 |
| Photo by brewbooks |
Over the years we have seen the literature has evolved and as time passed, new topics take priority for the authors of the moment. This is certainly enrich literature and generates a particular narrative style. With the advent of new social trends and experiences each author experiences, a rich and unique style is developed, which is written without inhibition and with dominant reality.
The literature has evolved. The protagonists of this change are the authors around the world, whom right now are at a computer, or with a simple pencil and paper, creating characters and giving them life. Each creation is unique, and in turn produces an unique and personal experience for each reader. Therefore, each book must be read by every reader, since an individual experience is developed during the reading process and analysis. The literature is universal, is to share an experience, is to start conversations, is to be accesible. But what happens when literature is stopped in its process of dissemination when bound and classified as inadequate?
I was reading an article in The Huffington Post entitled "Ulysses Anniversary: 6 Surprising Banned Books." The article addresses the issue of books classified as unsuitable to be read. Among them is The Giver a winner of the Newbery Medal.
Reading this article, I can't help but wonder: Who or whom have the authority to ban books from libraries or classrooms or from the libraries we all visit ? Why can someone has the capability to say what books I can read? Why a society that shows itself as open minded, lets people, let groups to deprive readers from an opportunity to read a book and develop a personal experience, an own opinion? What credentials does such person or people in a community have to affirm that a book is adequate or appropriate, or acceptable?
Unfortunately, misinformation proliferates when not giving way to new trends and when choosing the "right", according to what is suitable and socially acceptable and proper. The control the reading materials for the members of a community is to stop the literacy movement. By doing this, we create a society where members will not be able to discern for themselves and create their own opinions.
To remove books access won’t heal society. We should read everything. Reading everything does not mean we are going to like that everything. It means we can have the opportunity to analyze it and form an opinion of our own. Maybe someone read every book on the banned list and just like one of them or on the contrary, like all of them, but that’s an individual decision that is made by using critical thinking to arrive to that conclusion, not a list someone or a group generated.
Reading is a beautiful thing and it can’t be tarnish by someone deciding that a book should not be read on our communities. After reading the article, I read one of the lists of banned books and I can say I have read 5 of them during the years, and I didn't even knew. 5 so far, 95 to go!
The literature has evolved. The protagonists of this change are the authors around the world, whom right now are at a computer, or with a simple pencil and paper, creating characters and giving them life. Each creation is unique, and in turn produces an unique and personal experience for each reader. Therefore, each book must be read by every reader, since an individual experience is developed during the reading process and analysis. The literature is universal, is to share an experience, is to start conversations, is to be accesible. But what happens when literature is stopped in its process of dissemination when bound and classified as inadequate?
I was reading an article in The Huffington Post entitled "Ulysses Anniversary: 6 Surprising Banned Books." The article addresses the issue of books classified as unsuitable to be read. Among them is The Giver a winner of the Newbery Medal.
Reading this article, I can't help but wonder: Who or whom have the authority to ban books from libraries or classrooms or from the libraries we all visit ? Why can someone has the capability to say what books I can read? Why a society that shows itself as open minded, lets people, let groups to deprive readers from an opportunity to read a book and develop a personal experience, an own opinion? What credentials does such person or people in a community have to affirm that a book is adequate or appropriate, or acceptable?
Unfortunately, misinformation proliferates when not giving way to new trends and when choosing the "right", according to what is suitable and socially acceptable and proper. The control the reading materials for the members of a community is to stop the literacy movement. By doing this, we create a society where members will not be able to discern for themselves and create their own opinions.
To remove books access won’t heal society. We should read everything. Reading everything does not mean we are going to like that everything. It means we can have the opportunity to analyze it and form an opinion of our own. Maybe someone read every book on the banned list and just like one of them or on the contrary, like all of them, but that’s an individual decision that is made by using critical thinking to arrive to that conclusion, not a list someone or a group generated.
Reading is a beautiful thing and it can’t be tarnish by someone deciding that a book should not be read on our communities. After reading the article, I read one of the lists of banned books and I can say I have read 5 of them during the years, and I didn't even knew. 5 so far, 95 to go!
These are my thoughts about banned books. If you have some thoughts on this-and I know all of your readers have - feel free to make comments here. If you want you can create a post on your site, but don't forget to leave a comment here with the link to your post so I can go visit and exchange ideas with you.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for visiting! I appreciate your comments.