The Accidental Smallholder Forum
Community => Coffee Lounge => Topic started by: r+lchick on February 05, 2010, 04:40:58 pm
-
My OH tutors small children up to GCSE in all subjects and A-Level in maths (no this is not a advertisement). He came home the other day and said that one of his tutees, 11 years old, is do "The Hitcher" for English. Well, I knew the movie and I was astounded. He didn't know it. I bought the DVD and we watched it. Apart from being rated 18, it is a very menacing movie. Rutger Hauer plays the villain very well. My question is, why are 11 year olds watching 18 movies. There are more gory movies in the market these days and most is supposition. When the hitcher (Rutger Hauer part) looks and gives a smile, it is worse than watching someone's head being blown off. Anyone else's little delicates watching such movies at school. (Yes, they watched the movie at school!!!) Ros
-
NOOOOOOOOO!!!
I work in a school.... we'd be in BIG trouble. If 11 year olds are watching it, you should call OFSTED or CSCI, or even the local education authority/council and report it!
-
Our teachers would be hanged if they allowed us to watch 18's in school, some teachers are even reluctant to show 15's. Are you sure it was in school he watched it? :o
-
I am absolutely gobsmacked! If I remember right a man gets between the lorry and something else and then gets ripped in half as the lorry drives off. Its the only bit of overtly gory violence, but the tension and inferred violence is far too much for an 11 year old. Also surely schools must be honour bound to follow the age guidlines.
I know a friend of mine has had problems with the schools holiday club. Her boys (7 and 8yrs) have Nintendo DSs, a hand held game consol. Someone else at the holiday club was there with their DS and was playing an 18 rated very violent game, which of course her children are now desperate to have after having a turn on it. But this is not in the same league as asking a class of boys to study The Hitcher.
I think its a disgrace and should be reported. >:( >:( >:(
-
Those poor kids, I bet they have nightmares. :(
-
Bearing in mind the trial of those two monsters who had also been allowed to watch unsuitable dvd's I would want a discussion with both the teacher involved and the head. Its well words fail me.
-
This isi the Hitcher they are studying lmao. Just shows we shouldnt jump to comclusions!!!
Hitcher
I'd been tired, under
the weather, but the ansaphone kept screaming.
One more sick-note. mister, and you're finished. Fired.
I thumbed a lift to where the car was parked.
A Vauxhall Astra. It was hired.
I picked him up in Leeds.
He was following the sun to west from east
with just a toothbrush and the good earth for a bed. The truth,
he said, was blowin' in the wind,
or round the next bend.
I let him have it
on the top road out of Harrogate -once
with the head, then six times with the krooklok
in the face -and didn't even swerve.
I dropped it into third
and leant across
to let him out, and saw him in the mirror
bouncing off the kerb, then disappearing down the verge.
We were the same age, give or take a week.
He'd said he liked the breeze
to run its fingers
through his hair. It was twelve noon.
The outlook for the day was moderate to fair.
Stitch that, I remember thinking,
you can walk from there.
Simon Armitage
Not a poem I like but hey each to his own.
-
I absolutely would not like my under 15 year old reading that!!!
-
But you would be ok with Hamlet by Shakespear?
That has several murders and a suicide. Macbeth is even worse, that has witchcraft, patricide and child murders, plus the odd one or two adult murders along the way.
-
Yes, but it is patently obvious even to an 11 year old that Shakespeare was writing fictitiously. That poem and the film are too near modern life and are way way out of order for kids of that age!
-
Shakespear wrote about what was happening in his time and is a reflection of his times. Muder, child abuse, child murder were all more common then, but yes Hamlet is made up but then so was the poem.
That poem is, unfortunately, a modern classic that reflects a part of our time
Not, I agree a very nice poem but then no classic is.
Simon Armitage (born 26 May 1963, Huddersfield) is a British poet, playwright, and novelist. Before finding success with his poetry he worked as a probation officer and a supermarket shelf stacker.[1] He has received numerous awards for his poetry, including The Sunday Times Author of the Year, a Forward Prize, a Lannan Award, and an Ivor Novello Award for his song lyrics in the Channel 4 film Feltham Sings. In 2000, he was made the UK's official Millennium Poet during which time he wrote his over 9,000 line poem "Killing Time" about news events of the previous year.[1] He was one of the judges for the 2005 Griffin Poetry Prize and in 2006 was one of the judges for the Man Booker Prize for Fiction. His writing is characterised by a dry, native Yorkshire wit combined with "an accessible, realist style and critical seriousness." [1]
-
That poem and the film are too near modern life and are way way out of order for kids of that age!
