Books have been a part of history for 5000 years; in this time we’ve been using them to learn, teach, express, and give people experience that maybe mind alternating. Books are such an indispensable part of human development both in the sense of human evolution and the sense of an individual human’s growth. However, in recent years the act of banning books for “unsuitable” or “foul” language would be committing a disservice for the student body’s education; and for a school to deprive the student of said need is to fail of the main purpose a school is to serve. ”Foul” language is an essential literary tool for the dialect of certain books, but if censored, the lessons that could be taught from said books is lost. Along with this cutting out …show more content…
English is a complex medium that has been done, taught, and perfected for centuries, and it’s been understood that the art of writing itself is home to a multitude of different styles, vocabulary, themes, etc. It’s also been understood that when writing, especially a narrative style fiction, that characterization and every word the characters speak is essential to the stories. With the books in question, there is, no denial that the “inappropriate” words in question are present in the stories most often banned; but the words are more often than not either taken out of context or judged unfairly by today’s societal standard. One of the frequently banned books, The Adventure of Huckleberry Finn is both banned and know for its semi-frequent use of the word, nigger. The main character, and others, usually use this word to refer to the slave character of Jim.While the word is used, it serves a purpose, this purpose being mainly to establish Finn’s character and establish society’s state of mind, for example, “It was fifteen minutes before I could work myself up to go and humble myself to a nigger; but I done it, and I warn't ever sorry for it …show more content…
More often than not the argument goes along the lines of the book’s language are unnecessary and ruin a child’s innocence. One mother complains, “I’m very disappointed in the whole system,” McCall-Strehlow said Thursday. “A school is a place where children are supposed to be safe, but the material being read isn’t safe content.”(Osbourne) In this statement, the idea of the books being “not safe” really only presents one-two, not vague ideas one being that books will attack you physically, or two is that the phrases, words, and scenes will traumatize the students. Undoubtedly the first one is false so that only provides us with the second option. Suggesting that just reading about slavery or curse words traumatizes someone is strange; as previously mentioned the parents would have to know that the words in questions are bad, and they’re stable enough to raise and provide for a child and hover over their child’s reading material, how are they not traumatized or depressed? Other common arguments can be found in quotes such as, “We're validating that these words are acceptable. They are not acceptable," she said. "We will lose our children if we continue to say that this is OK, that we validate these words when we should not."(Schaub) The book at the center point of this particular article was Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird because of its use of racial slurs such as Nigger gets the book
The practice of the censorship of books in schools has been prevalent due to the explicit content of them. Parents have been complaining to schools about books that count as required reading because they disapprove with the points made in the book. If a book consists of offensive or sexually explicit material, then parents would challenge the schools about them in order to prevent their children from reading them. Censorship in general has been an intensely debated issue because it is considered an infringement to the First Amendment of the United States Constitution while others argue it is used to conceal inappropriate things (Aliprandini and Sprague). The banning of books in school curriculum has also been debated since parents see certain books as inappropriate while others argue that banning them hinders student learning. Against the censorship of books in schools, Fenice Boyd and Nancy Bailey, authors of Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, believe that banning books creates a barrier between students and intellectual development (Boyd and Bailey, 655). Banning books from schools and removing them from the curriculum prevents students from exploring different ideas and developing creativity and critical thinking skills.
How would you feel if an author published a book that contained a word that was once used frequently but has now developed into one of the most derogatory and unfriendly things a person can say? Since 1884, when the book was first published, there has been much controversy regarding the use of the word “nigger” in the novel The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, by Mark Twain. Many people all over the world, predominantly the African-American population, feel that the word demoralizes the Blacks, and feel that the novel should be strongly censored from society. Some say that the constant use of the “n-word” forces the reader to conceive one of the main characters, Jim (Huck’s slave friend), as a buffoon, and it therefore embarrasses the African-American community through the use of stereotype. Although it may be hard for many people to read it without having a negative reaction, the censorship of this American classic would be preposterous. As one reads this novel, one can begin to notice that the main character, Huckleberry Finn, reached a turning point with his troublesome behavior and slowly but surely began to mature and settle down into adulthood. Mark Twain actually used the relationship of Jim and Huck to portray the moral values these characters come to learn and, therefore, his book should not in any way be censored or be kept away from the classrooms. This message is more powerful than the usage of the n-word in the novel.
Countries worldwide actively call for the banning of books that are found to be politically inconvenient, religiously awkward, or embarrassing in one form or another. But for writers like Russia's Vasily Grossman, a book's ban means far more than just a dip in sales. In 1961, he pleaded with the Soviet censors, "I am physically free, but the book to which I have dedicated my life is in jail." (Merkelson). A book represents an idea, thus limiting access to a book is banning the representation of an idea. The banning of books in American schools should not be allowed, because banning books will prevent students from learning the reason for the controversy and alternate viewpoints they can come to on their own.
Banning Books “It’s not just the books under fire now that worry me. It is the books that will never be written, the books that will never be read. And all due to the fear of censorship. As always, young readers will be the real losers” (Blume 1999). Judy Blume can not explain the problem of book censorship any clearer.
Censorship/banning of certain books help protect children from the evil ways of the world that they should not see until an older, more mature age. Books with cruel language and mature thoughts and circumstances should only be read by teen children or young adults. At a more mature age students are more likely to be able to comprehend the content within the book. As well as a lower chance of the students being frightened by the crude language and activities found within the text than a younger child might be. Young children are impressionable and these types of books may leave unpleasant thoughts and influence behaviors now as well as the futures of the children. The banning of books such as The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger and others as well, should only be banned up to eighth grade in school.
