Latest news with #LonesomeDove
Time of India
28-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Texas House passes school library bill, intensifying US battle over who decides what students read
The Texas House gave preliminary approval on May 27, 2025, to a bill that would shift significant control over public school library materials from professional librarians to school boards and parents. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The bill, known as Senate Bill 13, was passed in an 87-57 vote and now heads back to the Senate for final approval. The legislation is part of a growing national debate over what books students should be allowed to access in public schools. Supporters argue the bill gives parents and local communities more say in their children's education, while critics warn it could lead to overbroad bans on important literary and historical works. Bill gives school boards final authority on book removals Senate Bill 13 would grant school boards, rather than librarians, the final authority to approve or remove books from school libraries. As reported by the Texas Tribune, the bill establishes a process for responding to complaints about library materials and allows school boards to either make final decisions themselves or delegate responsibility to local school advisory councils. These councils could be formed if 20% of parents in a district sign a petition — a requirement added in a House committee. The original Senate version had mandated the creation of such councils outright. The bill also includes detailed definitions of 'harmful material' and 'indecent content,' which prompted concern among Democratic lawmakers. They warned that vague language could lead to the banning of classic titles such as The Catcher in the Rye, Lonesome Dove, and even the Bible. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Debate over 'community values' and censorship risks During House floor discussion, Rep. James Talarico, D-Austin, warned the bill's language requiring that approved books align with 'local community values' could enable small but vocal groups to drive decisions. 'If your answer to 'could Romeo and Juliet be banned,' if it is anything other than 'of course not,' then that is a serious problem,' Talarico said, as quoted by the Texas Tribune. Rep. Erin Zwiener, D-Driftwood, expressed concern that what may be considered inappropriate for a five-year-old may not be for a 17-year-old, highlighting the danger of a one-size-fits-all approach. According to the Texas Tribune, she warned the bill could result in sweeping bans based on inconsistent standards. Amendments fail, while parental rights are emphasized Several proposed amendments to soften the bill's language around profanity and indecency were rejected. Rep. Brent Money, R-Greenville, unsuccessfully proposed reducing the threshold for creating advisory councils from 20% of parents to just 50 signatures, and restricting membership to petition signers only, the Texas Tribune reported. Rep. Brad Buckley, R-Salado, the bill's House sponsor, defended the legislation, saying it prioritizes children over controversial books. 'We should cherish and value our kids more, and Senate Bill 13 will do exactly that,' Buckley said, as quoted by the Texas Tribune. He dismissed fears of banning classics as a 'red herring.' Bill linked to broader effort to restrict explicit content The bill builds on House Bill 900, passed in 2023, which aimed to keep 'sexually explicit' materials out of school libraries. That law was partially blocked by a federal appeals court over its proposed book rating system. Opponents, including library advocates and civil rights groups, warn that SB 13 could create administrative delays, as school boards will be required to rule on each book within 90 days of a complaint. During the 2023–24 school year, Texas schools banned roughly 540 books, according to PEN America. SB 13 is among the legislative priorities of Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick. With its approval by the House, the bill now returns to the Senate for final passage.
