Unwind

 

I am currently reading the novel Unwound (Neal Shusterman), because it is assigned in high schools.

As literature, it is on the level of Dan Brown, or a good comic book: great plotting, but no linguistic charm, vivid description, symbolism, deep characterization, or thematic sublety. It looks to be mostly a conversation starter to discuss politics; specifically, the abortion isse.

The opening premise is that, at some future date, the US dissolves into civil war on the issue of abortion. Eventually a compromise is negotiated: abortion is illegal, but you are free to kill or “unwind” your children at age thirteen.

There is an immediate logical problem with this premise: those opposed to abortion are not going to feel better about killing teenagers. Evidently the author does not understand the issue, or is deliberately falsifying it. Either way, this is not education, but misinformation.

Then the novel has the sole religious family being most aggressively in favour of unwinding their children, on the premise that it is in the Bible. 

Eh?

The author means tithing—so they are obliged to “tithe” their tenth child by killing him. And, after all, wasn’t Moses left in the bullrushes to die? So killing every tenth child is a religious duty.

The problem, as anyone who has read a newspaper or news aggregator knows, is that the religious are generally the ones in favour of “family values,” and against abortion. And, as anyone who has read the Bible knows, Moses was not left in the rushes as a tithe or sacrifice to Yahweh, but at the command of a pagan ruler trying to wipe out the Jews. They might also be aware that such child sacrifice was the crime that provoked Yahweh to cast the Canaanites out of their land, and give it to the Jews.

“Then they made their sons and their daughters pass through the fire, and practiced divination and enchantments, and sold themselves to do evil in the sight of the Lord, provoking Him.” 2 Kings 17:17

This book, used in our schools, is teaching young people the opposite of the truth. Partly, is seem to me, to discredit religion. Religion, they are told, is out to kill them.

According to the peace that ended the imaginary second American Civil War, mothers were also permitted “storking.” That is, unwanted babies could be left at someone else’s doorstep without penalty. This being a supposed concession to the women who wanted abortion.

They can do this, however, only if they do not get caught in the act. 

In other words, it is illegal. It is hardly a concession to say that those who do not get caught will not be prosecuted for a crime. 

 Moreover, the current laws are actually more generous. Currently, it is not a crime. Any mother can put her baby up for adoption. In many states, all she has to do is drop the child off at the nearest hospital. 

Again, the book is falsifying the abortion debate, and feeding the impressionable misinformation.

There is a grave problem here. As I think Mark Twain has said, it is far easier to trick someone than to convince them they have been tricked. By filling their heads with falsehoods, the schools are actually preventing kids from learning.