I, being a 15 year old, wouldn't enjoy studying that text.
-
I wouldn't read it for pleasure but as an academic text? that's different IMHO. I don't think it's any worse than Shakespeare or reading the news for that matter. What matters is the context - I hardly think that any teacher is going to be recommending the behaviour in the poem. And to learn right from wrong, do you not have to experience, albeit secondhand, wrong behaviour?
-
I agree, Rosemary. There are many issues that could be discussed in class, besides the use of language within the poem. Morals are beginning to be greyer and not so black and white with eleven year olds, and it is the best time to discuss and maybe debate, for example, what constitutes lawlessness - is it a case of doing something because one doesn't believe they'd get caught, or is it an inherent belief that it is wrong to hurt another person, etc. Yes, the poem is dark and the subject matter is slightly morbid, but it is an excellent one, nonetheless, as a purely intellectual exercise in empathy, values, opportunistic crime, mental aberrations etc etc (I could go on..)
-
*Shrugs*
I studied "A Clockwork Orange" at school when I wasn't much older than 11. Scenes of rape, murder, sadism, drug abuse, assault, and torture by the state.
It's also one of the best, and most important bits of literature of the past 50 years and deserves to be read and discussed by any readership who can understand and appreciate it's themes as part of their education.
I think this whole idea of people committing heinous acts due solely to the media they have been exposed to, be it movies, video games, literature or whatever is massivly, and unhelpfully, overstated.
As a friend of mine said after the Columbine Massacre (which at the time was blamed by some on their exposure to video games where shooting things was a theme) . . . "You have two psychopaths, a load of guns and a video game . . . and you take away the video game . . . what difference does that make?"
If you're in a situation where a movie, or a game, or a book, inspires the manner of someone going out to kill or maim fellow human beings I'd argue that individual was already deeply dangerous and a serious threat to the public before he got anywhere near his TV, Library or X-Box . . .
-
And now we have a more 'balanced' view of that poem. ;D
I suggest all those who really take exception to that poem being taught should look up on the 'net why it is being taught and what value it has as an academic piece of work, just to say that you don't like it and don't want it taught to your child is a very narrow and idealistic view.
BTW kids have been imbibing violent information and scenes of violence since they first watched classic cartoons in babyhood or listened to Mums telling them nursery rhymes, it is nothing new.
Oh and remember to rush the kids out of the front room when the news comes on the TV because thats very violent usually.
-
I stand by my opinion, although I do appreciate yours.
-
*Shrugs*As a friend of mine said after the Columbine Massacre (which at the time was blamed by some on their exposure to video games where shooting things was a theme) . . . "You have two psychopaths, a load of guns and a video game . . . and you take away the video game . . . what difference does that make?"
Actually, that amounts to three psychopaths.....one is responsible for the content of the video game.
-
Hilarysmum I dont like that poem at all but a knee jerk reaction to anything isnt good.
We first assumed here that the kids were going to be studying The Hitcher film, which is a psychological thriller designed to scare anyone which would scare 11 yr olds, but it turns out to be a poem by a modern classic poet. So the initial knee jerk reaction was wrong.
The point Im trying to make, rather badly it seems, is that you/we MUST find out BEFORE you/we form an opinion, then by all means state your/our informed opinion.
Jackie
Playing Devils Advocate today. :)
-
I remember Tom and Jerry and The Roadrunner as only 2 examples of cartoons I grew up watching as being violent and vicious. Any one watched an episode of Emmerdale, Eastenders or Coronation Street with their young kids they are equally as violent and misleading to impressionable kids??? Me playing devils advocate this morning too!
PS remember Punch and Judy this made domestic violence and violence to the police as being funny and acceptable? And that was intended for pre school children!!!!
-
Hey up James Wot abhat T.C. and Brain not to mention Officer Dibble ? ;D ;D :farmer:
-
AengusOg:
I'm not sure if the people who create those video games could be described as psychopaths? Having a good imagination, and knowing what sells in terms of games does not constitute psychopathic tendencies surely?
I also agree with Jackie. I think that media created moral panic is designed to make us fearful, and more prone to knee jerk reactions. At what age should our children be released from their fluffy cocoons and introduced to the vagaries of human nature, and in what way should they be introduced - personally I'd much rather discuss certain topics with my kids in an educational or intellectual way, rather than in an emotionally wrought one.
