The ALA’s list of banned and challenged classics
#4 – To Kill a Mockingbird – Harper Lee
#9 – 1984 – George Orwell
#17 – Animal Farm – George Orwell
These are important because they’re some of the only assigned reading I finished when I was in high school. I read all three in eighth grade. Books I never finished included anything by Dickens or Shakespear. Ever read Great Expectations? Wanna talk about screwed up home life? That story puts any reality show to shame. But only barely.
Not on the list:
- All Quiet on the Western Front – Erich Maria Remarque. More required reading that I finished, and the graphic descriptions of violence and other things gave me nightmares for months. I’m not sorry I read it, but still.
- Hamlet
- A Midsummer Night’s Dream
Oliver Twist
Let’s see…man pretends to be crazy to out his father’s killer and everyone dies
…wood nymphs get it on…and not necessarily honestly
…orphan boy steals, cheats, lies, and lives a horrendous life…at least at first
Also not on the list (also not classics, or recommended reading, but still) any of the novels I found at the library and passed around to my friends at school when I realized they had ‘naughty’ scenes in them. The book I read about devil worship. VC Andrews (all of my friends read Flowers in the Attic).
Here’s the thing about all of these. My parents knew I read them. My parents who were upstanding members of their religous community. They even knew about the devil worship one. They allowed it. They encouraged it. And, oh yeah, my father was always available to answer any questions I had about what I’d read.
Then again, I claim allegience to a god of mischeif now, so maybe all that reading when I was younger was bad for me. All that learning. Self-education. I recently discovered Kurt Vonnegut (late bloomer I suppose) and was absolutely infatuated with Cat’s Cradle but there’s no way I would have understood the underlying theme of the story 20 years ago.
I’m glad I was exposed to those things, even if it was only through words, because then I knew what they were. Hiding me from the reality of fiction wouldn’t have done anything except made sure I was ill-prepared for the real-life version of it. Oh, and thanks to ‘All Quiet’, I still cringe at war movies, Hollywood blood, and gory violence.
Draw your own conclusions. Your children aren’t mine to raise or to tell what to read. Then again, no one else’s children are yours to raise or tell what to read, either.
Part of the point of literature (and this comes from a religious person) is to understand humanity. And humanity is pretty screwed up most of the time. Likewise, part of the use of books is to understand that the perspective you’re exposed to might not be correct. So what you do with books that have disturbing themes is what your family did–you TALK about them. Banning them only makes them forbidden fruit, and ensures that anything damaging in them will be as damaging as possible.
Banning anything makes that thing more desirable. A lot of the time, the thing banned isn’t worth the time anyway, but by banning it, you’re drawing attention to it and making people curious.
I think kids need to get exposed to all kinds of ideas and themes so they can decide what is important and what is right. Banning things because the ideas in them might be damaging is even more damaging than allowing kids to decide for themselves.
I read to my children some scenes out of Vonnegut’s Breakfast for Champions just the other day, even the racy and racial parts.
Funny thing about banning is that the gov will ban only the books that are most realistic!
Fiction is a great indoctrination, used heavily by every government since Rome perfected the technique. Haven’t you read 1984?
😉
– Eric