Educated and Cheaper by the Dozen - February CC Book Club Selection

[Mary13]

I don’t want to avoid the tough subject that rears its ugly head in both books: racism and/or anti-Semitism. The instances in Cheaper by the Dozen, although inexcusable, are (sadly) understandable. The book was written in 1948 and set 30 years earlier – “a product of its times” per the reviewer who wrote:

There’s…some horrifically casual racism, which is jarring by today’s standards: minstrel shows, the crude depiction of the pidgin of the Chinese cook at their grandparents’ house, talk of being skinned like “red Indians,” and the mother using the term “Eskimo” for anything she considers crude, vulgar, or inappropriate.
https://newswhistle.com/on-our-bookshelves-1948s-cheaper-by-the-dozen/

I wonder if there is a sanitized newer edition of the book out there, which deletes some of those unnecessary scenes and comments. If there were such a revised version, how would you feel about that? Do you think literature should stand as-is, as a sign of its times, or is it okay to make changes so that new generations can reap the benefits of a story without being exposed to dated racist beliefs?

Once, in a bookstore, I picked up a copy of The Scarlet Pimpernel, a book I had loved as a girl. I flipped through the pages and found that the character of “the Jew” near the end of the story–and all the horrendous stereotypical adjectives used to describe him–was gone. The character was instead identified as an old man. I googled to see what version that might have been. It must have been 1989, as described here: https://books.google.com/books?id=wBcGDAAAQBAJ&pg=PT238&lpg=PT238&dq#v=onepage&q&f=false

As a girl, I recognized that the description of the original character was “wrong,” but was too enthralled by the romance and adventure to give it much thought. An essay online put it perfectly for me:

When I was a teenager, I was able to brush this element of the story aside as archaic and ridiculous. As I grew older, and learned more about the history of anti-Semitism (including the Dreyfus Affair, which played out in the years leading up to the book’s publication), my cavalier attitude became a lot less comfortable.

As I found myself increasingly unable to re-read the book, I turned more of my attention to the film adaptations…Could the movies be a way to enjoy my favorite elements of the story without having to wade through the bigotry at the end?
My Magnificent Obsession: The Scarlet Pimpernel -The Toast

I don’t mean to dwell on The Scarlet Pimpernel – my point is that the same applies to Cheaper by the Dozen. I haven’t seen the film adaptation for a while, but I’m pretty sure there’s no minstrel show in it.

[jerseysouthmomchess]

^ in Oprah’s interview with Tara she asks her about the “n” word, and racism. Tara responds she is embarrassed how she used to laugh about it, and would never today.

She talks about not knowing about the Holocaust, and BYU students condemned her as anti Semitic.

Also, in another article Tara mentions she purposely left some things out about her father that would have been so damaging. I can just imagine.

About the 14 minute mark ::

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AObbEKCzLKY

[stradmom]

@Mary13 asks " Do you think literature should stand as-is, as a sign of its times, or is it okay to make changes so that new generations can reap the benefits of a story without being exposed to dated racist beliefs?"

I’m cautious about rewriting history completely. Language and beliefs that today are considered offensive were once widely accepted, and representations in literature or other forms of popular culture naturally reflected that world view. I’m opposed to censoring or banning the original versions.

At the same time, an edited version - with the changes clearly identified in a preface or appendix - could make an older work (like the ones already mentioned) accessible to contemporary readers without the distraction that elements like a minstrel show would present. Still, this needs to be done not only with transparency but with nuance. I’m reminded of the New South Publishing revision of Huckleberry Finn which replaced the problematic word with the word “slave,” totally changing the meaning and implications of the narrative.

Cancel culture cannot apply to history.

[AnAsmom]

I didn’t want to bring up the casual racism in the book because for that time, it was pretty accepted. The use of ‘Eskimo’ as a negative adjective by Lillian was grating as was the incident with the Chinese cook.

This is off-topic but I felt like I needed to get this out. Please bear with me. I read the The Scarlet Pimpernel omnibus the first time when I was quite young and didn’t quite understand or even recall the racist terms. I have a newer set here that I bought for my collection without the demeaning descriptions (probably the sanitized version you mention @Mary13 ) and it didn’t diminish my enjoyment of the books.
I think a lot of old favorites can do with a bit of ‘sanitization’ for want of a better term but the originals should be read to understand the disdain and contempt that the rest of the world that wasn’t white or pedigreed had to deal with mere decades ago (still do in many cases).

I had to study for my major, in some detail, about many ancient civilizations, their contributions in different fields and monumental architectural achievements, and when I read books that reviled the modern descendants of such civilizations it would make me sad.

