User:Jmg370/sandbox

Final Draft (minor changes made in language):

Critical Reception:

The novel only received a modest amount of attention when first published, often only reviewed in popular literary magazines. However, attention the book did receive praised Morrison’s skill: professional critic Haskel Frankel said, “Given a scene that demands a writer’s best, Morrison responds with control and talent.” The first major signal that the book would sell was an extremely positive review in The New York Times at the start of November in 1970. Morrison was also positively reviewed for her break from the status quo of usual novels from the time period, writing to a wider audience and focusing on black subculture in the forties, rather than the military culture of the time. Notable African American critic Ruby Dee said, “Toni Morrison has not written a story really, but a series of painfully accurate impressions." Morrison was additionally often praised for her wide coverage of emotion in the novel, extending from Pecola Breedlove’s quiet descent into madness to Cholly Breedlove’s skewed mindsets. Morrison’s focus on race was also said to be a strongpoint of the novel.

Critics did pick up on Morrison’s shortcomings as a first time published author. The most critiqued aspect of her writing was her language in the novel, as it was often viewed as being made too simple for the reader. Early critics were also seen being ambivalent about Morrison’s portrayal of the black woman as an object in society rather than a person, only ever going so far as to bring this fact to light and rarely commenting past it. It was only as feminist critique of the novel began that more in-depth analysis was given on this subject. There was also a difference to be seen in Afro-American critics (who often identified more with the characters of the novel) and Euro-American critics (who often only focused on the actual writing of the novel).

As time passed, more reviews and analyses were written in praise of Morrison’s writing of the “colonization of the mind,” her critique of white versus black beauty standards, and even began to analyze her use of simplistic language, calling it a stylistic choice rather than a pitfall of the novel. Popular 1990s critiques focused on her breakdown of classism in race, and often had good things to say about it.

Censorship:

In September, 2013, The Bluest Eye was challenged by Ohio Board of Education president Debe Terhar as a recommended reading for 11th graders statewide in Ohio for being "pornographic." The book was listed as recommended reading in the state's Common Core standards, but was challenged at the state's Board of Education, with some teachers pushing to ban it from the classroom. Although not seen commenting on previous challenges to her books, Morrison specifically commented on this particular incident: "I mean if it’s Texas or North Carolina as it has been in all sorts of states. But to be a girl from Ohio, writing about Ohio having been born in Lorain, Ohio. And actually relating as an Ohio person, to have the Ohio, what — Board of Education? — is ironic at the least.”

The American Civil Liberties Union sent a letter to Debe Terhar, the Ohio Board of Education president, saying that it is her personal opinion that is novel is "pornographic." In the letter it was suggested that Ohio schools “use controversial literature as an opportunity to improve students’ critical thinking skills and to create open dialogue between students and the community.” This received major pushback, with Mark Smith, Ohio Christian University president, saying, "I see an underlying socialist-communist agenda ... that is anti what this nation is about.” However, the book still remains on the recommended reading list, with the Board of Education stating that local school districts can make changes if they desire.

Second Draft (condensed article):

Critical Reception:

The Bluest Eye only received a modest amount of attention when first published, often only reviewed in popular literary magazines. However, the attention the book did receive praised Morrison’s skill: professional critic Haskel Frankel said, “Given a scene that demands a writer’s best, Morrison responds with control and talent.” The first major signal that the book would sell was an extremely positive review in The New York Times at the start of November in 1970. Morrison was also positively reviewed for her break from the status quo of usual novels from the time period, writing to a wider audience and focusing on black subculture in the forties, and not the military culture of the time. “Toni Morrison has not written a story really, but a series of painfully accurate impressions,” wrote Ruby Dee, a notable African American woman critic. Morrison was often praised for her wide coverage of emotion in the novel, extending from Pecola Breedlove’s quiet descent into madness to Cholly Breedlove’s skewed mindsets. Morrison’s focus on race was also said to be a strongpoint of the novel.

