Okay, so I actually got rid of a lot of stuff and wrote in some other things, so I feel like I'm more on the right track now. I still haven't done bookends, though.
Censorship is, when it comes to young children, a necessary evil. We don’t like having to withhold information, but we have to when something might be too inappropriate or too scary for a three-year-old. But for teenagers and adults, what is left in books that needs to be kept from us? As grown-up human beings, we have to be able to handle literature of any kind that is out there now, and there’s no point in keeping us in the dark then. Besides, just because a “harmful” type of literature is out there doesn’t mean we have to expose ourselves to it. It’s a choice. On top of that, whether the book is fictional, historical, or a memoir, writing is a form of free speech, which is a right in our country. Censorship is a violation of that right. So, censorship of books may be necessary for toddlers and elementary school kids, but as we get older, censorship becomes a hindrance. The banning of books as a form of censorship is simply unfair.
Adults deem some information and some topics unsafe for children to know. And I admit, there are topics that would traumatize children if they knew about it from the get-go. Plus, parents want to keep their children “innocent” for as long as possible, and that’s understandable. But some people in the community take that censorship too far, trying to protect not only their own children but everyone in the community from the so-called bad influences or topics in books. And here is where the censorship of books gets to be a problem.
Public and school libraries are constantly challenged by upset parents who claim that some books on their shelves should be removed. They argue that the material is inappropriate or in some other way mentally harmful to readers. But you’d think that people would trust others to make good decisions about what they read. Besides, “harmful” books have even included a picture book entitled Sylvester and the Magic Pebble, in which all of the characters were animals. Do you know why that one was banned in one library? Because the police were offended that the policemen in the book were pigs.
The parents of young readers can help their children pick appropriate reading material, and older readers should be expected to choose books that they feel comfortable with. The banning of books is restricting our right to choose what we read. It violates our right to free speech. Censoring should fall to parents when it pertains to their children, not the government-funded public libraries. And when it comes to adults choosing for themselves, isn’t that what we are meant to do? If a person finds a book offensive or overly creepy, he or she doesn’t have to read it. But just because they don’t like it doesn’t mean others are of the same opinion.
Over 6,000 books have been challenged across the country since 1990, and it’s estimated that only ¼ of such challenges are ever actually reported (Muse, 22). To make matters worse, 546 books were challenged in 2006 alone, a 30% increase from the year before (Souza). These people are trying to tell others what they should and shouldn’t read, and that’s not acceptable. Maybe your parents can tell you what you can and can’t do, but are you about to let someone you don’t even know tell you that Sylvester and the Magic Pebble is not appropriate for you to read?
Sometimes, it’s the best books that are falling through the cracks. For example, the Harry Potter series, which supposed promotes witchcraft, is the most-challenged series in history according to the ALA (“Should Schools Ban…”, Souza). But, the series has also sold over 400 million copies worldwide and has won numerous awards, including four Whitaker Platinum Book Awards and three Scottish Arts Council Book Awards (“Harry Potter”). The Giver, written by Lois Lowry, is on the ALA 100 most-challenged books list for 1990-2000, as many have complained of its alleged sexual explicitness and violence (Souza). However, the book was required reading in my middle school for seventh graders, and it’s won a Newbery Medal (“The Giver…”). Not only that, but George Orwell’s 1984 is among one of the top banned books of the 20th century (“EDITORIAL…”).
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Monday, October 25, 2010
A bit more of my persuasive essay
I haven't written much more on this essay than what I have posted before, but here it is.
Censorship is, when it comes to young children, a necessary evil. We don’t like having to withhold information, but we have to when something might be too inappropriate or too scary for a three-year-old. But for teenagers and adults, what is left in books that needs to be kept from us? As grown-up human beings, we have to be able to handle literature of any kind that is out there now, and there’s no point in keeping us in the dark then. Besides, just because a “harmful” type of literature is out there doesn’t mean we have to expose ourselves to it. It’s a choice. On top of that, whether the book is fictional, historical, or a memoir, writing is a form of free speech, which is a right in our country. Censorship is a violation of that right. So, censorship of books may be necessary for toddlers and elementary school kids, but as we get older, censorship becomes a hindrance. The banning of books as a form of censorship is unnecessary.
Adults deem some information and some topics unsafe for children to know. And I admit, there are topics that would traumatize children if they knew about it from the get-go. Plus, parents want to keep their children “innocent” for as long as possible, and that’s understandable. But, at that point, we get caught in a vicious cycle. As children get older, we realize that they need to know these things. But, we don’t know how to tell them, and we keep putting it off until some other kid at school tells them about it. That’s where censorship starts to get bad – we don’t know when to stop withholding information.
