Superintendent: 'Waterland' Should Have Been Reviewed First

Plymouth-Canton Superintendent Jeremy Hughes said Monday that if he were to do it again, he would have put Graham Swift’s Waterland through a formal review process instead of after a parent complained in December.

Hughes said that while he still objected to the graphic sexual content in the book, he was wrong to pull the book from the classroom and regrets disrupting the curriculum.

Hughes also clarified to community members that the district’s school board has not yet weighed in on the issue, despite what he characterized as anger toward the board regarding the book challenge.

“There’s no reason for people to blame the board,” Hughes said. 

At the board’s last two meetings, by proponents of private and church-run schools, criticizing the school board for apparently voting to keep Toni Morrison’s Beloved, another book challenged by the same parents, in classrooms, despite the board having never having weighed in on the matter.

Hughes spoke at a special meeting to compensate for a Jan. 24 meeting’s public comments being limited to 45 minutes, an action that and left about 15 people unable to address the board.

The board invited those who were unable to speak the first time, and between the speakers and other interested parties, saw another packed board room as parents and community members defended their stances on Waterland and Beloved, another challenged textbook that will stay in AP English classrooms after a recommendation from a committee assembled by the district.

Waterland beginning Feb. 8.

Tim Roraback, a parent who had objected to the previous meeting’s time limit, accepted a public apology from Vice President Adrienne Davis, who had chaired the Jan. 24 meeting. Roraback urged the district to reinstate Waterland to classrooms if it is undergoing a review process.

Roraback said there’s “no good reason” to keep the book out of classrooms, and urged the district to keep Waterland stocked in the district’s libraries.

That idea likely wouldn’t sit well with Matt Dame, the parent who complained about Waterland and Beloved. Dame said it might not be a good idea to have the book, which he says contains material inappropriate for younger readers, available in the libraries to 13-year-old students.

“Is that wise?” he asked the board.

Dame also criticized the district for removing adhesive labels that censor the book’s objectionable content. 

Rose Lang of Superior Township, a parent of three Canton High School students, said what is most shocking about the issue is how “desensitized” students are to the words and actions in the two books. 

“It’s scary that kids are not fazed by the language,” she said.

Student Jessi Longe, who made a YouTube video defending the use of both books in AP English, appealed to those in attendance to keep the discourse civil and avoid using words such as “enemies” for those with whom they disagree.

Longe said nothing in either book should cause much concern with district parents.

“Actions speak louder than words,” she said. “The only time we become concerned is when words become actions.”

Former AP students respond to removal of Waterland

While the book-challenge issue has drawn responses from parents, teachers and current students, it also has resonated with former students.

Lauren Crawford and Julie Rowe, both enrolled in teacher Brian Read’s AP English class in 2005-06 when they were 16 years old, spoke about the impact Waterland has had on their lives.

Crawford, a University of Michigan graduate, said after the meeting there was a “state of disbelief” upon first hearing from Read news of the book being pulled.

“Waterland was the most important book, to me, that I’ve ever read,” Rowe, a current U-M student, said.

Rowe said she hopes the process can take over and that Waterland can be reinstated in AP English classrooms.

“(The district) shouldn’t allow books to be removed on moral objections,” she said. “This cannot be a moral issue.”