Tuesday, September 27, 2011

Banned Books Week

Seeing how it's the middle of the week I presume that you've heard about it being banned book week, although last year I thought it was a whole month. Is there such a month? I remember sometime last year I was talking to someone about reading To Kill a Mockingbird since it was banned book month. Or was it week?
Oh well we're here now, and if you did know about it you probably also knew about the blog hop.

 Which is pretty much the reason I'm posting this now as opposed to the beginning of the week. I didn't sign up to participate because I'm not that familiar with banned books.
It's true, so I've been hopping down the banned book trail and have found some pretty interesting books, turns out I really haven't read that many banned books.
Less than 10 maybe?
Although I did notice that a lot are on my to-read shelf, and I'll admit seeing them on that list is tempting me to read them sooner. So yeah that list is definitely doing it's job... that is if it's job is to get more people interested in those books.

Banning books: I'm against it. I would ask who isn't? But clearly there are people out there who aren't, if you're one of them I'm sorry to say I've probably made fun of you. I am sorry but really it's upsetting that something gets taken away from the public because one person (or group) was offended by it.
I'm pretty sure the author didn't do it on purpose, although who knows. Maybe they did sit down at their desk and think to themselves How can I offend this individual.
Even more so for the authors of banned classics I bet that's the only reason Mark Twain wrote Huckleberry Finn he probably said to himself: In a hundred years they'll be reading this in schools so I'll be sure to make it real controversial!

Yeah no. It's not about you. I always want to say that to people when they get offended by things that can't really be helped.
That's the world past and present; we can't hide from it. Actually we can, which is most likely the reason I haven't read that many banned books, I read to escape and I can't exactly do that while reading books about real life problems.
And that there is the solution: just don't read them.  No one is forcing anyone to; not even the schools, ask around some students don't read the required books because they just don't want to. And I'll confess there were a couple of books I didn't completely read and I still manged to get by.
Not because I was against them I was just lazy sometimes.

If it's highly recommended to me I'll give it a try, even if it's not if I want to try it I will. And so far very few books have actually upset me. That is except a certain one I read this summer:
The Secret Diary of Ashley Juergens (read my very ranty review HERE). It wasn't even upsetting more like bothersome, but I hate the show so I shouldn't have expected much. Even though I didn't really enjoy it I in no way intend to stand in anyone's way, you want to read it go for it! Take my copy if you want! (That's not a giveaway offer, I don't give away books I don't like. Plus I've yet to master the art of mailing books. It is up on the Goodreads swap and also on Paperbackswap, it you're really that interested, that I can do).
Even though I made a joke about it being banned from schools I honestly don't see why it should be, it's about teen pregnancy and well it happens. At least kids want to read, schools already have a limited number of books no need to take more away.

Instead of putting a ban on books what I think should be done is putting a rating on them like they do to movies. I remember that the young adult shelf at my bookstore used to have a disclaimer sign saying some might not be suitable for young readers, lets put that on a book. Hopefully people (concerned parents) will actually acknowledge them. I used to get so annoyed (still do at times) when I would hear people complain about Meg Cabot's adult books because they just assumed that all she wrote was young adult, well you know what happens when you assume.
I hate it when they give age suggestions though since I always feel so weird if I'm more than a few years older, even if it's just a random suggestion, but if it helps lets do that.  But let's make it realistic.
Like Twilight being 12 and up. Really? I haven't read it so I'm not going to say it that's right or not, but the way I've always seen it is a young reader should be a least a couple of years within the age range of the main character.
Like The Hunger Games, main character is 16 or 17 so the youngest reader should be at least 13. Of course it would give an 11 year old nightmares; 11 isn't even young adult yet, and sure maybe her reading level was advance enough for that but it was obvious she was not ready for it. Actually I'm pretty sure I've mentioned The Hunger Games gave me some pretty weird dreams too so maybe it doesn't matter how "ready" you are. But hey, I loved those dreams, actually jumped out of bed one night and I bet I could have attacked someone who got in my way, (I already have a tendency to hit in my sleep sometimes).
But again other readers shouldn't be deprived of an amazing book because of one person. And how is it "sexually explicit"? I know mine was an audio version but I don't think I missed that much.\e.

No comments:

Post a Comment