With children, there’s the same problem with censoring books. Public and school libraries and constantly challenged by upset parents who claim that some books on their shelves should be removed. They argue that the material is inappropriate or in some other way mentally harmful to readers. But you’d think that people would trust others to make good decisions about what they read. Besides, “harmful” books in the past have included the Harry Potter series and even a picture book entitled Sylvester and the Magic Pebble, in which all of the characters were animals. Do you know why that one was banned in one library? Because the police were offended that the policemen in the book were pigs. Ridiculous.
The parents of young readers can help their children pick appropriate reading material, and older readers should be expected to choose books that they feel comfortable with. The banning of books is restricting our right to choose what we read. It violates our right to free speech. Censoring should fall to parents when it comes to their children, not the government-funded public libraries. And when it comes to adults choosing for themselves, isn’t that what we are meant to do? If a person finds a book offensive or overly creepy, he or she doesn’t have to read it. But just because they don’t like it doesn’t mean others are of the same opinion.
Let’s look at some so-called “harmful” books that have been banned in places across the country. For example – the Harry Potter series. The Harry Potter books are the most-challenged books of the 2000s. Over 400 million copies of the books have been sold worldwide, which means at least 400 million people have read them. (And that doesn’t even count how many people those books have been lent to, or the many that have checked them out of libraries. Let’s just say it adds up to a lot of people.) The reason most fanatically protective parents call for its removal from the shelves is its “promotion” of witchcraft. Apparently, readers are not expected to know the difference between reality and fantasy and will be led down the path to evil witchery if they read these books.
You can laugh here. It’s okay. However much it sounds like a joke, though, it’s not.
Yes, the Harry Potter books are banned because people think readers will try to become “witches” after reading it. Well, I have something unfortunate to tell you – witches aren’t real! I started those books in kindergarten and even then I knew it wasn’t real. Readers are underestimated by overprotective parents and members of the community. But nobody likes a person who always thinks they know best for you.
So, let’s peek into this twisted world of banned books a little more. I’m not sure if it will surprise you, but A Light in the Attic, a book of poems by Shel Silverstein, has been previously challenged for teaching children bad behavior, so-called “suggestive” illustrations, and glorifying Satan.
Have you ever read any of Shel Silverstein’s poems? If not, I must tell you that they are pure whimsy. Who would want to ban whimsy, I ask you? And I challenge you to find a reference to Satan in there. Good luck.
I also started my other essay, but I'm still not sure about the topic. It's that people should keep journals and why. Comments?
Censorship is, when it comes to young children, a necessary evil. We don’t like having to withhold information, but we have to when something might be too inappropriate or too scary for a three-year-old. But for teenagers and adults, what is left in books that needs to be kept from us? As grown-up human beings, we have to be able to handle literature of any kind that is out there now, and there’s no point in keeping us in the dark then. Besides, just because a “harmful” type of literature is out there doesn’t mean we have to expose ourselves to it. It’s a choice. On top of that, whether the book is fictional, historical, or a memoir, writing is a form of free speech, which is a right in our country. Censorship is a violation of that right. So, censorship of books may be necessary for toddlers and elementary school kids, but as we get older, censorship becomes a hindrance. The banning of books as a form of censorship is unnecessary.
Adults deem some information and some topics unsafe for children to know. And I admit, there are topics that would traumatize children if they knew about it from the get-go. Plus, parents want to keep their children “innocent” for as long as possible, and that’s understandable. But, at that point, we get caught in a vicious cycle. As children get older, we realize that they need to know these things. But, we don’t know how to tell them, and we keep putting it off until some other kid at school tells them about it. That’s where censorship starts to get bad – we don’t know when to stop withholding information.
With children, there’s the same problem with censoring books. Public and school libraries and constantly challenged by upset parents who claim that some books on their shelves should be removed. They argue that the material is inappropriate or in some other way mentally harmful to readers. But you’d think that people would trust others to make good decisions about what they read. Besides, “harmful” books in the past have included the Harry Potter series and even a picture book entitled Sylvester and the Magic Pebble, in which all of the characters were animals. Do you know why that one was banned in one library? Because the police were offended that the policemen in the book were pigs. Ridiculous.
The parents of young readers can help their children pick appropriate reading material, and older readers should be expected to choose books that they feel comfortable with. The banning of books is restricting our right to choose what we read. It violates our right to free speech. Censoring should fall to parents when it comes to their children, not the government-funded public libraries. And when it comes to adults choosing for themselves, isn’t that what we are meant to do? If a person finds a book offensive or overly creepy, he or she doesn’t have to read it. But just because they don’t like it doesn’t mean others are of the same opinion.
