Quote:
Originally Posted by rkomar
I can't speak for anyone else, but I wasn't saying that the librarian's plan was good. I was just arguing against the position that this was a case of tall poppy syndrome. My impression is that most of us arguing against that position also believe that using competition to foster a love of reading is misguided. So, there seems to be consent that she screwed up, but disagreement on exactly what the screw-up was.
|
She didn't object that the kid won twice or even four times.
It was the *fifth* win that offended her.
That was one too many for her sensibilities.
Not unlike the people who found J.K. Rowling a perfectly fine writer when her books had "only" sold a few million copies but decided she was a talentless hack once she became a billionaire.
The poppy had grown too big for *them*.
Too much success, as defined by *them*, is offensive and not to be tolerated.
And since the library director has the *power* to enforce *her* standards of propriety this is very much like the Vonnegut story.
"It is okay to win four times, children, but not five. Winning a fifth time means you are bad and don't care about the feelings of others. And that you deserve to penalized."
It is, in fact, about enforcing conformity with "standards" set by those in power.
And similar stories abound:
http://notesandqueries.ca/school-is-...-for-a-reader/
Quote:
The teacher calls the child’s mother. “She has to stop talking in class about the books she’s reading. It’s very insensitive. She’s making other students feel bad.”
“They feel bad? Why? What is she saying?”
“She said that Harry Potter isn’t hard to read.”
|