I wanted to post something for banned books week, but what else is there to say? In the United States, banned books are big news. Anyone with even a remote interest in the subject of books seems to post about this topic.
A different kind of blog post earlier this week caught my eye. It was written about a woman in India:
"My post on Banned Books Week, and why we don't have it in India":
It reminded me of the importance of this day and what it means to Americans. I thought perhaps I'd approach the topic from an International angle. I am thankful to the author for sharing her very interesting views.
Then I found this article:
A comeback for banned books in Indonesia: After chasing out former President Ben Ali and his Family, Tunisians can't stop reading about them
This provided more reminders about the freedoms we enjoy in my country.
But, it was an American article that made me decide just to reiterate my opposition to censorship rather than seeking another clever angle. Banned Books Week, 5 Books Almost Anyone Would Ban: Even Ardent Opponents of Censorship Could Hesitate When It Comes to Titles Like These. I opened the page with some excitement. I thought maybe indeed here was a new angle -- Books that I would actually want to ban. Here's the let down, I did not even hesitate despite the article's title. An argument that comes up again and again for those who want to ban books is that these books are so awful that they are "seriously taboo" topics and no one should read them.
The first book listed was Mein Kampf and my bubble was burst right off the bat. As the granddaughter of Holocaust survivors, I most certainly want this book to be available and read. I want people to know about the history of the Holocaust and why it occurred. I think the same should be said of number 2, which is Osama bin Laden's "Messages to the World." 3,4 and 5 are also terrible, but should not be banned. Banning something terrible doesn't make it go away. It just makes us less able to deal with the issues when the ideas it spews come up again in the future.
So, I guess I really have nothing new to add to this argument. It will keep coming up again and again. And though I have nothing new to add, it bears repeating over and over so we never forget why we celebrate "Banned Books Week." I have been verbally attacked for my views on this issue. I suspect that this posting may encourage new comments arguing against my views. Please, before you comment negatively, please read here and here. Feel free to reword what has been said because it has indeed all been said before. Don't expect that you will change my mind.
Showing posts with label censorship. Show all posts
Showing posts with label censorship. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Sunday, February 20, 2011
Book Banning
I never thought that I would have to write letters against book banning in my own community, but this is the second time within six months that I have had to voice my objections. I stand firmly against book banning in my professional world and in my family life.
Dear School Board Members:
I am writing to once again express my dismay and to object to the removal of a book from the high school curriculum. After reading about the pulling of "Water for Elephants" from a high school intercession program in the local paper and after reviewing the offending passage online, I am concerned about the education this public school system is setting up for my elementary school student. "Water for Elephants," like "Nickel and Dimed," is a best-selling book for which a place in the curriculum easily can be argued. As I wrote in my first email to you in December, it is vital that our kids are given the opportunity to read as much as they possibly can. By the time boys and girls are teenagers, we are (or should be) preparing them to deal with the realities of the world and not sheltering them as we did when they were elementary school students. Great literature has always described sex, war, poverty, religion and other subjects that some may find objectionable. Such books give us a broad scope of the world to increase our understanding of the activities of mankind so that we may make well-informed decisions grounded in knowledge of diversity. It is a parent's job to discuss things they consider objectionable with their children and it is the school's job to introduce materials that make students think.
Please stop removing books from the curriculum, aborting our teachers' capacity to broaden our kids' horizons. Please stop curtailing my child's right to read.
Melissa Mannon
Dear School Board Members:
I am writing to once again express my dismay and to object to the removal of a book from the high school curriculum. After reading about the pulling of "Water for Elephants" from a high school intercession program in the local paper and after reviewing the offending passage online, I am concerned about the education this public school system is setting up for my elementary school student. "Water for Elephants," like "Nickel and Dimed," is a best-selling book for which a place in the curriculum easily can be argued. As I wrote in my first email to you in December, it is vital that our kids are given the opportunity to read as much as they possibly can. By the time boys and girls are teenagers, we are (or should be) preparing them to deal with the realities of the world and not sheltering them as we did when they were elementary school students. Great literature has always described sex, war, poverty, religion and other subjects that some may find objectionable. Such books give us a broad scope of the world to increase our understanding of the activities of mankind so that we may make well-informed decisions grounded in knowledge of diversity. It is a parent's job to discuss things they consider objectionable with their children and it is the school's job to introduce materials that make students think.
Please stop removing books from the curriculum, aborting our teachers' capacity to broaden our kids' horizons. Please stop curtailing my child's right to read.
Melissa Mannon
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Censorship is Always Wrong
Censorship hit close to home yesterday when a book was challenged locally. Articles have appeared around the world about the controversy:
Boston: New Hampshire Parents Object to "Offensive" Book: http://boston.cbslocal.com/2010/12/07/nh-parents-ask-for-book-to-be-removed-from-class/
When I heard about the issue, the hair on my arm prickled. I have not read the book, but as a librarian/archivist I fall strongly on the side of intellectual freedom. This was the first time that book banning had become more than business or more than an abstract possibility in my community. It had become personal. A challenge to my right to read what I want, and more importantly a challenge against my child's right to be given an education through every book she can get her hands on, is frightening to me. I do not want an ugly precedent set here in my small NH town.
