Should The Lord Of The Flies Be Taught

In the debate my reason topic was Should the Lord of the Flies be taught? My thesis was the Lord of the Flies of shouldn’t be taught. My reason statement was that the Lord of the flies shouldn’t be taught because of the language complexity and grammar in the book doesn’t connect to common core. The text evidence that I have is that “Whee-oh!” “Wacco!” “Bong” “Doink” (pg. 33). There are other words that most 10th graders wouldn't know such as “furtive” (pg. 49), “gyration” (pg. 72), “lamentably” (pg. 77), and “Monotonously” (pg. 108). LOTF alsos uses archaic language which is a word or sense that still has some current usage but has dwindled down to a few specialized contents or “old-fashioned” language or as was used in this book, British

Which was the part about the lexile score because that meant that it should be taught since it's for 7th graders and I just should've left it out. I thought those words that I chose like furtive and etcetera were complex and I guess we were supposed to know them so I should’ve dug deeper to find unknown words or even some British English words. I had 3 reason statements in one which doesn't make any sense. Language complexity doesn't connect to and common core. So I should've made it something clearer like The LOTF shouldn't be taught in CGS because the British slang and the author's writing style is hard to comprehend. I personally had a hard time reading it for that reason and because of the imagery and description in the book such the whole beginning paragraph in Chapter 3 (pg. 48). I had to re-read that many times and even start the book over because I was unaware of what was going on at the time. Maybe that can be another reason, the author isn't clear on who is talking making it difficult for readers to understand. There were also other little things that I could've done such as knowing and being more knowledgeable about what I was saying and speaking with more emphasis and