Yahoo
27-05-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Texas Legislature poised to implement sweeping restrictions on school libraries
Texas school boards and parents would have unprecedented control over the school library book selection process under a wide-ranging state Senate bill that the House passed 87-57 Monday, moving it one crucial step forward in its path to becoming law. Senate Bill 13 would require school districts to pull books with 'indecent,' 'profane' or 'sexually explicit' content and grant elected board members veto power over new purchases. Any new library material, whether digital or physical, would be subject to a 30-day public review period, after which the school board would have another month before a vote. In support of the measure, Republicans said it will prevent students from being exposed to "sexually explicit' and inappropriate books. Sen. Angela Paxton, R-McKinney, authored SB 13. 'Senate Bill 13 understands that too often and for too long, our libraries have been filled with agendas, and it's time to end that,' said Rep. Brad Buckley, R-Salado, the bill's House sponsor. 'The way to end it is to empower our local leaders and our parents to find some resolution.' Democratic members called the bill a distraction from "real" problems that Texas children face, listing among them teacher shortages, housing instability and gun violence. They also argued the terms in the bill are unconstitutionally vague and could allow districts to strike classics like 'Lonesome Dove,' 'Catcher in the Rye' or 'Romeo and Juliet.' 'No child has ever died from a book, but many, like me, have been saved by one,' said Rep. Christina Morales, D-Houston. The House version of SB 13 authorizes school boards to appoint parental library advisory councils, but does not require them. These councils will be tasked with singling out books that contain 'indecent content or profane content inconsistent with local community values or age appropriateness,' as per Buckley's Monday amendment. This effort comes as a 2023 Texas law with a similar goal to SB 13 remains tied up in a First Amendment lawsuit. Under a ruling from the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, the state cannot enforce House Bill 900's requirement that vendors rate books for sexual content, meaning schools are not yet on the hook for removing them. Librarians have warned SB 13 could substantially slow down the book purchasing process, creating a significant roadblock for the acquisition of new materials. San Antonio school librarian Lucy Podmore said she was able to purchase a book on monologues for a student with a one-week turnaround this school year, making sure a student had it for a debate she was preparing for. But 'If the bill is in place right now, we would have to wait six to eight weeks plus two more months to get that,' Podmore told the American-Statesman. The librarian joined several dozen others to protest the bill Monday. Spread out on the floor and the steps outside of the House chamber, the group of parents, children, librarians and activists quietly read to themselves in front of a 'FREE TO READ' banner. 'I don't think this bill is about protecting children,' said Emily Kaszczuk, who participated in the "read-in" with her 6- and 9-year-old daughters from Leander. 'I think it's about control.' If 20% of parents in a district petition for a library advisory council to be established, the school board is required to create one. SB 13 would also let any parent submit a list of titles that their children cannot check out, and access their children's borrowing histories. Books that are challenged or under review would be removed from the shelves until probes are completed, at which time school board members would publicly vote on them. More: Parent advisory councils could shape school library content under controversial Texas bill Schools could use state funds to offset compliance costs under a successful amendment from Rep. Charles Cunningham, R-Humble. Before the chamber's initial vote, Democratic members implored their colleagues to oppose the bill. Rep. Mihaela Plesa of Dallas, whose parents fled from Romania's communist regime, said SB 13 reminds her of measures used by that authoritarian government to stifle dissent. 'We do not protect liberty by silencing it, we do not strengthen education by censoring it, and we do not honor democracy by fearing diversity," she said. For Rep. Jessica González, D-Dallas, the proposal 'will push LGBTQ kids away from the safety of school and education.' As a concerned mother, freshman Rep. Hillary Hickland, R-Belton, said she supported the bill because she had seen what she called "filth" in library catalogs. 'Trust has been broken between parents and public schools," she said. "As a parent, we want to know that our kids are safe in the libraries." The bill will go to a final vote Tuesday, and if it's passed, it will head back to the Senate. If the upper chamber disagrees with the changes, a conference committee will be appointed to hash out the details. This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Texas Legislature poised to pass school library restriction bill
