“What is perhaps not right for one
child is absolutely necessary to another.”
-Ellen Hopkins
Dear Ms Berner,
An
independent reading selection is a sacred and unique choice, one that we
students of MS.51 are given daily. This ability to select is in keeping with old-fashioned
American ethics like freedom of speech and free pursuit of knowledge. I believe
that censorship, or “book banning” as we know it, does very little good for
society. It creates a controversy
between kids and adults, and it prevents kids from exploring their world in a
safe way.
Many adults are
unaware of the books their children are reading. My research has allowed me to
form my opinion: it is up to a child and his or her family to select books
intriguing and helpful to the child. And it is a school’s job to be open to all
types of reading personalities, and supply kids with their guided selections.
Many parents are
able to understand how a book could harm their child, but often may not be able
to envision a situation in which that book might help another child. This is
the type of parental blindness that leads to book banning. In my opinion, books
speak to young readers who can relate to the dark issues explored in those
titles. In his article, “Why the Best Kids’ Books are Written in Blood,”
Sherman Alexie states, “Teens read because they live in an often terrible
world. They read because they believe, despite the callow protestations of
adults, that books—especially the dark and dangerous ones will save them”. Controversial
topics in books often provide models for children in need of help. The article,
“Students ask District 41 to reconsider ‘Perks of Being a Wallflower Removal’ ”
states, “The book has played its role in helping its readers realize they’re
not alone in feeling different.” Challenged books are often the ones most nurturing
to teens who need help. By taking away these books, we are invading teen’s
lives, and making their conflicts seem insignificant.
Banning books drives
a wedge between kids and adults, because it involves the conflict of adults
making decisions for their children.
In his article, “Teen Fiction Plots are Darker and Starker,” William
Porter earnestly writes, “I think adults shortchange teens and their ability to
grasp complex material and make deeper connections.” When protective adults make decisions about banning books,
doesn’t it leave younger readers feeling intellectually violated and
disrespected?
I believe
overreaction to dark topics in books comes from a place of fear inside
caregivers: their children are growing up, and handling more challenging
material. “We are willing enough to praise freedom when she is safely tucked away
in the past and cannot be a nuisance,” states E.M Forster. “In the present, amidst
dangers whose outcome we cannot foresee, we get nervous about her, and admit
censorship.” Adults are comfortable with
graphic conflicts in books when their children are not exposed to them. But once these subjects are easily
accessible to teens, the adults jump to extremes, limiting access to books
rightfully ours. Book banning
further divides teens and their elders. In order to come to a solution,
we need to find a way to bridge the two groups.
The solution is
communication. The issue of censorship cannot be fairly addressed, because of
one major flaw: many adults are unaware of the books their kids are reading. In
order to make an educated and balanced decision about what our nation’s
children should be reading, honest discussion between teachers, parents, and
their children is essential. The article “District 41 Slated to Reconsider Ban
on ‘Perks of Being a Wallflower’ ” describes the reassessment of the book
banning process in District 41. In this reassessment, a new policy was created:
at the beginning of the school year, parents would receive a letter asking
parents if there were any subjects or books they wanted kept out of their
child’s hands. I strongly support this solution to the problem. I think an
approach like this would perform wonders at a school like MS 51. “My job is to
help children find the books they want to read. The parent’s job is to help their children decide what books
they should read,” claims Jenna Obee, Young Adult specialist at the Stanley
Lake Library. This idea, along with District 41’s plan, would allow parents,
who know their children the best, to pass judgment on what books their kids
should be reading, without affecting the other kids in the classroom.
Some
censors disagree strongly with my opinion. In her article, “Darkness too
Visible,” Megan Cox Gurdon states, “No family is obliged to acquiesce when
publishers use the vehicle of fundamental-free expression to try to bulldoze
misery or coarseness into our children’s lives.” However, the majority of
my research has led me to believe that dark books actually help readers solve
their own life issues. Young adult books generally show choices the main
character makes, and the negative effects of those choices, causing readers to
make better decisions than the main character did. As Sherman Alexie states, “I
read books about monsters and monstrous things, often written with monstrous
language, because they helped me battle the monsters in my own life.” The
censors of America are supposedly “protecting” kids from books, while really
all they’re doing is taking away one of the only ways kids across the nation learn
how to manage the valleys of their lives.
In
conclusion, censorship or book banning does little service to society. The sixth graders at MS.51 are on the
verge of adulthood. Don’t take
away their access to young adult books, just because of more graphic
material. Rather, institute
regulations regarding parent-child communication. This improved solution will nurture all reading personalities,
protect kids who need a little less exposure, and let already-exposed kids feel
less lonely and left out. As Judy Blume, says, “If parents and kids can talk together,
we won't have as much censorship because we won't have as much fear.” Some principals may choose to follow censorship, to
choose fear. But I propose that
there is a choice. And today, I
choose bravery.
Sincerely,
Julia
Frankel
