use of the 鈥淣-word.鈥� Other challenges have arisen from its allusions to rape and assault and how the African-American characters have little agency in a story about the injustices they face.

Debate across North America

It鈥檚 part of a long struggle with how to deal with literature, written in a time of different norms and paradigms, that is聽problematic in the 21st century. In 2011, for example, 鈥淎dventures of Huckleberry Finn鈥� was released in the United States with a new edition that replaced the 鈥淣-word鈥� with 鈥渟lave,鈥澛爇icking up a storm of criticism. Others have stopped teaching texts like it or 鈥淭o Kill a Mockingbird鈥澛燼ltogether.

Recent debate in Canada is indicative of new thinking surrounding the text wherever it鈥檚 being taught.

For one school board near Toronto, the answer lies in a new dictate: a memo sent to schools ahead of this school year requiring that the book be taught only if done through an 鈥渁nti-oppression lens,鈥� says Peel鈥檚 Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction, Adrian Graham.

That means additional resources, including help from a literary coordinator, for teachers to question the book鈥檚 white perspective on the civil rights struggle and grapple with offensive language peppered throughout.

The decision was panned in a Toronto Star column this fall that characterized it as evidence of a 鈥渃ulture of fear.鈥� 鈥淏ecause apparently teachers in 2018 can鈥檛 be trusted to discuss the novel sensitively, within a modern context, alive to the feelings of racialized students,鈥� Rosie DiManno wrote.

Mr. Graham says the new approach is not about restriction or censorship but is intended to be an empowerment tool in a multicultural context. 鈥淲e鈥檙e not interested philosophically in banning books,鈥� he says.

The change came after complaints about the book, which Graham says have grown in the past five years, were addressed by a committee of an initiative called We Rise Together in the district. That initiative seeks to empower black male students specifically and is part of a larger effort to be culturally responsive to minority representation in the curriculum.

Carl James, a professor at York University in Toronto who has worked as a researcher with We Rise Together, says the board鈥檚 decision is a responsible one. 鈥淚t would seem contradictory that we鈥檙e saying, 鈥榃e're looking at the issues of black students and concerned about their social and educational well-being,鈥� and at the same time working with a book that might be hurtful to them,鈥� he says.

On stage, more adapting

In some ways new stage productions have been better able to respond to such issues. Although the Broadway production by Aaron Sorkin initially faced a legal dispute for a script that veered too far from the original text, ultimately the sides settled. The re-adaptation gives more agency to some of the black characters and has received rave reviews. Lead producer Scott Rudin said in an interview with The New York Times: 鈥淚 can鈥檛 and won鈥檛 present a play that feels like it was written in the year the book was written in terms of its racial politics.... The world has changed since then.鈥澛�

For the production in Stratford, a character named Jesse, who appears in the novel but not the original play, was written in to bring more black presence to the stage. The festival also provided online study guides for teachers and offered hourlong interactive workshops facilitated by the play鈥檚 actors for student groups before the show. That included history of the civil rights era and the exploration around representation and who controls the narrative. 鈥淐ertainly it鈥檚 a coming-of-age story for Scout, but the violence and the racism that鈥檚 in the book is horrifying,鈥� says Ms. Adamson. 鈥淚f things live nostalgically for us, then we forget that, and I think it鈥檚 important to key into how it will land with people who are experiencing it for the first time.鈥�

Amid some of the brouhaha are questions about whether it鈥檚 the right text today. George Elliott Clarke, who was Canada鈥檚 parliamentary poet laureate, calls Lee鈥檚 debut novel 鈥渁 great book.鈥� But he questions its role in classrooms in Canada, where lessons about racial injustice are too often considered an 鈥淎merican鈥澛爌roblem, when there are plenty of struggles to focus on at home. He also worries the narrative might send a message to minority students, including Asian and indigenous pupils, of passivity: 鈥渢hat the proper response from them toward white supremacy, towards anti-black, anti-brown, and anti-indigenous racism is to be silent sufferers, to be quiet victims,鈥� he says.

Professor James and colleagues have debated whether there needs to be a bigger conversation on what they have called 鈥渄isrupting the canon,鈥� James says, which challenges聽reflexively reading certain literature simply because it鈥檚 always been read, without thinking about who is making those choices. 鈥淭here might be a point in which they have lost that status of classic after all,鈥� he says.

In Peel, out of 37 high schools, seven are teaching 鈥淭o Kill a Mockingbird鈥澛爐his academic year. Five years ago,聽Graham estimates that it would have been closer to 25 schools.

Once an English teacher, he says he would never presume that a book ever 鈥渞uns its course.鈥� But new realities demand a rethink all the same. 鈥淚 think right across North America we are slow to change up the books that we read, but at some point 鈥�To Kill a Mockingbird鈥� replaced another book,鈥� he says. 鈥淲e tend to [choose] classics often because of themes that we like, but I think we also have to honor the fact that there鈥檚 been a lot of good literature written in the last few years. There are other books out there that offer the same themes.鈥