If I Don’t Want to Read it, Neither Do They

Isabella Voss

I’ve always loved . From the way the pages felt to the enticing look of the printed letters, I was infatuated. I can’t remember a time when it wasn’t anything but enjoyable for me to escape for hours in a well-written . Reading allows us to live vicariously, letting us experience things we otherwise would never have seen in our own lives. I admire the ability and talent of authors to communicate these experiences in a manner which enables us, the readers, to learn from them without ever needing to move from our seats. But nothing is more intriguing to me than exploring the motives for an author’s writing. From Lee’s call for social reform in her to Adolous Huxley’s warnings against the loss of morality in

Brave New World, authors have made extensive and necessary statements concerning a plethora of issues and ideas. Nevertheless, these which have made the most substantial claims against the problems faced by humans are often notoriously banned for mentioning these very ideas. Because authors use their writing to bring attention to the pressing issues many face, certain people become uncomfortable by the clarification of the problems and find it ‘best’ to call for the ban of the book itself.

These banned are believed to be completely composed of inappropriate themes thought to negatively influence and corrupt the minds of readers. The desire of parents to protect the innocence of their children prevents educators from using that contains controversial topics to avoid potentially corrupting the impressionable minds of America’s youth. By withholding the controversial material, educators are committing a great disservice to students through the removal of opportunities to gain further empathy and understanding provided through the experiences articulated in literature. Moreover, the removal of these classic 2 pieces of literature deprives students of thought-provoking themes and ideas necessary to promote educational freedom. The excessive banning of any piece of literature deemed threatening to the innocence of students in secondary education only perpetuates needless ignorance towards the experiences of others while also inhibiting the educational rights of students.

Before we begin the argument stated, it is important to first lay out some clear parameters to define both the students and content being discussed and defended. First, the community of students I’m referring to are at the high school level, meaning we will assume they are mature enough to discuss the proposed controversial topics under the guidance of a competent teacher.

Moreover, we will also assume these students are capable of individual thought, allowing them to properly extrapolate the important information and themes from the given books. In terms of the expectations for the teachers, we will assume they are in no way teaching material with malicious intent or for purposes of perpetuating certain opinions to their respective students.

Teachers are, under no circumstance, permitted to force their own thoughts upon their students, nor are they allowed to encourage students to follow the immoral or inappropriate themes found within the stated literature. Instead, teachers are expected to encourage thoughtful and contemplative discussion with their students as well as distinguish the purpose of the author from the content represented within the book. Lastly, it is understood that several of the books mentioned throughout this essay have been or still are being read in high schools across the nation. It is important to differentiate these instances from the arising number of bans on these books due to reasons we will explore later in the essay.

With these parameters in mind, it's best to take a look at the book banning process and its subsequent causes. Oftentimes, people confuse the action of challenging a book with actually 3 banning it. According to the American Association book challenges and book bans are two separate events, with challenges leading directly to bans. When a book is challenged in the education system, this means a person or a group of people have found the content within the book to be particularly inappropriate or offensive for the level of education in which it is being taught. So, according to their own reasoning and opinions, they compose a book challenging and bring it to either the library or school board and present their case. Depending on the consensus of the organization’s board, the book may be banned, meaning removed from their curriculum and/or library, if seen fit. Despite the seriousness associated with banning books from schools, this process is not usually made into a big showcase. More often than not, a school board will silently call for the removal of certain books to avoid confrontation with parents or other institutions.

Despite the discreet manner in which educational boards deal with book bans, this situation raises pertinent questions that must be answered. Who is ultimately responsible for the public education of high school students? Is it the system itself or the parents? Who has the most authority concerning the material students are given? In order to answer these questions, we must examine the public high school education system as a whole in America. We, as a country, love to boldly preach about the advantages of having a democratic school system, yet we still limit the educational freedom of our students through book . Instead of reading and discussing the topics within these banned books and encouraging individual thought in our students, it is far easier for us to pretend these themes and ideas don’t exist. So, we ignore the racial tensions and injustice in Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, we turn a blind eye to the warnings against power corruption 1984, and we refuse to acknowledge the cruel and twisted treatment of the poor working class in The Grapes of Wrath. If school boards are allowing their curriculums to be 4 modified by objections from overprotective parents or the fear of mentioning controversial topics, they are not taking their responsibility to provide students with a well-rounded education seriously. The American public education system has no right to claim they’re advocating for the best interests regarding the educational freedom of high school students when they are deliberately withholding intellectually stimulating literature though book censorship.