[jerseysouthmomchess]

Just saw this headline and thought of your question @Mary13.

Covers on classics reflecting diversity,
https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/05/media/barnes-and-noble-diverse-editions-trnd/index.html

Regarding your question

Do you think literature should stand as-is, as a sign of its times, or is it okay to make changes so that new generations can reap the benefits of a story without being exposed to dated racist beliefs?

Yes, I think it might be ok to modernize, by substituting, hateful words. Interested in what others feel about this, can see the other side of this complex issue.

[Genevieve18]

@Mary13

@silverlady

It is hard to judge Lillian Gilbreth’s position in the family. I think the book was definitely written to focus on the father and children. I can’t imagine how many time she must have rolled her eyes at his antics.

With 12 children and that husband, Lillian must have had a great sense of humor, right? That doesn’t really come across though. She looks stern in many of those family photos (but I know a genuine smile was hard to catch in early photography). I think her survival tactic was dignity, always dignity – an an oasis of calm amid the shenanigans. Maybe that’s why she gave up on learning to swim. Hijinks in the water held absolutely no appeal for her and took her out of her “unflappable and in control” comfort zone.

Belles on Her Toes gives a better picture of Lillian, though she’s away from home a lot in it. In order to keep paying family expenses (including their house, and college for all 11 kids) and keep the family from being split up among people who’d offered to take some of the children, Lillian had to travel a lot to speak at conferences and convince clients to hire her as a solo female consultant in industrial engineering. There are descriptions of the hard work she had at first to keep clients and get new ones, and how she moved to a focus for a while on making kitchens more efficient, because that was a more acceptable sphere for a woman to work on. She taught at Purdue once a week for years, but also started a course that she taught at the family home, which allowed her to be at home more and lets the book cover more of her interactions within the family. It’s a good read. One of the things mentioned is that Lillian treated each of her children like an individual, and made them feel seen and understood personally.

[csfmap]

I strongly oppose sanitizing books. To me, it makes the books more acceptable only by erasing the sins of the past and making the past deniable. I don’t think that serves society well.

I read Cheaper sometime in junior high or high school and really enjoyed it. I have no memory of being uncomfortable with the racism in the book. Both of my kids had it read to them by a fourth grade teacher (in 2002 and 2004), and they liked it. I have no idea if the teacher stopped to discuss the examples of racism or just kept on reading . For myself, re-reading it in January, I thought it was harder to get through and it felt dated in a way it didn’t long ago. The racial issues were so obvious this time, and I think that’s a good thing. It makes me realize how far we’ve come, but still how far we have to go. I think it’s okay that some books will fade away in popularity, but yet they will always be there as a testament to their times.

[mathmom]

I think I could be onboard with some sanitizing in limited cases where the descriptions really aren’t germaine to the story. But only if there is a footnote explaining the changes. In the case of Huckleberry Finn, one of the major themes for the book is that Huck learns to view Jim as a real person. The use of the N-word is integral to the story line.

A more interesting case I think comes up in Dorothy Sayers - in one of the earlier mysteries there is a dead body who is everybody’s stereotype of the Jewish moneylender, and yet later in the series, one of Peter’s good friends marries a Jewish woman.

The Barnes and Noble thing, smacks of epic stupidity. Let’s promote white authors with covers of black people!

[AnAsmom]

Looks like I cross posted with others earlier. I think sanitizing is a way to let us enjoy books without feeling the guilt. But, taking away the parts that aren’t considered politically correct would be counter effective. Readers of all ages should be able to see and understand what was once so common. If we try to hide those things that give us discomfort now, future generations won’t continue the learning.

The Barnes and Noble is just unfortunate - they tried to do something positive with the covers but forgot to address the fundamental issue of celebrating authors of color.
I remember a book discussion with a friend many years ago - she appreciated a book so much more because it was devoid of race identifying physical descriptives like hair, eyes and skin.

I would like to think that I can appreciate a writer’s talent for creating memorable characters and stories in spite of the racist tone of the writing. We read to learn, to forget the mundane and immerse ourselves in another’s imagination. A writer who used racist terms and descriptions writing at a time when those were acceptable isn’t necessarily indicating his or her personal feelings about race differences but rather is documenting them. We aren’t all activists and that’s ok too.
My objection to the way Lillian used the term ‘Eskimo’ is that she isn’t just using stereotypes but is using a race derogatory descriptive that she seems to have coined herself. I haven’t ever read ‘Eskimo’ used in that manner but I could wrong and maybe it was a common term back then.