The subject of censorship is a very controversial one, especially the banning of books. Many people believe they must protect themselves and others from the "evils" of many classic books and works of art because they can be deemed "indecent" in one way or another. Many believe that this is absurd and censorship in its current form is a violation of our First Amendment right to free speech. Personally, I align myself with the latter, however I do feel there are occasions where censorship is justifiable.
When our country was founded in 1776, it was founded on the liberty of expressing and having your voice be heard which gave us the first amendment. Part of the first amendment is freedom of speech which lets many authors express themselves through words and informing readers about real world issues that nowadays people just ignore, and information that might be essential to someone on the days come forth .By challenging, banning or censoring a authors book you're basically restraining them from using their first amendment. When censoring a book it’s censoring a part of a book that either one or more have found offensive and with banning its the whole book. Banning or challenging a book is absurd , no one has the right to decide for everyone
Although students should read novels that they are mature enough to understand and comprehend, Lohmiller explains that by allowing all middle school students access to read novels with profanity and Christian derogatory, it is not certain that all students are mature enough to not have their daily language influenced by it. While children should read material that they are mature enough to comprehend, censoring material in schools because of language and Christian derogatory does not take away student exposure to any of the censored issues, but instead takes away student exposure to a learning environment that would teach meaning and context. The use of "hell" and "damn" and other Christian derogatory in novels is necessary in furthering the storyline and depicting a realistic illustration of the environment. It is necessary to expose children to the evils in novels because "[a]n uneducated world is a miserable world full of fighting and conflict...A world without books is a dystopian world" (Censoring the Pages of Knowledge 1). This explains that student exposure to profanity and Christian derogatory in schools would allow the youth to be educated on the evils and be the gateway for conversations that the students would benefit from later in life. Banning controversial novels for the evils within will create ignorance in the youth of America today, as they will not be educated on the usage in novels, but of the evils through other means that are not explained and understood by youth. By teaching and allowing students to struggle with profane language and controversial topics in schools, it is ensured that students will be educated on the meaning and reasons behind usage. For example, Fahrenheit 451 is a novel that satirizes and challenges censorship in modern society by depicting the effects of that censorship on a future society where all books are burned. By the use of profanity and Christian derogatory as a means of critiquing the society,
Britney Pham Mr. Stuart Maclean English 10.3 22 February 2024 Schools should not ban books from their libraries. The debate over whether schools should ban books is not a new issue. Many articles, studies, and surveys have taken this issue as their subject. From my point of view, schools should not ban books for the following three reasons: some issues are brutal but necessary in children's development, book censorship takes away personal choices from the majority in the community, and banning books is a discriminatory action.
Anything and Everything Did you know that the author with the most challenges in their books since 2013, is Dav Pilkey, author of the series Captain Underpants(Crum)? Imagine if there were no books in the world, we wouldn’t have ancient history, no knowledge from the past for humanity to reflect on, and people wouldn’t know the stories of ‘heroines and heroes’. Books dare to go over the uncommon topics that people don’t care to go over, and oftentimes books spark people’s imagination because they only have one limit, the author’s ability to write. Books shouldn’t be banned because they are an essential tool for learning and also encourage empathy and social-emotional development. Books are an essential and great tool for learning, whether you're
imagine a future in which library shelves, once teeming sources of knowledge, resemble a bleak wasteland. Where books once stood side by side, they now lie scattered and forgotten, blanketed in layers of dust. Here, amidst the stillness, the absence of words echoes, drowning out the whispers of history's secrets and the tales of heroes long forgotten. In this desolate landscape, there is no resonance of ideas, no vibrant exchange of thought—only an empty void, where the very essence of human intellect is suppressed by the unyielding grasp of censorship. While this scenario is not yet a reality, it is a looming possibility.
Dear Local Board of Educators, Did you know that books like How to Kill a Mockingbird, Anne Frank: The Diary of a Young Girl, and The Catcher in the Rye, have been banned in some schools as have many other books that students can use for class. Books have been around for hundreds of years and they have helped educate many individuals throughout their lifetime. By banning books, we are limiting education and dictating what students should and shouldn’t learn. Banning books causes students' grades to drop, and it also causes a negative impact on kids who love and need books.
Censorship is to conceal certain things from people, whether or not it is to learn and educate, including news, films, and books. Some will say that it is to prevent children from reading things inappropriate for their age, and if they are the guardians of the children, the parents or guardians should have a say in what their children are taught and what they read in school. People want their children to be raised with specific values, and the school has no right to change them or say they are incorrect. Some materials in schools and libraries go against religious beliefs and cultures. It should be maintained in and outside their homes, so they can do that by banning books.
One can read books to gain knowledge and increase their level of reading but not to come across offensive language and words. Especially in school, children are censored from these books that are controversial in the classroom. Parents are the ones who have a hard time letting their children read these books because they use curse words or have morals that differ from personal values. As a parent it is their right to fight the banning of books that use language such as the “n-word” or characters depicted negatively. Presently in the classroom, “race matters in these books. It’s a matter of how you express that in the 21st century” (Schultz). When children read these novels they may think that it is acceptable for them to a...
Dear School Principal I understand that banning certain books at school is a controversial topic. Some books are difficult to understand why they are banned since they don't violate school guidelines. The reason does not seem to be valid enough. Even kid books like "Charlotte's Web" are banned in certain schools!