In some instances, book censorship in schools stems from the cultural perspective of the area. We see this with the numerous book bannings in the south resulting from heavy church affiliations. For example, the American Library Association clarifies that most southern states discriminate against books with racial or anti-religious content as per strong connections to local religious institutions. Books like The Color Purple and The Handmaid’s Tale are but a few of many books that have been successfully removed from southern schools and due to the depictions of southern racism and anti-organized religion in each respectively (Hair and Hurand).

With these examples in mind, one can imagine the difficulties faced by teachers or professors who work at schools in unfamiliar regions. In a recent interview, Dr. Tony R.

Magagna, an Associate Professor of English at Millikin University, divulged his experiences dealing with cultural censorship in the education field. After going to school to become an

English teacher in western America, Magagna took a teaching job at Millikin University, located in the Midwest. While reading the novel Brokeback Mountain in his class, which includes heavy homosexual themes, Magagna had shown his students the movie in an effort to spur further discussion regarding the novel. However, a student’s parents had contacted the Dean and accused Magagna of ‘attempting to indoctrinate his students’ by discussing homosexuality in society within the classroom. Magagna’s liberal western influence led him into conflict with a student’s parent but this didn’t detract from the lessons he wished to display to his students. 5

From the perspective of a teacher, the use of these novels is not to encourage immoral thoughts and behaviors but discuss prevalent social themes that students are all interacting with in one form or another. Yet, Magagna experienced first-hand how some parents berate the educational system and call for censorship in favor of educational freedom.

The word ‘censorship’ has many different connotations. As defined by Cynthia J. Miller in Culture Wars in America, censorship is “the regulation of speech and other forms of expression by an entrenched authority…censorship suppresses what is considered objectionable from a political, moral, or religious standpoint.” Some think of Hitler and the Gestapo burning books to prevent the exposure of ideas which threatened the Nazi movement. Others picture the

Chinese government censoring its people’s internet searches. However, it is important to note censorship in education is far more distinct and delicate than these intense notions. High schools display censorship through the discreet removal of books from their curriculums and libraries, as well as specific teacher conferences which discuss how to avoid parental confrontation concerning controversial topics. School boards wish to keep any potential controversy from the public, especially when it concerns the welfare of the students, hence the discrete nature of banning literature.

These actions only contradict the democratic liberties we love to brag about in the

American education system. Daphne Muse, a Bay area writer, touches on the loss of these liberties in her article “Banned Book Week September 22-29, 2001: Look What They’ve Done to

My Books, Mom!” when she makes the comment “Given the fear and terror advancing out of many churches, communities, and the halls of Congress, efforts to deny our young people the opportunity to form independent ideas and to think critically are bound to grow” (23). Muse connects the fear of certain institutions, even those affiliated with the government, to the 6 inhibition of free, independent thought by our students. If we prevent knowledgeable students from developing well-rounded ideas and thoughts about the world and how it operates, then we are by no means granting students the educational freedom we say we are. By censoring the literature we present to our youth in high school, we neglect to think of the detrimental effects set in motion by ignoring the central themes presented in these banned books. Students no longer have exposure to the harsh realities of racism, the struggles of homosexual individuals, or the coming-of-age tales which defined the 20th century.

Besides the lost content, students lose exposure to many acclaimed authors. Since institutions are banning these books purely on the themes and ideas they are assumed to perpetuate, students are unable to read and examine any stylistic writing found in banned and challenged books. Because of the focus on content, challengers fail to understand the value in the unique writing styles and influential modes of expression found within the aforementioned literature. Moreover, when discussing banned books, challengers refuse to analyze the author's motives within their respective works. Most book challengers are unable to examine the function of controversial themes within writing as they relate to the author’s purpose; instead they focus only on their presence, allowing them to completely ignore the value and message of an author altogether.

Though these banned books may contain objectively inappropriate themes, authors aren’t looking to perpetuate immoral or inherently evil ideas simply by their inclusion. For example, the article “The Lure of Evil: Exploring Moral Formation on the Dark Side of Literature and the

Arts” by the professors David Carr and Robert Davis explores the motives for seemingly immoral motifs within novels. Carr and Davis remark that the use of immoral concepts used in art and literature are employed purposely to elicit discomfort in order to make a statement (97). 7

When writing, authors often use this method to define their purpose for their work. One of the most notable banned examples of this method is Oscar Wilde’s The Picture of Dorian Gray. The novel brims with brutal honesty, bringing to light the crippling influence of opioids in the

