The Patron Saint of Superheroes

Open letter to the Lexington City School Board about removing the graphic novel One Fine Summer from the middle school library.

First, I want to thank the entire board for responding to these book concerns thoughtfully and carefully. I’m also grateful for having had the opportunity to speak at the last board meeting. I limited my two minutes to Kiss Number 8. I would like to expand those comments in response to a “Request for Reconsideration” of another graphic novel, This One Summer.

The complaint includes the following:

According to the definition of “sexually explicit” presented at the school board meeting, this novel is not sexually explicit. It also does not meet the definition of “R-rated.” It does not include any representations, visual or textual, of sex acts. It only briefly represents individuals talking about sex acts. The complaint also takes those statements out of context, failing to note that they are spoken by antagonist characters and that the statements do not reflect the attitudes of the main characters and therefore presumably the authors.

Using the film industry rating system, this might fall under PG-13: “A PG-13 motion picture may go beyond the PG rating in theme, violence, nudity, sensuality, language, adult activities or other elements, but does not reach the restricted R category” (filmratings.com).

However, since the novel does not include any nudity or directly represented adult activities, it might fit a PG rating: “A PG-rated motion picture should be investigated by parents before they let their younger children attend. The PG rating indicates, in the view of the Rating Board, that parents may consider some material unsuitable for their children, and parents should make that decision. The more mature themes in some PG-rated motion pictures may call for parental guidance. There may be some profanity and some depictions of violence or brief nudity. But these elements are not deemed so intense as to require that parents be strongly cautioned beyond the suggestion of parental guidance. There is no drug use content in a PG-rated motion picture.”

An R-rated film typically includes “sexually-oriented nudity,” which this novel does not.

The misleading use of the term “sexually explicit” is not limited to the individual who wrote the complaint. This One Summer is listed under “Sexually Explicit Materials” in a school document:

Though I’m not sure what definition the school is using for “mature content,” I personally believe that This One Summer would fall under that label. It does not, however, belong on any “Sexually Explicit list” – at least not according to the definition of “sexually explicit” provided to the public at the last board meeting or to any other definition that I’ve encountered.

The phrase “sexually explicit” was also used in text messages between the principal and superintendent:

This, I believe, was in regard to the novel Kiss Number 8, but as with One Fine Summer, the use of the phrase “sexually explicit” is false. More concerning, the principal and superintendent do not appear to have read the novel they decided to remove. The statement “based on these two pages alone” indicates that they accepted the out-of-context excerpts of the person who made the complaint, and, more strangely, assume that the rest of the novel includes similar material. This is a disturbingly ignorant process for judging the appropriateness of any material.

While I’m writing specifically about One Fine Summer, the “Request for Reconsideration,” the school’s “Sexually Explicit Materials” list, and the messages between administrators further demonstrate the need for objectively verifiable definitions that do not allow subjective attitudes to enter into any decision process.

Thank you again for your time and attention.

I apologize if I’m giving too much feedback, but in case it’s helpful, I’ve looked over the material on the school website and have some further thoughts. 

According to a revision of the draft policy, the school “prohibits selecting and maintaining materials considered to be sexually explicit by the definition provided.” The draft, however, does not provide a definition; it only references 2.2-2827 of the Virginia Code. For clarity, please quote the relevant language from 2.2-2827.

Once included, the Code’s definition still requires further clarification.

The phrase “sexually explicit” means words or images depicting any of five things. The first and last on the list seem unproblematically straightforward (“sexual bestiality” and “sadomasochistic abuse”), but the middle three may leave room for uncertainty.

Fortunately, the Code provides unambiguous definitions in the related section 18.2-390, which I urge be included in the policy too:

A “lewd exhibition of nudity” must depict the “nudity” of “genitals, pubic area or buttocks” or “the female breast.” (The Code does not define “lewd,” but multiple dictionaries indicate a specifically sexual meaning.)

“Sexual excitement” must depict “genitals when in a state of sexual stimulation or arousal.”

And “sexual conduct” must depict “masturbation, sexual intercourse, or physical contact in an act of apparent sexual stimulation or gratification with a person’s clothed or unclothed genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or, if such be female, breast.”

There is very little room for subjective disagreement about any of these terms. These are the kind of unambiguous definitions that the policy should have when defining a potentially subjective term such as “sexually explicit.” 

When these unambiguous definitions are applied to Kiss Number 8 and This One Summer, the graphic novels are not sexually explicit. That is, they do not depict any nudity, including of any genitals, stimulated or unstimulated; and they do not depict any sexual acts.

And yet the novels were listed as “sexually explicit.”

The draft policy also indicates that the principal must “review the instructional materials in question.” I hope the board will further clarify the definition of “review.”

 It seems that the decision to remove a novel was made after administrators reviewed only one and a half of its pages, less than 1% of its total contents. I would have assumed that administrators would review an entire novel as the first step in an evaluation process. Since there is evidence that this most basic first step did not happen in the case of Kiss Number 8, the policy needs to make the requirement explicit.

[The draft policy and revision are here.]

Tags: book bans, kiss number 8, Lexington City School Board, tamaki, this one summer