Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
A Matter of Principal?
Headlines are accumulating about the forced resignation of a charter school principal in Tallahassee. (For a taste, here’s WaPo’s article.) Allegedly, Hope Carrasquilla’s indiscretion was to give a lesson to sixth-grade students on Michelangelo’s David, The Creation of Adam, and Botticelli’s Birth of Venus. We’re told some parents complained about the material, one going so far as to say the statue is “pornographic.”
Many articles suggest that the phrase “parental rights” was tossed… and therefore, that was that for Miss Carrasquilla. Naturally, some variation of “Ron DeSantis’s Florida” made its way into most of the texts. Perhaps that goes without saying. But this story seems to have legs beneath the indecorous bits. Which direction they’re running isn’t clear yet, but I think serious citizens ought to keep an eye out.
I had to look up the Tallahassee Classical School (TCS). It did not exist when I was left to the nearby prison that is Raa Middle. TCS opened in 2020 with initial advisement from Hillsdale College. Its mission: “To train the minds and improve the hearts of young people through a content-rich classical education in the liberal arts and sciences, with instruction in the principles of moral character and civic virtue.” The chair of the school board Barney Bishop III insists that it wasn’t the ancient nudies that motivated his ultimatum to Carrasquilla to resign or be fired—though the ultimatum has been confirmed. Instead, it was that, among other unspecified factors, prior notice hadn’t been given to parents.
If I haven’t already, allow me to go on the record as being pro-parental rights in education. No responsible alternative exists in the minimal sense, and there’s no better we can do than to have mothers and fathers deeply involved in the bringing up of their children. Inevitably there would be some ugly chapters in this custody fight over America’s youth given the breaks between its adults. Whether this is an unneccesary one, I can’t say yet—it is possible that this was an ordinary firing that had viral potential.
In any case, it’s a reminder that conservatives are a generally tame bunch. If this is a prime example of the unintended casualties of a war the right started a few years back, we’re a decent people… hopefully an introspective one, too. What I find interesting here (regardless of what ultimately surfaces) is that this shows that the intra-party fights over what we mean by “pro-parents” haven’t quite played out yet. That’s understandable given the all-of-a-sudden need for an explicit dictum that the adults who made the little people (and who love said little people more than any other bigger people possibly could) should be the authority on what ought to be put into the little people’s little heads. But the nature of the consensus remains to be seen. To what extent are we a “we” at all?
I suspect it’s time to assess this impromptu coalition. There are surely political merits to keeping this vague, but I think putting up a rough draft of the paradigm is advisable. Luckily there’s this Ricochet thing! I have a few Q’s below, but, by all means, go with it where you will.
Would you put your money on this being an ordinary firing that’s painted as politically motivated by unfair media apparatchiks? Is the classical ed school wrong to have Renaissance Art (given the era’s artists’ romantic taste for oft-curiously-naked subjects) as a requirement for sixth-grade students? Were the disgruntled parents wrong to expect notice for content of this sort? Are flat-footed administrators unprepared for the array of parental concerns, maybe unclear on the mission of schools like TCS? Should normie classical parents prepare themselves for good-ol’-fashioned civic arguments? (Is there such a thing as a normie classical parent?) Or is it David who was wrong to show up to a death match in his impressive birthday suit?
Published in General
I am sure there is a lot more to the story. The explanation from the school board chair suggests that the principal had a “read the room” problem. I don’t have children or grandchildren (or even the potential great-grandchildren) so I am quite out of touch with the expectations for 12-13 year olds. What are they exposed to already? Is the community, if not prudish, at least worried about exposing 12-13 year olds to classic art works that display genitalia?
When I was 12-13 years old, bra adverts were exciting. We seem to be waaaay beyond that today, so I don’t know quite how to react other than it isn’t only the children that need a foundation for this, but the parents as well. So preparing the parents for the curricula should have been understood as prerequisite to the material. That’s why I say the principal may have had a “read the room” problem and this likely wasn’t the first instance where this became evident to the board. But, who knows?