[Mary13]

So much food for thought! On the whole, though, I think we are on the same page: Don’t expunge evidence of the sins of our past–that benefits no one. But don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater either. We need to approach literature with an eye on historical context and an appreciation for the advances in social justice.

Here’s an article from Haaretz that focuses a little more on the anti-Semitism that was part of Tara’s upbringing: https://www.haaretz.com/jewish/holocaust-remembrance-day/.premium.MAGAZINE-how-tara-westover-found-out-about-the-holocaust-and-became-educated-1.6221342

As a young man, her father had read “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion” and believed it to be an authentic historical document and not a conspiracy theory that served the Nazis in accusing the Jews of planning a global war.

The realization that her beloved father – and in his footsteps her mother as well – held racist and anti-Semitic opinions developed slowly during Westover’s years at college. Only when she dared to distance herself from her family did she begin to read about the destruction of European Jewry, and she could not get over the shock.

^ I never got the impression in reading Educated that Gene was her “beloved” father. There were so few examples in the book of him being kind or compassionate or loving. If we had seen more of his good side, I might have been able to at least pause and consider how complex human nature is…instead, he was almost one-dimensional in his awfulness.

[Mary13]

Not a deep thought, just sharing: Tara Westover must have had a fabulous marketer. She is interviewed everywhere–you name the magazine or talk show and I’ll wager she’s made an appearance. She’s photogenic as well, so that doesn’t hurt. This piece in the CultureConceptCircle is basically a photoshoot: red dress…navy blazer…black velvet suit: https://www.thecultureconcept.com/educated-by-tara-westover-determination-and-persistence

I have no problem with that–I guess she’s gotta do what she’s gotta do. At this point, I’ve read a lot of articles about Educated and seen a lot of clips, and I’m amazed and impressed that Tara can continue to say almost exactly the same thing over and over and over, and still make it sound fresh.

[jerseysouthmomchess]

^ agree with your comments about all of those Tara interviews, same answers all the time. Although in the Oprah interview, she speaks about her father, saying she never doubted his love for her.
I know it’s so contradictory.

Regarding the Barnes and Noble misguided marketing concept, perhaps B&N should hire Tara’s PR person.
They have discontinued their new project due to backlash.

The bookseller ** relied on artificial intelligence to comb through 100 books to find those that didn’t explicitly define their characters as white ** , according to the New York Times. From that analysis, 12 books were chosen to reissue with new covers. But it created for some awkward juxtapositions, such as the colonialism of “The Secret Garden.” In that novel, the main character views her Indian servants in racist and negative stereotypes.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/barnes-and-noble-black-history-month-diverse-covers-classics-suspended/?ftag=CNM-00-10aag7e

[mathmom]

That’s seriously funny. I’m pretty sure that it Mary Lennox is obviously white. She’s described as “yellow-faced”, sickly and ugly.

I think once your book hits the bestseller list, the book publishers are pushing you to make all the appearances you can. There’s certainly no guarantee that she has another bestseller in her, especially if she is serious about academia.

[Mary13]

@AnAsMom

We read to learn, to forget the mundane and immerse ourselves in another’s imagination. A writer who used racist terms and descriptions writing at a time when those were acceptable isn’t necessarily indicating his or her personal feelings about race differences but rather is documenting them.

It can be hard to go back to favorite classics and see some of that documenting. In the book about the publishing history of The Scarlet Pimpernel, author Sally Dugan observes that, “nostalgia is never uncomplicated.”

[Mary13]

Ruby Ridge was really horrendous, wasn’t it? I just refreshed my memory on the details. I can see why the tragedy of what happened to the Weaver family fed Gene Westover’s paranoia.

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/incident-at-ruby-ridge
https://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/2012/08/ruby_ridge_20_years_later_rand.html

[jerseysouthmomchess]

^ what a great link. I’m glad Sara Weaver has found peace, and wealth.

can you imagine if Ruby Ridge, Waco, Texas and Oklahoma Bombing happened when internet could spread the anger and horror of it all, to the anti government segment of the early 90s. ( mmmmmmm actually it might be a bit like today )

I didn’t realize the Weaver’s were acquitted.

During the siege, Sara Weaver crawled around her mother’s blanket-covered body to get food and water for the survivors, including the infant, until the family surrendered on Aug. 31, 1992.

Harris and Randy Weaver were arrested, and Weaver’s daughters went to live with their mother’s family in Iowa. Randy Weaver was acquitted of the most serious charges, and Harris was acquitted of all charges.

The surviving members of the Weaver family filed a wrongful death lawsuit. **The federal government awarded Randy Weaver a $100,000 settlement and his three daughters $1 million each in 1995 ** .