Also, I'm sure most of us have introduced violence in our little ones lives - anyone remember the story of two little children abandoned by their parents in the woods, only to be kept prisoner by a witch who wanted to eat them, or the story of the stepmother who was so overwhelmed by sexul jealousy she wanted to kill her own stepdaughter, who went to live with seven men - the fairytales we feed our little kids are pretty sordid, even if we give them the saccharined version by Disney. Of course this doesn't give us licence to show the them the goriest, scariest films available; I'm just pointing out that we tend to conveniently ignore the stuff that isn't overtly deviant, and allow the 'acceptable ones' even though their content is just as bad.
-
James funnily enough I was thinking of Tom and Jerry when I wrote about classic cartoons. lol
George if I remember right officer Dibble never did catch TC lol Do you remember Captain Pugwash? Now that was violent and aimed at pre schoolers too!
Sagehen you have echoed my thoughts exactly!
I too preferred to discuss life issuses and vagries of human nature in general terms (sometimes in detail dependant on what they had heard etc) with my kids in a sensible and structured way so that they felt safe whilst exploring things they had heard or seen or read.
We cannot, and should not, cucoon our children as it makes them vulnerable to anything bad. What we should do is explain about life and risks (age appropriately) in a calm manner and that each of us is responsible for ourselves and our actions.
Did you know that in the 40' & 50's when children were kept in ignorance that there were more child sex attacks because no one had told the kids about 'wrong touches' and to tell.
Children are not stupid they do pick up on whats right or wrong if we, ouselves, know what is right or wrong. In other words WE as parents set the standards by which our children live.
-
Knowing what sells to kids is one thing.....creating computer games based on greed and gratuitous violence, and selling it to kids is another.
-
certainly, my reaction was to the information that 11 year olds were being shown 18 rated films! I believe others' were too?
Now, if you'd like a debate on violence on screen, bring it on!!
-
AengusOg:
Knowing what sells to kids is one thing.....creating computer games based on greed and gratuitous violence, and selling it to kids is another.
Well, yes, I do agree that there are games out there that is purely gratuitous violence, but my point was that you can't just call someone a psychopath because they create those games.
-
Go on then, Little Blue ;D Start a debate on violence on screen ;D
-
Knowing what sells to kids is one thing.....creating computer games based on greed and gratuitous violence, and selling it to kids is another.
You are aware Video Games come with age restrictions and have for years aren't you?
-
Yes Little Blue my reaction was intially exactly the same as yours and based on the thought that the kids were being shown an 18 rated film BUT I then thought that the school couldn't be so stupid as to show the kids a film that would inevitably get the school into trouble so I did a little research and found the truth of the matter.
That was the point of my posts, we reacted to something that was wrong in a knee jerk way.
With a little common sense light was shed on the matter and all became clear.
All this has been a very much 'them and us' situation. We don't trust 'them', the schools but we do trust 'us' the other posters. :)
-
It was the movie that they watched. When ever I did Shakespeare at school, we only read it and it was in play form, so no fill in bits, which does sanitise it. I know it is different now and they are shown the plays, but it is still not tying up a girl between two trucks and taking off. However, I will run off the poem for him. It would make a good comparison for the film.
-
Sorry, I am adamant on this. There is too much information given to underage kids these days. These videos and poems contain gratutious violence and it stimulates young minds to do liewise! The imagination was sufficient when I was at school, and sometimes my imagination was to scary to think about. And that poem is not well written. I did Higher English at school, got an A, and I would have been slated for a poem like that - in fact I will write one better, but in a similar style and post it on here to illustrate what I mean. In the meantime here is one my friend wrote for a laugh
Ode to Annie's pup
Oh to be in Scotland now the new pu'ps here
No more watching telly, no more drinking beer,
Looking out for phessies, hares, and other stuff
He's in the field and gaining
On that chicken up the duff.
Piddling on the carpet
Chewing up the chairs,
Sicking in the dog crate
Tearing out my hairs,
Where the hecks the trainer
When you need to ask
Just what you do to get the thing
To come running back
At least it flipping scans! ;D
-
Um Ros, Shakespeare only wrote plays (and sonnets but that's something else), and they were meant to be performed, so really if you get to see the plays performed, it would help in understanding the text. Or do you mean they are shown the film versions of the plays? Are you sure the kids watched the Rutget Hauer film instead of the poem, because the National Curriculum syllabus would state what they are meant to learn for the year?
Annie, that's a lovely poem, and it does scan well. However, scanning isn't a necessity for a poem. Haikus for example, do not scan in the normal way, but are a genre in itself. I actually thought Simon Armitage's poem quite brilliant in the way it conveys a lot of 'modern rage' in such a few words, myself, but that may just be me ;D
-
OK, non scanning poem.
It was and still is - a nightmare,
just not fair.
A roller coaster from when he fell, a week of hell.
No-one could know if he would die or live
the love and support they could give did not help
Doctors know so much yet not enough to save some.
