Banned Books: An Essay

(Note: this is an essay I whipped up for english class. It contains spoilers for John Steinbeck's of Mice and Men as well as Looking for Alaska by John Green and Persepolis by Marjane Satrapi. If you don't like spoilers, maybe you should read something else. Enjoy! )

In the past, as well as recently, books have been banned on the grounds of being sexually explicit, containing language that is considered to be offensive, or containing topics or information not suitable for young audiences - or any audience (American Library Association). This is done with good intention. The hearts of the people behind these decisions are "in the right place," so to speak.  According to Noam Chomsky, "if we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all." With this in mind, as well as the grounds on which all books have been banned, the justification of these grounds, and the grounds on which John Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men has been challenged or banned, it is clear that this book should never have been banned at all.

Many books have been challenged or banned in the past for multiple different, yet similar, reasons. One example of a challenged book is Persepolis by Marjane Satrapi. Satrapi wrote it as an autobiographical account of her childhood, as she grew up during the Islamic Revolution. The book contains an illustrated scene of torture - one page in her comic, to be exact - and was recently removed from Chicago classrooms and school libraries (MacDonald). It was removed because it showed violence and a seventh grade teacher did not want to teach this book to his or her class (Konrad). Looking for Alaska by John Green has been challenged as well for its somewhat controversial content. Some called it "pornography" due to its scene involving oral sex - which, according to Green, was “awkward, unfun, disastrous, and wholly un-erotic." Green argued that this scene was trying to relate that physical intimacy can never be a stand-in for emotional closeness (Green). Much like with the controversy around Of Mice and Men, many people often disregard the intentions of the things they oppose in favor of their own interpretations and intentions. In Of Mice and Men, Curley’s wife refers to Candy, Lennie, and Crooks as “a bunch of bindle stiffs – a nigger and a dum-dum.” This does not mean Steinbeck thinks this way or uses this language himself, or that he promotes using this language. Steinbeck once wrote in a letter that “for too long the language of books is different from the language of men.” He also notes that in his writing, the language people use is meant to be adornment in every day speech, and to those men speaking it is “never vulgar” (Daniels).

The reasons for banning books are simultaneously good and bad. As said previously, the reasons come from good intentions and the desire to help and protect others (American Library Association). However, books are created with good intentions as well - to spread word, to inspire, to unite people, and to entertain. To say that one group's good intentions are more important than an author or a book's good intentions is hypocrisy, and disagrees with the First Amendment (Konrad) and/or the idea of free speech. According to an interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights, called Free Access to Libraries for Minors, “parents – and only parents – have the right and the responsibility to restrict the access of their children – and only their children – to library resources” (American Library Association). This means that only parents can decide what their own children have access to in order for them, as parents, to keep them away from what they consider to be offensive or difficult content. This is why we don’t often see video games being taken off shelves or television shows off the air because a child may find it – it is the responsibility of the parent, not the content, to keep children away from offensive information.

Since the 1950s, John Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men has been challenged and/or banned on the grounds of containing racial slurs/offensive language, and promoting euthanasia. Words such as the “n word” are used throughout the novel, along with other various phrases found to be offensive by certain people or religious groups. This language is used believably and within the context and dialogue of the novel - without these “offensive” words there, the characters of the book simply wouldn’t be realistic or even really be who they are (Daniels). The world in which George and Lennie live is one that is beautifully shown to the reader through Steinbeck’s narration, and clashes with the harsh, rough language used by the characters (Daniels). The book also brings up the topic of euthanasia, which occurs twice in the book. In the beginning, it is Candy’s dog which is shot because it is so old that it is now a nuisance to itself, and according to the characters of the book, keeping it alive would do more harm to it than good.  Later, at the end of the novel, it is Lennie who is killed so that he would not have to live through the torture Curley would put him through if he were to be caught by the lynch mob. Euthanasia is promoted by the idea that it is the more kind solution, though many groups and individuals disagree. There is nothing wrong with forming your own opinion, and a child or adolescent has every right to be able to do so as well. If a child does not have access to difficult material, they will not learn how to form their own opinions about things, or even feel that they can’t, and will likely only ever have the opinions of others. Reading allows people to form themselves as individuals, and children – as well as teenagers – should not be denied that right.

Of Mice and Men should never have been challenged or banned/censored at all. Steinbeck’s aim was to show speech as it occurs in everyday life, not promote negative ideas. This goes for all books as well – books should not be censored, regardless of the intentions of the authors or the people behind the censorship campaign. It’s simply hypocritical to promote free speech while simultaneously denying someone the same right – regardless of your opinion about them or their views. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, even if it’s the unpopular opinion, and children, as with all readers, need to be able to view things from all angles and perspectives in order to grow intellectually and flourish as empowered individuals.