Los Angeles Times
27-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Los Angeles Times
Her ‘Only Murders' mystery may be solved, but Jane Lynch will be back for Season 5
During the filming of its third season, 'Only Murders in the Building' showrunner John Hoffman approached Jane Lynch and asked her how she felt about having her character killed off. She was elated. Since the series' 2021 debut, Lynch's Sarah 'Sazz' Pataki, the erstwhile stunt double to semiretired actor Charles Haden-Savage (Steve Martin), would pop up every season on two or three episodes. But returning as a ghost whom only Charles could see or talk to meant Sazz would be the focus of Season 4. 'And even if I'm not in the episode,' says Lynch, 'I'm being talked about.' What no one anticipated, not even Lynch, was how this exploration of Sazz and Charles' relationship would inject fresh poignancy into Hulu's crime comedy. So is this the end of Sazz? Or will the wholesome fan favorite with the perma-smile remain a fixture? 'I'm coming back in a flashback [next season],' Lynch says. 'But I'm always open to [more].' Initially you were kept in the dark about who shot Sazz and why. Did you try to guess the murderer's identity? No. Why not? Maybe I'm not a curious person [laughs]. Or perhaps you just don't like spoilers. A friend of mine read ['Lonesome Dove'] and said when he was reading the final pages, he just burst into tears. And I was like, 'Oh, I want to read this book now.' So I bought it recently, and I started reading the foreword by Larry McMurtry. He gives away the whole emotional storyline. The book is [843 pages], and I'm going to do it, but I'm not as excited about it. Now I know how it ends. As a figment of Charles' imagination, Sazz is always in a suit and a porkpie hat. What's it like to wear the same costume for a six-month shoot? Well, I basically wore the same outfit on 'Glee' for 5 ½ years, just different colors [laughs]. Sometimes when you wear men's clothes, which is what I was wearing, it looks like you're wearing your dad's suit. You can't even tailor it enough to look good on you. But our wardrobe people were great. I thought this suit looked particularly good on me. I have a skinny little neck and it's a man's shirt, but it fit me. So I loved it. It was good to get into that costume every day. No wardrobe surprises. I'm a hard person to fit, straight up and down, so wardrobe fittings, especially when I was a little heavier, they were just horrible. I'd always say, 'Look, I'll bring my own pants.' Talk about Sazz's authoritative presence. What she has is absolutely no insecurities. She wouldn't for a moment think that when she walks through the door, she wouldn't be welcome. It wouldn't even cross her mind. And I'm Leo rising, so I kind of have that going on too. In preparation, did you do a deep dive into the lives of female stunt doubles? No [laughs]. That may be because I'm lazy. The relationship was the most important. My devotion to [Charles] is unparalleled. My raison d'etre for living is him, to take care of him, to protect him. She learned it from her father who was a big stuntperson, we find out. You make sure that your No. 1 doesn't have to do anything that'd risk their physical [well-being]. That was her obsessive, single-minded focus. What's your theory about why viewers responded to Sazz and Charles' deep friendship? I always think of 'Game of Thrones,' how the King's Hand was absolutely devoted to the king and would do anything, would lose his life, for the king. In this country, we don't have that kind of relationship. I think it was news to Charles that [Sazz] was so devoted. It made him feel weird. Then, as time went on, and [she] was still doing this 25 years after [Charles' TV procedural 'Brazzos'] was over, he became grateful, really moved by the idea that there was someone in this world who was devoted just to him, that saw him as perfect. Have stunt doubles hailed your performance? No. I'm surprised. Don't you think Sazz ennobles the profession? Probably. But the thing about these guys is that they're very quiet, in their own space. They have a very specific job to do. They're not social. The guy who was my stunt double? He had to jump off a fricking building. Is he going to sit around and spill tea with me? No. Side note: Is there even such a thing as a female stunt double who performs dangerous acts for a male actor who plays a '90s-era TV crime solver? I don't know. But Sazz is a particular woman. She's as strong as a man. She's as physically capable. She was brought up in the business. I think she was singular.
