Ms. Berner,
As you know, banned books are a frequent topic of discussion as of late. Many concerned parents are worried about the graphic content contained in the YA novels their children are reading, and I'm sure you've received numerous complaints from some of these adults, telling you to ban these books from the classroom libraries, or else their children may be corrupted. However, I greatly urge you to ignore these preposterous accusations. These books are NECESSARY for a child's development and understanding of the world. They must know how some people are really treated, and how to acknowledge and close their emotional wounds. Really, books should not be banned for children aged thirteen and up, because they are just beginning to deal with the problems teens face, book publishers realize that they'll be emotionally mature enough to handle the content, and they are old enough to think for themselves.
First of all, children are now entering their teen years and need the help and guidance of an understanding book. For example, Ellen Hopkins states in her Banned Books Week 2010 article, “I have received tens of thousands of messages from readers, thanking me for turning them around, giving them much needed insight, and saving their lives.” Here, Hopkins shows us that her books have greatly helped children in need. They take on the role of an understanding friend; someone who's gone through the same experiences these kids are going through and can reassure them that everything will be okay – that they will make it through this and are not alone. Another example is from Sherman Alexie's essay, “Why the Best Kids Books are Written in Blood”. Alexie writes, “I vividly remember what it felt like to be a teen facing everyday and epic dangers. I don't write to protect them. It's far too late for that. I write to give them weapons – in the form of words and ideas – that will help them fight their monsters.” The idea Alexie is trying to communicate is that kids who are going through such terrible times do not need to be protected; they need to be guided through their trials and tribulations, which include social exclusion, abuse verbally and/or physically, loneliness, etc. He's basically saying that kids can learn from and identify with these books. Even if it makes one child uncomfortable (and if it does, he/she can simply stop reading it), the book will then save thousands of other children's lives. Banning these comforting books will prevent kids from getting the care they need.
Second of all, publishers are beginning to understand that teenagers are developed enough to be able to handle their reactions to such problems in an emotionally mature way. For example, the article “Age-rated books: Right or Wrong?” by BBC News poses this idea: “Each book will carry a specific marking indicating whether they are suitable for readers 5+, 7+, 9+, 11+, and 13+/Teen.” This is a very good idea, as these numbers are merely guidelines for the average child of each designated age. It recognizes that teenagers deserve to be grouped with adults, as they are now becoming adults themselves. Now, if the parent is firmly against the child reading a certain book, that is for them to have a personal, family discussion. But in general, these groupings serve to give teenagers the freedom to explore books with adults, and be treated as the mature young people they are. This is also a good solution when you pair it with what Meghan Cox wrote in her article “Darkness Too Visible”. She points out, “They think that every 12-year-old is going to love that stuff [violence/adult themes] and not be affected by it. And I don't think that's possible.” Though this is actually a quote from Jewell Stoddard, Meghan states she wholeheartedly agrees with it. This problem can easily be solved with age-rating. If a child is finding a book to be too emotionally exhausting for them, they can find another book better suited for their age group, rather than having it be completely banned and inaccessible to children who ARE emotionally mature enough to handle its contents.
Finally, teenagers are now old enough to begin forming their own thoughts and ideas, separate from that of their parents. They are now becoming adults, and must learn to survive on their own in the adult world. For example, the article “Man from Ministry Bans Potter” by Tania deLuzuriaga clearly tries to refute this by saying, “Most of the controversy is centered around witchcraft and occult themes. But there are others who say the books model disrespect for adults.” Now, to be fair, this event DID occur at a Catholic school, so it's inevitable that many people may feel threatened by works including magical and fantastical and sometimes dark themes, as much of the Christian religion is against it. Respect for adults is also a major teaching at Christian schools. However, their children are now at an age where it is inappropriate for their parents to control their lives in certain ways – including reading. So, I feel it would be best for the parents to have a long discussion with their kids, where they actually try to hear the child's point of view and come to an agreement based on what their offspring wants. If they did that, it would show that they have a real respect for what the teen thinks and feels, and for the fact that, like it or not, they are forming different opinions from their parents and are growing up.
In conclusion, books should not be banned for children aged thirteen and up because they need books to help them through their issues, they are emotionally mature enough to handle them, and they are forming ideas that differentiate from their parents'. It's incredibly hypocritical of adults to try and decide what teens should and should not read, when they get to decide for themselves what THEY want to read. This contributes to the mindset of society that everyone must think alike, and doesn't acknowledge the fact that people all have different boundaries. It is a common misconception that adults know what is best for their children. Truthfully? They DON'T know, especially when the child in question is a teenager. This is the time when kids begin to keep to themselves, when they start to have all these thoughts and feelings and aspirations that they wish to keep private from the rest of the world, even though they wish for someone to understand what they're going through. They're becoming adults, different people from who they used to be, and they need to be open to having new experiences in order to learn and grow as people. In this way, it is impossible for a parent to really, truly understand their child at this point in their life. They should guide them, but they can't keep them from seeking out new resources for connecting with themselves; which is the very essence of what books are. The world would be a better place if people could all think for themselves, regardless of their age. This is why you should not listen to those who want you to ban certain books, and SHOULD continue to allow children to experience the joy of reading.
Sincerely,
Caroline R.
No comments:
Post a Comment