I came across this on one of my favorite twitters the other day. I meant to address it sooner, but there you are. Books are very near and dear to my heart. In fact, if I were to compile a top five list of the things most important to me, books would be in the top two, competing for top billing with a few key people. I cherish my novels and treasure my poetry. I covet nonfiction, and revere essays. My bookshelf is always full to bursting with what I feel is a well-rounded library of tomes that would interest even the most obstinate anti-bookworm. I have always maintained that everybody likes to read- those who say they don't have just not found the right book yet.
This adoration and appreciation for literature being as ingrained in my being as the necessity to breath in and out, I am understandably outraged and that anyone- regardless of their convictions- would condone or participate in the banning or censorship of books. It is a concept as abhorrent to me as any evil ideal that may be considered by mankind to be against the rules of decency.
I could delve here into a lengthy refutation of all the reasons that these books are banned. But i think the link says enough on that topic, so I will instead give a few blanket statements that encompass my general feelings on the issue as a whole:
1. Their is no content that is inappropriate for the target age group when the target age group is adults. Adults do not need to shelter themselves from the iniquities of the world in which they live, and should have the intellectual and emotional maturity to handle reading material they may not agree with.
2. Some of the most celebrated works in historic literature were considered radical, crass, blasphemous, and treasonous in there time. However, over the years people found something in the words to appreciate and build on. If we can not allow revolutionary material to be contemplated by simple and brilliant, young and old minds alike, we will be doomed to repeat the movements of the past over and over.
3. It may be fruitless to vehemently advocate having an open mind, and giving all written word at least the chance to impress. But I will continue to admonish the public not to judge anything until they have tried it wholeheartedly and consider what its merits might be for another group or individual before writing it off as something sinful.
4. Even if a subject or discourse is found to be unsuitable, it must still be respected. It must be remembered that it is always vital to know and understand what the enemy is thinking and believing in order to have a stronger refutation to the opposing viewpoint.
5. Joining a proverbial witch hunt does nothing but perpetuate the volatile herd mentality that has led to the downfall of every regime throughout history. Idiocy can not be eradicated completely but it can be controlled by keeping the "masses" as educated as possible. Banning books is not the way to keep people educated. It is singularly prohibitive to the positive mental processes that result from enriched reading (whether that material is deemed socially "appropriate" or not)
6. It is imperative to remember that morals and standards are all arbitrary and relative. Two people will rarely agree completely on how the world should be run. And irreversible actions, like condemning literature, should not be based on something arbitrary.
Some classics and classic authors that were censored/banned in their own time:
Leigh Hunt
Percy Shelley
William Blake
John Keats
Lord Byron
Marquis deSade
The Library at Alexandria
The Scarlet Letter
Uncle Tom's Cabin
Of Mice and Men
Voltaire
George Orwell
Sappho
Every idea has merit, whether it be for the reader, who is absorbing the meaning behind the words, or for the writer, whose mental capacity leaves room only for the concrete completion of creative thought. Both facets should be respected and carried on through as many generations as possible. As long as there is ink, and paper, there will be the necessity of written word. It should never be stymied, never persecuted, and certainly never judged. Interpretation is the only recourse.
This adoration and appreciation for literature being as ingrained in my being as the necessity to breath in and out, I am understandably outraged and that anyone- regardless of their convictions- would condone or participate in the banning or censorship of books. It is a concept as abhorrent to me as any evil ideal that may be considered by mankind to be against the rules of decency.
I could delve here into a lengthy refutation of all the reasons that these books are banned. But i think the link says enough on that topic, so I will instead give a few blanket statements that encompass my general feelings on the issue as a whole:
1. Their is no content that is inappropriate for the target age group when the target age group is adults. Adults do not need to shelter themselves from the iniquities of the world in which they live, and should have the intellectual and emotional maturity to handle reading material they may not agree with.
2. Some of the most celebrated works in historic literature were considered radical, crass, blasphemous, and treasonous in there time. However, over the years people found something in the words to appreciate and build on. If we can not allow revolutionary material to be contemplated by simple and brilliant, young and old minds alike, we will be doomed to repeat the movements of the past over and over.
3. It may be fruitless to vehemently advocate having an open mind, and giving all written word at least the chance to impress. But I will continue to admonish the public not to judge anything until they have tried it wholeheartedly and consider what its merits might be for another group or individual before writing it off as something sinful.
4. Even if a subject or discourse is found to be unsuitable, it must still be respected. It must be remembered that it is always vital to know and understand what the enemy is thinking and believing in order to have a stronger refutation to the opposing viewpoint.
5. Joining a proverbial witch hunt does nothing but perpetuate the volatile herd mentality that has led to the downfall of every regime throughout history. Idiocy can not be eradicated completely but it can be controlled by keeping the "masses" as educated as possible. Banning books is not the way to keep people educated. It is singularly prohibitive to the positive mental processes that result from enriched reading (whether that material is deemed socially "appropriate" or not)
6. It is imperative to remember that morals and standards are all arbitrary and relative. Two people will rarely agree completely on how the world should be run. And irreversible actions, like condemning literature, should not be based on something arbitrary.
Some classics and classic authors that were censored/banned in their own time:
Leigh Hunt
Percy Shelley
William Blake
John Keats
Lord Byron
Marquis deSade
The Library at Alexandria
The Scarlet Letter
Uncle Tom's Cabin
Of Mice and Men
Voltaire
George Orwell
Sappho
Every idea has merit, whether it be for the reader, who is absorbing the meaning behind the words, or for the writer, whose mental capacity leaves room only for the concrete completion of creative thought. Both facets should be respected and carried on through as many generations as possible. As long as there is ink, and paper, there will be the necessity of written word. It should never be stymied, never persecuted, and certainly never judged. Interpretation is the only recourse.
Though you dislike him, he is still worth mentioning since he was still banned in his time - Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn. And don't pounce on me. I don't know how to do html coding for italics.
ReplyDeleteGreat post, k-knappy. You argue some good points put those idiots (who won't be reading this because it'll be banned once they realize it bashes them) to shame. If only idiots knew how idiotic they were or could be shown or convinced, how well on our way we would be to making the world a better place. :) Unfortunately, the First Amendment prevents most from realizing their moronic statuses.
lovingly,
-auds-
Speaking of book burning, I think that's coming soon.
ReplyDeleteAudra, html fonts are easy.
ReplyDelete<.i.> for italics
<.b.> for bold
<.u.> for underline.
you type those at the start of where you want whatever font style, and at the end you type it again, with a slash. ie: <./i.>
just take out the periods. i had to put them there to break the code :p
Thank you, Norris. I appreciate your effort in instructing me. Imagine my embarrassment upon realizing that I in fact use that exact html code multiple times a month when I load information onto our server at work. I suppose I didn't know it carried over to this (or any other) site. So it's universal code, eh, and not just Tate code? Good to know. ;)
ReplyDeleteretreating now into my stupid hole,
-audra-
Oh, you can't forget about James Joyce's Ulysses, and the odd banning (and at least one burning) of The Grapes of Wrath. ;)
ReplyDelete----
Class time!(?)
There are ways of getting around the limitations of displaying code. One way is to use the <code> and </code> tags to surround the code (which will display it as written--though I have always had trouble with it actually doing just that), or the venerable ISO code for special characters, such as:
< = <
> = >
So, to show <u> and </u>, you would want to type <u> , and </u> . Seems like a lot of work, huh? ;)