Timothy McVeigh cited both Ruby Ridge and Waco as motivators when he bombed the federal building in Oklahoma City in 1995. Ruby Ridge has been cited often by militia and patriot groups since.

“What Ruby Ridge did was energize the radical right in a way it had not been in years,” Potok said.

I distinctly remember being so devastated with the Oklahoma bombings, the first experience with “home grown” terrorists, and bombings.

To think that today we have mass shootings so often, we ask “how many killed” this time rather than “on my god how can this happen”.

The Oklahoma bombing was just so shocking, unimaginable at the time.

[jerseysouthmomchess]

From wiki

The surviving members of the Weaver family filed a wrongful death suit for $200 million. In an out-of-court settlement in August 1995, the federal government awarded Randy Weaver $100,000 and his three daughters $1 million each. The government did not admit any wrongdoing in the deaths of Sammy and Vicki.[151][152] On the condition of anonymity, a DOJ official told the Washington Post that he believed the Weavers probably would have won the full amount if the case had gone to trial.[69]

[jerseysouthmomchess]

Idaho, home of the aryan nations seems to be high on the lists of states with hate groups.

The SPLC tracked more than 1,000 groups across the country in 2018, a record number.

And though Idaho saw a decline in the number of hate groups in the state, it still joins South Dakota and Montana as having the most hate groups per capita in the country.

In 2017, the Idaho State Police said it handled 51 reports of hate crimes across the state, a nearly 16 percent increase from the previous year. In recent years, **Idaho has earned the No. 2 and No. 1 spots in 24/7 Wall Street’s analyses of “most hateful states,” though the number of hate groups is down from a high of 18 in 2011 ** .

Read more here: https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/northwest/idaho/article226528650.html#storylink=cpy

[csfmap]

From the discussion questions:
2. In the first pages of “Educated,” we are introduced to the mountain in rural Idaho where the Westover family lives, described as a dark, beautiful and commanding form in a “jagged little patch of Idaho.” How does this setting inform the family’s experience?

In think “place” is a major part of this story. Her dad was a fundamentalist and a survivalist, who feared the government, and lived in a place he found some like minded people to validate his thinking. The isolation of the area let him keep his family uneducated.

In an interview with The Irish Times, Tara said:
“My father created our reality in a really meaningful way because we were so isolated. He would say these things about public education and doctors and the government and we didn’t know any better. We didn’t go to school so as far as we knew the world was exactly the way our father described it.”

From the same article:
She quickly realises she could never return to life on the mountain, that she could no longer live in her father’s house knowing what she now knew about the wider world. “There was always a sense that I could go back to Idaho if I failed. Then after even a few semesters, there wasn’t that sense anymore.”

In spite of everything, there is something lush in some of the descriptions of her childhood – a “sense of sovereignty” on the mountain, days roaming in the wild, picking herbs, breaking in horses. Recounting those moments was painful: “Those were the things about my childhood that I had loved the most. It was painful to know that I would never have them again – kind of like attending the wedding of someone with whom you’re still in love.”

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/you-could-miss-someone-every-day-and-still-be-glad-they-re-not-in-your-life-1.3393409

I have reason to routinely travel to Montana, Washington and Oregon, so I frequently pass through Idaho. It’s heading north out of Salt Lake or Logan, Utah that takes one to Tara’s part of Idaho. It’s rugged and beautiful and very isolated. I love that north western part of our country, and I can see Tara’s attachment to her home. I think her hopes and desire to maintain a relationship with her family and her love of the land she left drew her back, even when it wasn’t safe.

[Mary13]

@csfmap

I think “place” is a major part of this story. Her dad was a fundamentalist and a survivalist, who feared the government, and lived in a place he found some like minded people to validate his thinking.

Absolutely. I’m glad you brought this up – it’s another one of the things that was disturbing about Tara’s story. If the abuse happened in the way she describes, then the entire community is complicit. There is a scene with Shawn dragging Tara, screaming, through a parking lot in town. There are non-family members present during some of the most horrific accidents that happen to the family. There are witnesses to the abuse, yet everyone turns a blind eye – no one seeks medical help when it’s clearly called for; no one makes an anonymous call to DCFS; no one steps in to protect Tara or her siblings.

Re @jerseysouthmomchess’s comments about the Idaho haters, here is another article (from Boise NPR) – I am posting it because it is pertinent to our discussion, but fair warning, it contains offensive material: https://www.boisestatepublicradio.org/post/legacy-hate-specter-north-idahos-past-still-haunts-region#stream/0