Sydney Morning Herald
14-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Sydney Morning Herald
Why ‘rooting' means something different to Australian ears
'Forgive the crassness of my query,' wrote Eden Sandwell, and instinctively, my ears pricked up. 'I'm reading Lonesome Dove (the classic American novel set in Texas after the Civil War), and a character named Lorena talks about Jake 'wanting a root…' Ginseng, maybe? Mandrake? Not a chance, as Lorena works at the bordello, and there's no mistaking the context. Eden added, 'I've tried in vain to find other American examples. All this time I thought it a quintessentially Aussie expression, while Americans only use root meaning to barrack for a team.' A book-sweep backs Eden's hunch. Across US media, fans are either rooting for teams, while Robert Downey Jr is rooting for Dominique Thorne, the young star of Iron Heart, a Disney spin-off of Downey's own Iron Man. Elsewhere, companies are rooting out racism, or farmers, kudzu vines. Prepositions spell the difference. Beyond Australia, you either root for – or root out. You don't root full-stop. Even in Britain, the sexual connotation is lost. Proof lies in a viral Instagram confession from February this year, when an expat English tradie and his father-in-law (also a Pom) visited a Brisbane tip. Eager to scavenge, the pair pointed to a rubbish pile, asking council workers whether they could 'have a quick root over there?' Um, said the staff. Probably not a good idea, fellas. 'Besides mate, there's cameras.' Somehow, in one verb, Cloughy the tradie went from son-in-law to 'toy boy or something'. Eric Partridge, the godfather of slang, called root 'the great Australian verb, corresponding in all senses, physical and figurative, to the British f---'. And Eric should know. For all his years in the UK, the Kiwi was schooled in Toowoomba from 1908, where rooting was common as muck. Beyond Australia, you either root for – or root out. You don't root full-stop. That said, the word took its time to become official. Associate Professor Amanda Laugesen, author of the bad-language bible Rooted (NewSouth, 2020), claims the sexual sense emerged around 1940. Though back then, rooted was more likely to mean exhausted, linked to routed: wasted. Knackered. Soon the noun denoted penis, echoed by the comic novel, They're A Weird Mob (Ure Smith, 1957). John O'Grady, writing as Nino Culotta, warned new Australians, Americans included, that root has a 'fundamental, biological, extremely vulgar application'. Not enough to faze locals who soon entwined the taboo into root rat, rootability, root ute (a shaggin' wagon), and Wellington boot: the rhyming offshoot.
The Age
14-05-2025
- Entertainment
- The Age
Why ‘rooting' means something different to Australian ears
'Forgive the crassness of my query,' wrote Eden Sandwell, and instinctively, my ears pricked up. 'I'm reading Lonesome Dove (the classic American novel set in Texas after the Civil War), and a character named Lorena talks about Jake 'wanting a root…' Ginseng, maybe? Mandrake? Not a chance, as Lorena works at the bordello, and there's no mistaking the context. Eden added, 'I've tried in vain to find other American examples. All this time I thought it a quintessentially Aussie expression, while Americans only use root meaning to barrack for a team.' A book-sweep backs Eden's hunch. Across US media, fans are either rooting for teams, while Robert Downey Jr is rooting for Dominique Thorne, the young star of Iron Heart, a Disney spin-off of Downey's own Iron Man. Elsewhere, companies are rooting out racism, or farmers, kudzu vines. Prepositions spell the difference. Beyond Australia, you either root for – or root out. You don't root full-stop. Even in Britain, the sexual connotation is lost. Proof lies in a viral Instagram confession from February this year, when an expat English tradie and his father-in-law (also a Pom) visited a Brisbane tip. Eager to scavenge, the pair pointed to a rubbish pile, asking council workers whether they could 'have a quick root over there?' Um, said the staff. Probably not a good idea, fellas. 'Besides mate, there's cameras.' Somehow, in one verb, Cloughy the tradie went from son-in-law to 'toy boy or something'. Eric Partridge, the godfather of slang, called root 'the great Australian verb, corresponding in all senses, physical and figurative, to the British f---'. And Eric should know. For all his years in the UK, the Kiwi was schooled in Toowoomba from 1908, where rooting was common as muck. Beyond Australia, you either root for – or root out. You don't root full-stop. That said, the word took its time to become official. Associate Professor Amanda Laugesen, author of the bad-language bible Rooted (NewSouth, 2020), claims the sexual sense emerged around 1940. Though back then, rooted was more likely to mean exhausted, linked to routed: wasted. Knackered. Soon the noun denoted penis, echoed by the comic novel, They're A Weird Mob (Ure Smith, 1957). John O'Grady, writing as Nino Culotta, warned new Australians, Americans included, that root has a 'fundamental, biological, extremely vulgar application'. Not enough to faze locals who soon entwined the taboo into root rat, rootability, root ute (a shaggin' wagon), and Wellington boot: the rhyming offshoot.