So sad but we all come to the same place at the end
So for now we fill our time and enjoy our time until it is our time.
-
That tugs at the heart strings scanning or not.
-
Are you sure the kids watched the Rutget Hauer film instead of the poem, because the National Curriculum syllabus would state what they are meant to learn for the year?D
Definitely that movie. We watched it again last night. Scary stuff. I know that poem from the curriculum. Not the most pleasant of poems. It did get me looking at poems that I did when I was their age. We had "The Man from Ironbark" by A B (Banjo) Patterson (Don't forget - Aussie schooling). Slightly violent but in a more pleasant manner!! Ros
-
Ros, if it is the film, your husband has a responsibility to inform the headteacher, and enquire if the teacher has obtained permission from parents for showing an 18 rated film to 11 year olds. I doubt 11 year olds are doing film studies, and even if they are, there are protocols for it. There may be a misunderstanding somewhere, but I doubt very much that a teacher would show the film 'The Hitcher' to his students, because it's not worth his job, to do something like that. I agree that the poem isn't the most pleasant of poems, but I still think it's quite brilliant. I remember having to do Auden's poems and Wilfred Owen when I was 13 or so, and feeling really moved by the unnecessary violence in war :(
-
My daughter's (primary) school sent round permission letters before showing a 12/PG rated film to the kids - I would have thought a senior school would be similar. I'd be livid if I found they'd shown an 18 film to an 11 year old - although I do admit to being a bit conservative and consider most 18 rated films shouldn't even be shown to adults especially on a reguar basis!
Trouble is there is far too much sex and violence in evidence in daily life - newspapers, magazines, tv, adverts, in fact wherever you look - to make much difference banning it in schools! As an example I remember my Mum used to get the Daily Mail regularly (for the special offers, she said!) and when my daughter became an enthusiastic reader at a relatively early age she used to hide it away as the content was generally fairly sordid. And thats mild compared to some of the papers. It is difficult, because it would also be wrong to pretend nasty things don't happen.
-
It is difficult, because it would also be wrong to pretend nasty things don't happen.
I totally agree, but my stance will never change! You must at all costs tailor the content of anything whether it be video, radio, books or newspapers to the age of the reader - and if that means stopping kids seeing newspapers then so be it!
-
I think most parents would only expose age related material to their children, but I don't think that's really the issue. I think the issue is WHAT the parents decide is suitable for their children. Something that you think may be okay, I might not be okay with, and vice versa. I mean, what does constitute suitable material for an 11 year old? I often underestimate my kids, and think they are not capable of handling something, and they always surprise me by being quite mature about it. I usually go by the adage, 'If they are old enough to ask, they are old enough to know the answer', and so far it's worked.
-
I was approached in Argos the other day by an elderly woman and I assume her grandson, he looked no older than 11yrs, they obviously could not write as they asked me to write down a number for them for a playstation game, I found it for them then explained it was certified 18yrs (it was Grand Theft Auto San Andreas) they shrugged and said 'so'? I said none of my business but as long as you know its only suitable for adults, they just walked off and ordered it, didnt even say thanks ::) they waited by the kiost and asked the lady behind if it was there yet, she said they had to wait for the number, that I dont think they understood, so they just stood there, then the lasy gave it to him, and said 'there you go son, is the game for you?' ::)
-
I think most parents would only expose age related material to their children, but I don't think that's really the issue. I think the issue is WHAT the parents decide is suitable for their children. Something that you think may be okay, I might not be okay with, and vice versa. I mean, what does constitute suitable material for an 11 year old? I often underestimate my kids, and think they are not capable of handling something, and they always surprise me by being quite mature about it. I usually go by the adage, 'If they are old enough to ask, they are old enough to know the answer', and so far it's worked.
From that I must assume that you are a mature, sensible and responsible parent, and I salute you.
Unfortunately, I don't think it is a majority of parents who would take the same interest as do you and I. In certain areas of Britain there doesn't seem to be any inclination by parents to police their childrens' uptake of material. Many of the children in inner cities are old before their time, and know far too much for their age.
-
I'm such a woose that I'm usually not keen on 15 rated films. I tend to stick to PG or U. I've NEVER watched an 18 (Apart from Lady Chatterley's Lover starring Sylvia Kristel) - it would give me nightmares. ;D
-
You're not alone, Rosemary! I can't watch anything scary either ;D ;D ;D
-
I'm a horror film buff - it's actually one of my interests, and there's nothing better than sitting down and watching a scary movie at night, with a bucket of popcorn ;D
Oh and thank you AengusOg, I hope I am anyway - mature and responsible that is!