Let’s look at some so-called “harmful” books that have been banned in places across the country. For example – the Harry Potter series. The Harry Potter books are the most-challenged books of the 2000s. Over 400 million copies of the books have been sold worldwide, which means at least 400 million people have read them. (And that doesn’t even count how many people those books have been lent to, or the many that have checked them out of libraries. Let’s just say it adds up to a lot of people.) The reason most fanatically protective parents call for its removal from the shelves is its “promotion” of witchcraft. Apparently, readers are not expected to know the difference between reality and fantasy and will be led down the path to evil witchery if they read these books.
You can laugh here. It’s okay. However much it sounds like a joke, though, it’s not.
Yes, the Harry Potter books are banned because people think readers will try to become “witches” after reading it. Well, I have something unfortunate to tell you – witches aren’t real! I started those books in kindergarten and even then I knew it wasn’t real. Readers are underestimated by overprotective parents and members of the community. But nobody likes a person who always thinks they know best for you.
So, let’s peek into this twisted world of banned books a little more. I’m not sure if it will surprise you, but A Light in the Attic, a book of poems by Shel Silverstein, has been previously challenged for teaching children bad behavior, so-called “suggestive” illustrations, and glorifying Satan.
Have you ever read any of Shel Silverstein’s poems? If not, I must tell you that they are pure whimsy. Who would want to ban whimsy, I ask you? And I challenge you to find a reference to Satan in there. Good luck.
I also started my other essay, but I'm still not sure about the topic. It's that people should keep journals and why. Comments?
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
What I have of my persuasive essay so far...
Censorship is, when it comes to young children, a necessary evil. We don’t like having to withhold information, but we have to when something might be too inappropriate or too scary for a three-year-old. But for teenagers and adults, what is left in any media that needs to be kept from us? As grown-up human beings, we have to be able to handle media of the kind that is out there now, and there’s no point in keeping us in the dark then. Besides, just because a “harmful” type of media is out there doesn’t mean we choose to expose ourselves to it. It’s a choice. On top of that, whether the media is books, video games, or television, media is a form of free speech, which is a right in our country. Censorship is a violation of that right. So, censorship may be necessary for toddlers and elementary school kids, but as we get older, censorship becomes a hindrance.
Adults deem some information and some topics unsafe for children to know. And I admit, there are topics that would traumatize children if they knew about it from the get-go. Plus, parents want to keep their children “innocent” for as long as possible. But, at that point, we get caught in a vicious cycle. As children get older, we realize that they need to know these things. But, we don’t know how to tell them, and we keep putting it off until some other kid at school tells them about it. That’s where censorship starts to get bad – we don’t know when to stop withholding information.
With children, there’s the same problem with censoring books. Public and school libraries and constantly challenged by upset parents who claim that some books on their shelves should be removed. They argue that the material is inappropriate or in some other way mentally harmful to readers. But you’d think that people would trust others to make good decisions about what they read. Besides, “harmful” books in the past have included the Harry Potter series and even a picture book entitled Sylvester and the Magic Pebble, in which all of the characters were animals. Do you know why that one was banned in one library?
Because the police were offended that the policemen in the book were pigs. Ridiculous.
The parents of young readers can help their children pick appropriate reading material, and older readers should be expected to choose books that they feel comfortable with. However, people are too sensitive, and they expect that everyone else is offended by the same books, when really, we think they’re fine. The censoring of books is restricting our right to choose what we read. It restricts our freedom of speech. Censoring should fall to parents when it comes to their children, not the government.
Adults deem some information and some topics unsafe for children to know. And I admit, there are topics that would traumatize children if they knew about it from the get-go. Plus, parents want to keep their children “innocent” for as long as possible. But, at that point, we get caught in a vicious cycle. As children get older, we realize that they need to know these things. But, we don’t know how to tell them, and we keep putting it off until some other kid at school tells them about it. That’s where censorship starts to get bad – we don’t know when to stop withholding information.
With children, there’s the same problem with censoring books. Public and school libraries and constantly challenged by upset parents who claim that some books on their shelves should be removed. They argue that the material is inappropriate or in some other way mentally harmful to readers. But you’d think that people would trust others to make good decisions about what they read. Besides, “harmful” books in the past have included the Harry Potter series and even a picture book entitled Sylvester and the Magic Pebble, in which all of the characters were animals. Do you know why that one was banned in one library?
Because the police were offended that the policemen in the book were pigs. Ridiculous.
The parents of young readers can help their children pick appropriate reading material, and older readers should be expected to choose books that they feel comfortable with. However, people are too sensitive, and they expect that everyone else is offended by the same books, when really, we think they’re fine. The censoring of books is restricting our right to choose what we read. It restricts our freedom of speech. Censoring should fall to parents when it comes to their children, not the government.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)