Victorian Era as well as the negative consequences of the then-popular hedonistic lifestyle. In addition, Wilde depicts his main character as hedonistic, self-centered, and materialistic in order to make a bold statement concerning the fast immoral downfall of the Victorian society. Yet,

Wilde doesn’t simply write his novel in this manner because he aims to encourage his reader to divulge in drugs or live according to self-fulfillment. Rather, Wilde uses these themes as a warning to unsettle the reader and cultivate moral responses to the immoral themes through the tragic fate of the main character. However, The Picture of Dorian Gray is now banned in many high schools just for mentioning the ideas of drugs, sex, and immoral lifestyles, thus completely ignoring the overall purpose of the author. The banning and challenging of books completely deprives authors of the moral value instilled in their work while accusing them of having other motives besides their original purpose. In doing this, school boards are dramatically depreciating the artistic value and moral concepts found within these novels. It is not justifiable to degrade the work of an author, especially if the author in question aims to make a change.

With the thought of change in mind, it is important that we explore the basis and purpose of censorship in society. To clarify, I am not claiming that all censorship is unfavorable, and we should eliminate it entirely. Truthfully, levels of censorship are beneficial in the rearing of children. However, it is critical to note that with maturity comes the ability of critical, individualized thinking. Therefore, censorship is only necessary concerning the influences society presses upon our youth, not young adults. Dr. Robert Money, a Philosophy Professor and

Chair of the Philosophy Department at Millikin University, divulged to me in an interview the 8 delicate nature of censorship. After explaining its deep roots in ancient Greece, Money clarified that censorship was originally meant to prevent “garbage in, garbage out” thinking in an effort to encourage only intellectual ideas. That is to say, many Grecian philosophers thought if the youth heard immoral or irrational ideas, they would only produce similar thoughts. Money went on to emphasize the importance of censorship in regards to movie ratings, language and ideas, and even Internet exposure. I understand that it is completely unreasonable to expect a five-year-old child to understand the detrimental effects of racism found in literature when they can’t even watch PG-13 rated movies. I am not advocating for the early exposure of controversial ideas and themes; I’m advocating for the deserved of mature students.

After further discussion with Money, I inquired about his thoughts on the potential loss of knowledge due to the presence of censorship in education. After emphasizing the necessity for truth and freedom within a democratic society, Money stated that the involvement of censorship in education perpetuates the loss of truth, historical understanding, and creative conflict. The removal of literature which expresses some unavoidable truth or historical meaning prevents students from being exposed to ideas and themes which they would most likely never see

(Money). Moreover, the restriction of this information impedes the concept of creative conflict in the classroom. In other words, without the controversial topics mentioned in literature, students are unable to use a classroom setting to develop their ideas and thoughts in a challenging environment.

Furthermore, the loss of this outlet discourages the developmental tendencies of generational learning. Nancy M. Bailey, an assistant professor at Canisius College, and Fenice B.

Boyd, an associate dean at Buffalo University, wrote the article “Censorship in Three

Metaphors” in order to articulate the idea that censorship is a limiting concept. The authors use 9 long extended metaphors to describe censorship in order to “elicit thoughtful responses to challenges that limit teachers’ professional decision making and students’ paths to a truly democratic society” (655). In other words, censorship directly imposes on the educational freedom of students as well as limits the professional ability of educators to prepare and enlighten their pupils to their best ability. The responsibility of educators is owed to their students, not third party-opinions which degrade the value and importance of educational liberty.

Despite this essential responsibility, third-party members exercise control over the education of high school students through the banning of books, exposing their efforts to prevent this method of learning while encouraging their own purpose: maintaining approved influencers and social ideals to keep values and behavioral patterns stagnant. Because of this, students of this generation and future generations run the risk of being conditioned to a certain ideological thought process, disabling them from exploring new and improved concepts and ideals. Without this critical process, new generations of students will be molded with a cookie-cutter curriculum, excluding the necessary development needed to advance society. These set curriculums promote thought-conformity, especially when administrators deprive students of material that catalyzes and cultivates mature thought and discussion.

Furthermore, the development of this conformity-based thinking will strongly detract from social interactions and norms. Is it not the responsibility of public educators to provide students with necessary information concerning the structure of society and interactive norms?

The fear of non-normative thinking contradicts this responsibility, making educators prime targets for oppression. In order to promote the status-quo, many people keep the school boards in check for fear of disruption by production of free-thinking individuals. However, this does not justify the silencing of social injustices, the struggles of those in poverty, or the obstacles faced 10 by many everyday described in literature. Not to mention, the banning of books due to their content only emphasizes the seriousness associated with the controversial topics and in no way resolves the issue.

