Banned Books Week
While Banned Books Week ended yesterday (from September 25th to October 1st), I would like to make a post about the weeks and what it exactly means to me. For as long as I can remember I was not only against book banning but very confused by the concept of banning books. While I understand not placing certain books in classrooms or library due to it not being appropriate for certain ages (for instance I would never put Fifty Shades of Grey in Elementary School Library), many books are banned that are in the appropriate sections of the library or classroom and for some of the strangest or ridiculous reasons ever.
This is just a few reasons why some books have been banned:
1. The Diary of Anne Frank by Anne Frank because it is "too depressing"
2. Charlotte's Web by E.B. White because talking animals are "unnatural and blasphemous" and Charlottes death is not appropriate for children.
3. A Light in the Attic by Shel Silverstein because it promotes kids breaking dishes so the children do not have to dry the dishes.
4. Moby Dick by Herman Melville because it went against "their (A Texas School District) community values"
5. My Friend Flicka by Mary O' Hara because a female dog in the book is referred to as a "bitch"
School Districts and towns banning books from libraries and classrooms is usually because they feel that the book is inappropriate for readers and feel instead of letting the parents individually decide what their child should or should not read or use the book as a teaching tool to help their child understand certain themes. One thing I really hate is generalizations especially when it comes to books and different media. Just because one TV show may have offended certain people, does not mean it offended all. Just because one movie may have a swear word in it or two, does not mean not child should be allowed to see it. When it comes to most media like TV or movies we allow the parents to decide. We give them tools and guidelines to know age restrictions and what kinds of material that children or teens could potentially be exposed to. So why can we not do the same when it comes to books.
Well some may believe that it is harder to control what kids read because teachers can assign books for class to read, school libraries do not have much restrictions to what kids can and cannot check out, and neither do the classrooms, I do not think it is so different than the access kids can have to TV shows or movies. While parents can restrict what their kids can watch, they can easily find ways around that by going to a friends house or finding another way to watch a show or movie that may be restricted on their home tv (another TV, internet, borrowing DVD, etc.). The fact of the matter is books can be easily to obtain as TV episodes and films. Yet I never see parents getting away with banning entire films from libraries or schools (or at least as much as you hear about books). While I do feel that while a parent can have the right to tell their own child not to read or watch something, just because they do not want there child reading a certain book does not mean it should be banned or that every child in the school or class should be deprived of the book.
Yes these books can tackle serious and tough issues and sometimes have not so "kid friendly language in them", but first of all many books are not banned for reasons pertaining to the entire book being 100% inappropriate for younger audiences or sometimes even the target audience. These books are usually banned because one parent or a few parents did not like a certain word, picture, theme, etc. of the book. And while again parents do have the right I believe to stop their own child from reading something (whether I personally agree with the choice), does not mean that the parents should be taking away the books from other kids in the school. Many of the things that parents are upset about in the books are things that either children should be thinking about or are things that will go over kids heads. Even if themes or dialogue or storylines in the book can be harsh, does not mean that they should be censored. Instead of banning the book, or at least for every child, it is better if the child can learn from the book. Yes the story of Anne Frank may be depressing, but it really happened and it is important that we learn about past so that we can prevent things like the Holocaust and other awful events from occurring again in the future. The story of Huckleberry Finn may have language that we should not be using today, but it is also a way to use that language to teach children that it is not okay to say those kinds of words and why racism and slavery are wrong. Using books as a teaching tool like they are supposed to be (as well as entertainment) is a great way to deal with serious topics in books, not banning them for everyone. And if a parent still does not want their kid reading the book than it is their job to deal with the teacher and their child so that they can work out a different assignment or find a way for that child to not obtain that particular book. Though I do not agree with that parenting, if a parent wants to do that to their specific child they have a right, when they start trying to ban a book for every kid due to their own "moral agenda" that is where I draw the line.
Books are an amazing tool that can help teach children new lessons, facts, or views that can help them grow in society. We can not allow parents to continue to ban books from schools just because they do not want their child reading it. Sheltering kids from the lessons that can be learned in children's and young adult books will only hurt them, not help them. Lets be the generation that says no to banning books and yes to allowing children to read, learn, and grow from these books rather than be hidden from them. If we do, than I can assure you this generation and future generations to come will be better off because of it.