I wrote to my school board to express my opinion that children should be exposed to diverse points of view. I plastered my personal social web space with quotes from the American Library Association.
"... the freedom to read is essential to our democracy, and reading is among our greatest freedoms...every silencing of a heresy, every enforcement of an orthodoxy, diminishes the toughness and resilience of American society and leaves it less able to deal with controversy and difference...intellectual freedom is essential to the preservation of a free society and a creative culture..." - American Library Association
http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/banned/bannedbooksweek/ideasandresources/banned_books_week_proclamation/proclamation.cfm
http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/oif/statementspols/ftrstatement/freedomreadstatement.cfm
Many people had lots of thoughtful things to say on a local Yahoo web site. Many people with very diverse political and religious views fell on the side against censorship. A friend responding to my ALA posting summed it up appropriately, "Censorship is always wrong!"
1. If we value personal freedoms, as we claim to do in our democracy, we must also make an earnest effort to accept that our fellow citizens have diverse views.
2. School (especially high school) is the proper place to introduce materials for discussion that encourage logical thinking. One does not need to agree with material that is introduced, but should reflect upon it and use critical thinking skills to evaluate it. This will strengthen our understanding of ourselves and of those around us and allow us to make better informed decisions.
3. We all bring our own personal and community experiences to our efforts to evaluate our reading, but rejecting a point of view because it is not your point of view, uses language you wouldn't use, or is borne of a lifestyle with which you think you can't identify, is irresponsible. Strengthen your ability to make logical choices for yourself, your family, and your community by trying to understand why others have alternate opinions.
4. Trying to ban an argument that is not your own without consideration does not help your own cause. One should take in alternate views to make your own argument stronger. Rejecting the opportunity to read all kinds of information does not make you a better person. It makes you a dumber one.
5. Listening to alternate perspectives also prepares you to deal with movements that undermine you, your lifestyle or even your safety. Silencing your "enemy" does not make your "enemy" go away, it just sends the enemy underground. Open discourse helps disperse hostility.
I am pleased that the book will continue to be used in our school for now. It sounds like logical heads are discussing the value of this particular book. I hope this discussion opens new doors for learning for me and for those in my community.
Boston: New Hampshire Parents Object to "Offensive" Book: http://boston.cbslocal.com/2010/12/07/nh-parents-ask-for-book-to-be-removed-from-class/
When I heard about the issue, the hair on my arm prickled. I have not read the book, but as a librarian/archivist I fall strongly on the side of intellectual freedom. This was the first time that book banning had become more than business or more than an abstract possibility in my community. It had become personal. A challenge to my right to read what I want, and more importantly a challenge against my child's right to be given an education through every book she can get her hands on, is frightening to me. I do not want an ugly precedent set here in my small NH town.
I wrote to my school board to express my opinion that children should be exposed to diverse points of view. I plastered my personal social web space with quotes from the American Library Association.
"... the freedom to read is essential to our democracy, and reading is among our greatest freedoms...every silencing of a heresy, every enforcement of an orthodoxy, diminishes the toughness and resilience of American society and leaves it less able to deal with controversy and difference...intellectual freedom is essential to the preservation of a free society and a creative culture..." - American Library Association
http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/banned/bannedbooksweek/ideasandresources/banned_books_week_proclamation/proclamation.cfm
http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/oif/statementspols/ftrstatement/freedomreadstatement.cfm
Many people had lots of thoughtful things to say on a local Yahoo web site. Many people with very diverse political and religious views fell on the side against censorship. A friend responding to my ALA posting summed it up appropriately, "Censorship is always wrong!"
1. If we value personal freedoms, as we claim to do in our democracy, we must also make an earnest effort to accept that our fellow citizens have diverse views.
2. School (especially high school) is the proper place to introduce materials for discussion that encourage logical thinking. One does not need to agree with material that is introduced, but should reflect upon it and use critical thinking skills to evaluate it. This will strengthen our understanding of ourselves and of those around us and allow us to make better informed decisions.
3. We all bring our own personal and community experiences to our efforts to evaluate our reading, but rejecting a point of view because it is not your point of view, uses language you wouldn't use, or is borne of a lifestyle with which you think you can't identify, is irresponsible. Strengthen your ability to make logical choices for yourself, your family, and your community by trying to understand why others have alternate opinions.
4. Trying to ban an argument that is not your own without consideration does not help your own cause. One should take in alternate views to make your own argument stronger. Rejecting the opportunity to read all kinds of information does not make you a better person. It makes you a dumber one.
5. Listening to alternate perspectives also prepares you to deal with movements that undermine you, your lifestyle or even your safety. Silencing your "enemy" does not make your "enemy" go away, it just sends the enemy underground. Open discourse helps disperse hostility.
I am pleased that the book will continue to be used in our school for now. It sounds like logical heads are discussing the value of this particular book. I hope this discussion opens new doors for learning for me and for those in my community.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)