This tendency towards emphasis instead of resolution by authoritative book bans results in curious students. So, it is far more advantageous to expose students to these topics in a proper classroom environment rather than have them seek out the information by themselves. Regan

McMahon, a former journalist and book editor for the San Francisco Chronicle, wrote the article

“Why Your Kid Should Read Banned Books” to advise parents on this very idea. McMahon encourages parents to allow their children to read these books because of their potential to stimulate thinking, rather than prevent kids from reading them altogether, which could potentially discourage further desire to read and learn. Similarly, the intense topics brought up in banned books (i.e. racism, abuse, mental health, language) are likely present in the everyday lives of children. Bringing up these topics in a mature classroom setting allows students to properly encounter and explore these ideas in favor of feigning ignorance. Danielle Patricio, a

Lecturer of English at Millikin University, had responded in an interview that “It’s okay to openly acknowledge how this [book content] is inappropriate. It’s alright to read things that make us uncomfortable. They’re necessary to provide example and discourse.” Patricio went on to explain how proper mentorship and conversation in conjunction with banned material is extremely beneficial in making classrooms more diverse. In doing this, students are able to gain perspective on the more intense situations faced by many in favor of creating more victimization or stereotypes with the use of censorship (Patricio).

With the use of a proper classroom setting, discussing banned books with mentorship and mature conversation will prompt more intellectual thinking by our high school students while 11 promoting their educational freedom. The banning of books does nothing more than perpetuate needless ignorance and cowardice by those who refuse to discuss the pertinent messages authors are striving to communicate. The attempts by many to ban books they deem inappropriate are nothing more than acts of poor judgement which yield poorly constructed curriculums while depriving students of stylistic writing and non-normative thinking. Banning books from

America’s secondary education system is a direct contradiction to our supposed dedication to and integrity. It is absolutely absurd to think the education system is purposely preventing students from reading this literature and developing their own mindset. The banning of literature in the education system needs to be stopped and focus must be placed on mentorship and cultivation of individualized thinking.

These students have every right to live vicariously through these books and form their own thoughts in the classroom. They are entitled to enjoy reading and look for the moral value and purposes authors instill in their writing. It is not up to school boards or other authoritative institutions to inhibit the natural curiosity or intellectual development of students. Let them read.

Let them think. Let them love books.

12

Works Cited

“About Banned & Challenged Books.” American Library Association, 10 Dec. 2012.

http://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/aboutbannedbooks.

Bailey, Nancy M., and Fenice B. Boyd. “Censorship in Three Metaphors.” Journal of

Adolescent & Adult , vol. 52, no. 8, May 2009, pp. 653-661. Academic Search

Complete, doi:10.1598/JAAL.52.8.1.

Carr, David, and Robert Davis. “The Lure of Evil: Exploring Moral Formation on the

Dark Side of Literature and the Arts.” Journal of Philosophy of Education, vol. 41,

no. 1, Feb. 2007, pp. 95–112. Academic Search Complete, doi:10.1111/j.1467-

9752.2007.00541.x.

Hair, Amy and Reyna Hurand. “Banned Books in the United States From 1885 – Present.” esri,

https://www.arcgis.com/apps/Cascade/index.html?appid=d807211fd74b4c659ba5f82b22

8ef0ac.

Magagna, Tony. “Faculty Interview.” 31 Jan. 2020, Millikin University, Decatur, IL.

McMahon, Regan. “Why Your Kid Should Read Banned Books.” Common Sense Media, 20

Aug. 2019, https://www.commonsensemedia.org/blog/why-your-kid-should-read-

banned-books. 13

Miller, Cynthia J. "Censorship." Culture Wars in America: An Encyclopedia of Issues,

Viewpoints, and Voices, edited by Roger Chapman, and James Ciment, Routledge, 2nd

ed., 2013, Credo Reference,

https://mulinutil1.millikin.edu:2443/login?url=https://search.credoreference.com/content/

entry/sharpecw/censorship/0?institutionId=1742.

Money, Robert. “Faculty Interview.” 3 Feb. 2020, Millikin University, Decatur, IL.

Muse, Daphne. “Banned Book Week September 22-29, 2001: Look What They’ve Done to My

Books, Mom!” Black Scholar, vol. 32, no. 2, 2002, pp. 22-25. Academic Search

Complete, doi:10.1080/00064246.2002.11413186.

Patricio, Danielle. “Faculty Interview.” 30 Jan. 2020, Millikin University, Decatur IL.