Our discussion in class
about banned children books got me thinking about where freedom of speech came
in. Shouldn’t authors have the
right to write what they want without the fear that it might be taken off the
shelves? And should kids be
limited in what they can read? Many
of the books that have been banned have been banned for very minor details or
were heavily influenced by a bais opinion. For example The Diary
of Ann Frank was banned because it is “too depressing”. Yet, all the components of depression
in the book are realistic. I do
not think children should be sheltered from this; they should at least have the
option to read it.
One
of my favorite childhood book; Sylvester and the Magic Pebble, by William Steig represents characters as animals. The book was banned because the policemen
were pigs. I read this book dozens
of times as a child and I never noticed this minor detail.
Some
people may argue that there should be stricked rules on what kids are exposed
too because they are unable to make the right decisions for themselves. I agree
that censoring material that children have access to is necessary to a degree,
but the above examples are very extreme and unnecessary. According to the ALA President Carol
Brey-Casiano, "Not every book is right for every person, but providing a
wide range of reading choices is vital for learning, exploration, and
imagination. The abilities to read, speak, think, and express ourselves freely
are core American values." This
suggests that there should be less intense bans on books. I completely agree,
what do you think?
In terms of where to draw the line with censoring books from children, I agree with the ALA president Carol Brey-Casiano's quote, "Not every book is right for every person...". I feel that no books need to be banned from children. If there is a book a parent feels is inappropriate for their individual child to read, they have the option not to give their child access to that book. That way the book could still be published, kept in libraries, bought in stores, and parents choose whether or not their child reads it.
ReplyDeleteAlana, Nice job blogging this quarter. You've covered a nice range of topics. With this post, you begin to explore an important issue, and I like your personal example. What you need to do to take this to the next level is cite a source (the source that claimed Annd Frank was "depressing" for example). This might allow you to define some of the loose language: e.g., "less intense bans." See? Overall though you are headed in the right direction. Please stop by to chat with me or Mr. B if you'd like further pointers.
ReplyDelete