So I understand the motive behind banning books. But this doesn't mean I agree with it.
Some ideas really can be harmful. Some books are genuinely dangerous.
But who gets decide that?
Banning books is an absurd idea. We live in the information age, but people can still be censored? If you ban a book, it means that it contained something radical. Radical ideas are what force people to think, the things that point out flaws in the self and in society. Some ideas that were once considered radical enough to be burn-at-the-stake worthy ended up, years later, being pillars of modern knowledge, freedom and thought. Women's rights? Democracy? The Earth not being the center of the universe?
Letting anyone decide what anyone else gets to read, and consequently think, goes against every human sensibility and shred of morality I have. Thoughts and ideas are a precious resource, and the only things that can move us forward. I don't see how banning books is any different from suppressing knowledge or encouraging ignorance, two things which sound like bad ideas for a reason.
The reasons given for banning Slaughterhouse-Five actually almost make me angry. Of course war is innapropriate, for ANYONE. That doesn't make it any less of a reality. Okay, there's some sex, but you know what else has that?
REAL LIFE.
What I find shocking and inappropriate, what I think SHOULD provoke strong responses out of people, is the fact that this book can be banned in certain States, yet in those very same ones young people in the are allowed to give up their lives for their country (age 18) before they are even trusted enough to be allowed to consume alcohol (age 21) because, apparently, that's too much responsibility . The people that decided this are not the people that should be deciding what I, or anyone else, should be allowed to think. That very thought scares me.
Rant over.
-Ellana
No comments:
Post a Comment