Critics did pick up on Morrison’s shortcomings as a first time published author. The most critiqued thing about her writing was her language in the novel, as it was often viewed as having been made too simple for the reader. Critics were also seen being ambivalent about Morrison’s portrayal of the black woman as an object in society rather than a person, only ever going so far as to bring this fact to light and rarely commenting past it. It was only as feminist critique of the novel began that more in-depth analysis was given on this subject. There was also a difference to be seen in Afro-American critics (who often identified more with the characters of the novel) and Euro-American critics (who often only focused on the actual writing of the novel).

As time passed, more reviews and analyses were written in praise of Morrison’s writing of the “colonization of the mind,” her critique of white versus black beauty standards, and even began to analyze her use of simplistic language, calling it a stylistic choice rather than a pitfall of the novel. Popular 1990s critiques focused on her breakdown of classism in race, and often had good things to say about it.

Censorship:

In September, 2013, The Bluest Eye was challenged as a recommended reading for 11th graders statewide in Ohio for being "pornographic." The book was listed as recommended reading in the state's Common Core standards, but was challenged at the state's Board of Education, with some teachers pushing to ban it from the classroom. Although not seen commenting on previous challenges to her books, Morrison specifically commented on this specific incident: "I mean if it’s Texas or North Carolina as it has been in all sorts of states. But to be a girl from Ohio, writing about Ohio having been born in Lorain, Ohio. And actually relating as an Ohio person, to have the Ohio, what — Board of Education? — is ironic at the least.”

The American Civil Liberties Union sent a letter to Debe Terhar, the Ohio Board of Education president, saying that it is her personal opinion that is novel is "pornographic." In the letter it was suggested that the schools “use controversial literature as an opportunity to improve students’ critical thinking skills and to create open dialogue between students and the community.” This received major pushback, with Mark Smith, Ohio Christian University president, saying, "I see an underlying socialist-communist agenda ... that is anti what this nation is about.” However, the book still remains on the recommended reading list, with the Board of Education stating that local school districts can make changes if they desire.

Rough Draft:

The Bluest Eye was Morrison’s first novel, which only received a modest amount of attention when first published. However, the attention the book did receive praised Morrison’s skill: “Given a scene that demands a writer’s best, Morrison responds with control and talent.” Morrison was also positively reviewed for her break from the status quo of usual novels from the time period, writing to a wider audience and focusing on black subculture in the forties, and not the military culture of the time. “Toni Morrison has not written a story really, but a series of painfully accurate impressions,” wrote Ruby Dee. Morrison was often praised for her wide coverage of emotion in the novel, focusing from Pecola Breedlove’s quiet descent into madness to Cholly Breedlove’s skewed mindsets. Morrison’s focus on race was also said to be a strongpoint of the novel.

Critics did pick up on Morrison’s shortcomings as a first time published author. The most critiqued thing about her writing was her language in the novel, as it was often viewed as having been made too simple for the reader. Critics also seem ambivalent about Morrison’s portrayal of the black woman as an object in society rather than a person, only ever going so far as to bring this fact to light and rarely commenting past it.

As time passed, more reviews and analyses were written in praise of Morrison’s writing of the “colonization of the mind,” her critique of white versus black beauty standards, and even began to analyze her use of simplistic language. Popular 1990s critiques focused on her breakdown of classism in race, and often had good things to say about it.

Bibliography:

-http://digitalcommons.auctr.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3480&context=dissertations (dissertation on critical analysis of all of Morrison's novels)

-https://pen.org/nonfiction/beauty-banning-toni-morrisons-bluest-eye (a more recent review, a black woman's account of why people dislike the novel)

-http://www.amerlit.com/novels/ANALYSIS%20Morrison,%20Toni%20The%20Bluest%20Eye%20(1970)%20analysis%20by%2025%20critics.pdf (compilation of reviews of the novel, dating from 1970-2014)

-http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2013/09/12/Debe-Terhar-questions-appropriateness-of-book.html (article about Ohio ban)

-http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/13/ohio-ban-bluest-eye-toni-morrison-school-board_n_3921001.html (article about Ohio ban)