brain...exploding...from...irony...

I suspect that if a novel set as a reading assignment for his daughter were to contain the sentence "all firemen are cowards" for example, then it would mean for Verm that the author believed all firemen to be cowards; that the school authorities that set the text believed all firemen to be cowards; and furthermore, that the government want you to believe that all firemen are cowards. No matter that the statement might be ironic, or that the sentiment might be expressed by a craven idiot or a compulsive liar.The key issue I think with the Farenheit 451 news item is that the pro-ban father cannot read critically. I suspect that he cannot see irony or multiple meanings in a text; and even if he can, he wants to actively deny their existence for himself and his daughter for pragmatic religious reasons.I suspect that if Alton Verm was to admit to himself or his family that texts can contain irony or conflicting messages, then his relationship with whatever holy text he holds in the highest esteem would crumble into ash.I think schools should teach children to read critically, but no doubt many of Verm's beliefs would interpret this, if his school board were to propose it, as a direct threat to his child's immortal soul.I don't think parents have a duty or even a right to shape their children's outlook. Although it is impossible not to influence your kids, I believe that ideally one should nurture a child's critical faculties so that they are best able to shape their own beliefs.Perhaps thats too much to ask for?

If you are saying that my outlook is that of the Nazis and Soviets (which is what I think you are saying) then you have misunderstood.My point was that I think the only thing a parent should do (and although not possible I think it remains the ideal) is to develop their child's critical faculties so they can attempt to evaluate their parent's beliefs or the ideals of the government, or any idea at all, with thoughtfulness and balance.I don't think this would have been viewed as helpful in a repressive regime like Soviet Russian, as I don't think it would be viewed as helpful by the father of that little girl at the start of this discussion.

I agree that Farenheit 451 is about not burning books. That was my point when I talked about the importance of irony or multiple meanings in a text. People like Vern believe that if something is represented in a text it is being condoned. This is patently absurd, but I further offered and explanation of this seemingly odd behaviour: the suggestion that people like him think like this because of their relationship to scripture. Any thoughts on this?I also agree with your assessment of Vern's proclivities when it comes bibliographic pyrotechnics. I'd be interested if you could outline where it is we differ on either of these issues.As for the parent's responsibility to moulding their children, my point was that if a parent has any faith in the validity of their own beliefs, then they should not impose beliefs on their children, but instead teach them to evaluate evidence and weigh up arguments. If their parent's beliefs do indeed hold any water (holy or otherwise), then their children will probably find themselves sharing them; and if they do it will be because they have thought about it for themselves, and not because they have been imposed from on high.If the children end up chosing a different set of beliefs, then at least the parent's can console themselves with the idea that they have given their child the tools to make an informed choice.Does that make sense?

No worries, bat chap,I don't want to get into that argument either. I haven't ever had any children, and so who am I to comment on the finer points of child-rearing? To be honest I was thinking my position as I was writing it, and so won't be aghast if it doesn't stand up to a degree of scrutiny.This is completely off-topic, but talking of dystopias (well, we were talking about farenheit 451 a bit at one point) I just got back from a showing of Children of Men and I was really impressed. If the premise tickles you at all, and you are at all like me, you will be rather impressed by it.Edited by Tusko, : No reason given.

Cheers holmes,Always good to hear from you. I suspect that we aren't disagreeing very much here, and that I've just not made myself sufficiently clear. Perhaps there is an issue of substance here though; you'll soon see.When I used the word "impose" I was thinking of emotional blackmail, primarily - though verbal abuse, the threat of physical abuse and actual physical harm would definitely be be other techniques for imposing beliefs on children. I've seen people be heavily pressured to adopt a faith by their parents, and I've seen people be treated with aloofness by their parents for adopting a faith. In both instances I felt something sad was happening.I hadn't thought about the "re-inventing the wheel" aspect. On reflection though, I don't think its necessarily a problem.After all, you can't realistically hide your beliefs from your children. They are going to get a fairly developed idea of your philosophy just by being around you. Ideally though, I think you wouldn't be dogmatic about the things you believe, to the extent that you would expose them to as many other ideas as you can comfortably manage. Swamp the little critters in stuff.You'd just act naturally and love your kids, and give them the tools for argument, and probably have some unavoidable influence on them but never judge them if they disagreed with you - just challenge their ideas to see if they'd thought about it.I hear your worry about the siren song of others who might nab your children's souls if you are too busy being open-minded. I can only really offer a personal perspective here. My mother and father did a thorough job of instilling a sense of skepticism in me from a very early age. They did such a good job in fact that for as long as I can remember I have always found those who try to pressure me and not argue me into their beliefs to be flagged up by my early warning systems. Perhaps I haven't been submitted to the same degree of pressure as others though, it's true.But I think a child armed with a rational approach to argument is going to be a lot less likely to go and believe something really wacky than a child schooled into believing things are a certain way just because.Naieve? Probably. Like I just said to Chiroptera, I've never raised even one child so I haven't lived at the sharp-end of child-rearing. I probably have a pretty unrealistic idea of how these things work.

I've read what you have to say, and I think you are probably right.