(File/Getty Images)
COLUMBIA — A state education committee postponed deciding whether a novel about a young woman who becomes addicted to meth should be removed from all public high schools in South Carolina.
The vote to delay a decision on “Crank” marked the only time Thursday that a State Board of Education panel didn’t follow recommendations from the Department of Education, which presented 11 books for approval or rejection.
The board’s Instructional Materials Review Committee agreed with staff that seven other contemporary novels should be removed from classrooms and library shelves, while three classic novels can stay. Those recommendations will go for final approval before the full state board on Tuesday.
The 11 books are the first to be reviewed by the board under a state regulation that took effect in June. It bans public schools from having or using books with “sexual conduct.”
The regulation ties the definition to the state’s obscenity law, but only to a portion of the code that lists sexual activities. Any books and other classroom materials that describe or depict what’s on that list are barred.
Dr. Christian Hanley, the committee chair, said Thursday the 11 books were selected after he asked state Department of Education staff to review any books challenged in multiple school districts, or books mentioned repeatedly as the regulation made its way through the approval process.
Staff recommended keeping “To Kill a Mockingbird,” “Romeo and Juliet” and “1984.”
The eight books recommended for banning, including “Crank,” were all published in the 2000s or 2010s. Only “To Kill a Mockingbird” and “Romeo and Juliet” are available for middle school students, the rest are only in high schools.
“Crank” was clearly not in line with the state regulation, said Robert Cathcart, a staff member who presented each book.
If “descriptions or visual depictions of sexual conduct” are in any passages, as exist in “Crank,” then the book “must be removed from all South Carolina schools,” Cathcart said.
Hanley, a Summerville family doctor, seemed to agree. But he said he received an email before the meeting from someone who found the book helpful in dealing with drug use in the family.
“After reading that email, I wanted to get to ‘yes’ on this book,” Hanley said. Based on the excerpts depicting sexual content, though, “it looks like we’re kind of stuck.”
Three board members voted in favor of postponing a decision on the book: Former state House Education Chairwoman Rita Allison of Spartanburg County, retired Lancaster educator Joyce Crimminger, and retired Saluda educator Tammie Shore.
‘1984,’ ‘Romeo & Juliet’ to be considered under new SC ‘age-appropriate’ book rule
Hanley voted against a delay. But his vote as chairman would count only if needed to break a tie.
Not all of the books drew public testimony. But most of the people who spoke wanted the board to approve the books’ availability.
Mary Foster, of Beaufort, said “Crank” was one of 97 books challenged in Beaufort County schools in 2022. Following a district review, 91 of them were approved to remain in its schools.
“’Crank’ was one of those 91 titles; seven committee members reviewed it in full and voted unanimously to return it to the shelves,” Foster said.
Foster said she reached out to the author, Ellen Hopkins, for her comment on the proposed removal. She read a section of the reply from Hopkins, which was also shared by the state American Civil Liberties Union ahead of the meeting.
Hopkins said the book is based loosely on her own daughter’s experience with methamphetamine.
“I was determined to turn other teens away from that path if I could. I also wanted those who’d already chosen that direction to believe there was a way out, and I wanted people who’d never made that choice to develop understanding and empathy for those who had,” Foster read from the statement.
Many of the speakers talked about the training school librarians go through to select books, the process that local districts like Beaufort have used to decide what to keep on the shelves, and the ways that even books with sexual content can inform and inspire students.
The seven books the state panel agreed should be removed included three fantasy books from author Sarah J. Maas.
Given the number of explicit passages pulled from those three, any future books from Maas should possibly bring extra scrutiny, Hanley said.
One speaker, Steve Nuzum, who is a vocal critic of the regulation, signed up to oppose George Orwell’s “1984.”
He disagreed with the staff analysis that there were no sexual passages, and read several scenes from the book where characters reference or have sex.
“Should a book be reduced to a few out-of-context sentences?” he said when he finished. “Of course not. If we consider the artistic and literary merit of ‘1984,’ of course it should not be removed.”
But, he argued, if the committee considered books it “likes” on the overall merit and other books based on a few passages and excerpts, it would be engaging in “viewpoint discrimination.”
“The solution is to change the regulation, not to pretend it says something it doesn’t,” Nuzum said.
Cathcart said there was not enough detail in the passages to make it fall afoul of the regulation.
The main criteria for rejection is not whether or not sex is referenced, which it is in “Romeo and Juliet” and “To Kill a Mockingbird,” but whether it was depicted clearly on the page, he said.
“I do understand there are passages in (‘1984’) that some may allege are descriptions of sexual conduct as defined by this regulation,” Cathcart said. “However, these passages do not rise to the level … of explanatory detail necessary to violate the regulation.”