If we as a society can’t recognize the difference of exposing school children to inappropriate sexual material vs. renaissance sculpture and documentary video of a live birth. Then we deserve to be forced to learn Mandarin in re-education camps.
This year I bought a Michelangelo wall calendar. The man sure did love his genitalia.
I’m told they are less, um, obtrusive in their proper context, the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.
Obtrusive? What is it, a pop-up calendar?
No … but that’s a sure fire moneymaking idea!
Who says we are? Who says that’s what happened here?
I’m not trying to keep art from sixth graders. I’m saying that they won’t see nudes as art. The Western Canon is so chock full of stuff that you can easily teach other pieces of art to these kids until their hormones have had a couple years to simmer down.
Aren’t we all? You just don’t understand, dad.
Worrying about Venus seems a bit odd when little Billy in the seats has access to hardcore on his phone. But maybe Tyler next to him doesn’t have a phone (child abuse, I know.) Even in our degraded times not every kid is going to have the same background and the same exposure to smut. If a twelve-year-old porn addict is already bored by Venus rising out of the ocean, I don’t think that gives us leave to titillate the more sheltered kid next to him. I’d rather err on the side of caution.
I’m not certain where I fall on this. I’m guessing that by 6th grade I’d already seen this statue, felt a little embarrassed by it, and generally moved on. My parents could be a bit prudish at times, but I appreciate the intent to shield my brother and I from perverts and their means; however, we did have texts in the house, along with National Geographic publications, that would have shown most of this and we knew it. However, it was there for us (brother and I) to discover and I don’t recall that we addressed it purposefully in a school session. Were I a school administrator, my inclination might be to make the parents well aware of the texts we were using so that they could peruse the content in advance. Should one have discomfort with the human nudity to be shown, I would be inclined to ask them to discuss it with their child first and note that the way you get past dealing with a subject in an immature fashion is to deal with it in a mature fashion, not make much of potentially offending aspects, and move along. The earlier you deal with stuff in a mature and responsible fashion, the likelier you are to teach the young ones to do it as well, rather than simply expecting them to know how to deal with it on their own in the surrounds of foolish children who or adult scoundrels who seek to make hay of the sensitive item or topic. I would share that same approach and thought to any parent who asked about it. Should they wish to avoid that particular item, it seems reasonable that the child not have to be subject to it in the classroom, but I would remind them that the child will at some point be subject to it, and likely not in the surrounds of mature teachers intent on treating this only as part of a broader subject and attempting to guide the discussion.
Oh, if only we had mature teachers! Instead of those promulgating “drag queen story hour” and being intent on discussing their same-sex marriage with the kiddos…
It’s looking more and more that way.
I wouldn’t call Tallahassee prudish. College town with big football and basketball programs. Kids are exposed to a lot at those games alone, and, with a few exceptions, the public schools are pretty rough.
Sounds like it was a few parents who would’ve opted out.
Ya know, it’s funny, I thought the same thing as I was writing the post. I don’t think Hank’s said anything I seriously disagree with. And yet:
I think this is right on the money.
Kinda reminds me of the ‘kids learning about sex on the street’ argument for sex ed. Which I do not want to revisit here.
Rather, there is value in letting kids know that sniggering about sex parts is childish and reflects poorly on them.
Maybe it would be a good start to get kids to stop sniggering over “don we now our gay apparel.”
If they can accomplish that, then move along to Step 2.
Alright, I’ll try harder.
Oh c’mon, that’s just funny.
Coming at it from the other end of the problem. One of the problems we have with society is that teachers are treating their classrooms as if they rule the fiefdom by the divine right of kings. While I’m against cancel culture generally I’m fine with removing educators for even unreasonable causes until they remember that they have access to the kids at the sufferance of the parents, and start to act like it.
Yes. It’s creepy.
And all the more sus when the indoctrinators are people who can’t have their own kids.