The written word is influential, sacred and powerful. The
influence and power of the written word is seen in many ways and is most often
abused when used for propaganda or to push ideology upon people that is merely
the belief of those in charge and without basis in fact. Influence and power
goes hand in hand with censorship, as through inclusion and exclusion of
certain words and texts, one is forced to take the included texts on face value
at a basic level and perhaps believe what they are told or what they read is
fact is true when they do not have access to an opposing viewpoint. This is
just one factor in censorship, and one that perhaps may work in theory but will
eventually backfire, as there will always be those who wish to get the full
story and gain an understanding of the truth through their experiences. A
recent fictional example of how this can happen is in Jackie French’s Pennies for Hitler, where a young boy,
Georg, brought up in Germany and in the midst of the Nazi Regime, believes what
he is taught about perfect Aryans until tragedy forces him to run to England,
where he is affected by what he sees there, and hears, and by the Blitz.
Following this, his evacuation to Australia brings it all together that the
Nazi’s are not who he thinks they are and where he learns that friendship and
loyalty and kindness are more powerful than hatred. As an example of how
keeping information from citizens, though not explicitly stated, French shows
these changes through Georg, and in my opinion, armed with what I know about
World War Two Germany, this book is an exgcellent example of how people’s
opinions can be changed by words and access or non access, or denial and lies
about events.
Some words are seen as scary or objectionable by various
people and groups, even governments, in which case, these words go against the
institution and will be censored for “the good of the public”. It is these
perceived threats that cause governments, schools, libraries or even just one
small community group within the larger community to ban books. Banning books
is a form of censorship: By restricting what people have access to, you censor
what they can learn, and by cutting out vital words of texts that give context
as to time and place, or even changing and modernising these words as Chorion
have been doing with Enid Blyton’s books, the story loses all meaning and the
question must be asked how many times can we change a text before it loses all
meaning, and why do we nitpick one author and not authors from years before
her? What is it about Blyton that is so offensive? This is what brings me back
to once you start, where does it end? How long is a piece of string? Will new
authors have to worry about the words they so carefully choose and craft into
stories for fear of offending the delicacies of somebody who doesn’t understand
a certain word or finds the subject matter offensive based on religious or
cultural or political reasons? (From previous research, these are the main
reasons for censorship and banning books).
If it is not a big government body, it may just be the
complaint of one or two people to a school or library about an innocent
children’s book that they do not want their child to read. Fine. Don’t buy the
book for your child, but let the other kids enjoy it. Curiously, many banned
books over the years have in fact been what those of us in the literary world
classify as children’s literature. Some examples are:
·
Anne Frank, The Diary of a Young Girl was banned
because it was too depressing (What do they expect from a diary written by a
girl in hiding in WW2? Puppies and sunshine?)
·
The Harry Potter Series by JK Rowling was banned
because they promote witchcraft, set bad examples and are too dark (Fantasy,
and again, of course they are dark. It deals with good and bad and in my
opinion hardly set a bad example – much worse happens in the real world)
·
The Bridge to Terabithia by Katherine Paterson
was banned because of Profanity, encouraged disrespect of adults, death being
central to the plot, encouraged secular humanism and/or Satanism and blending
of fantasy and reality.
These three examples are all
books I have read multiple times, and clearly I haven’t been depressed, started
worshipping Satan or practising witchcraft because I read them (It’s true, I
haven’t). When I write fantasy, or read fantasy, of course I expect some degree
of magic or another world. And I cannot think of a single kids book in which
the adults go off on adventures with the child characters.
I am anti-censorship. I do not
believe in it and I think the above reasons are ludicrous. I don’t think it
works because it just drives the books underground or people will find another
way to get them and read them. You can’t cancel out a book forever unless you
burn every copy plus any manuscripts the author and publishers might have.
Nobody has the right to tell me what to read and I don’t have the right to tell
them what to read. Having such free and fluid access to a wide choice of
reading material is something I expect in a community where we are not ruled with
an iron fist or communism.
Reluctantly though, I understand
there is censorship and partially understand and accept why people do it but
believe when it comes down to saying “Well my child isn’t going to read this”
it should be left at that and not make other people’s decisions for them. I
call this self-censorship, whereby we ignore what we do not like and let other
people read it – we do not say “Well I find so and so (Insert any title here)
objectionable because of a, b and c, so therefore everyone must and therefore
it should be banned” – this is so far from the truth. Everyone is different. My
aforementioned reluctant understanding comes from history, cultural and
literature studies, and in fact an essay written on censorship. Just as it is
not my choice to say to someone “You can’t read Twilight or One Flew Over the
Cuckoo’s Nest” for example (the former a book I will never read, the latter I
read and hated), it is not their choice to tell me I have to read Twilight and
that I can’t read A Song of Fire and Ice or Agatha Christie.
The place of censorship in my
opinion has no place in today’s society with the Internet giving easy access to
books in a myriad of ways – e-books, bookstores and online texts. I question
whether censorship is worthwhile and the cost of banning books when you can
just go somewhere the book is not banned to buy it. When it comes to that, how
do you police where people are taking it? And where would it stop? What belongs
behind the curtain and what doesn’t? For me, it is the same issue as how long
is a piece of string and everyone finds something they do not like in all
books. Yes, even me. The freedom of choosing what I read is what I love the
most, and to have that choice taken away from me, from the world, is a
nightmare that I hope never comes true. Choose what you read, not what everyone
else reads.
