Argument Essay-Banned Books

     One of the most controversial arguments today is whether people should have the right to ban books. Some of the top banned/challenged books range from children’s stories like Captain Underpants by Dav Pilkey and In the Night Kitchen by Maurice Sendak to more disturbing books such as The Lovely Bones by Alice Sebold and The Bluest Eye by Tony Morrison, as well as timeless classics like Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain, To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee, and The Giver by Lois Lowry. While many people (especially parents) feel strongly that certain books should be banned, many others argue that it is unethical to restrict books. Those who believe that it is fine to ban books say that there are parts of books that are inappropriate for any audience, challenged books have disturbing content and language, and feel the need to take their power away for those reasons. These are not legitimate reasons for a book to be banned. It is unethical to ban books.

            One reason why it is unreasonable to ban books is because a lot of bias can come from reading one part out of context. Many people misunderstand books because they only read excerpts. For example, Alexandra Petri, the author of the article “Searching for Offense” writes that, “If you object to the tiny naughty bits concealed in good literature, you run the risk of never again reading classic literature…” Petri is right—one must keep an open mind and read the whole thing before making any judgments. People who skim a text for offensive content will find it in almost every book they read—including well-respected classics—because they are incapable of appreciating the literature as a whole. This can greatly obstruct their view of what literature is and what it means to others. One can bias themselves as well as other readers by choosing to acknowledge/share only certain parts of a book. This is not fair to other readers because they are not being allowed to experience literature as the author wanted them to. This is also unfair to the author because their words are being manipulated to bias others against their work, when everyone should be able to read for themselves and develop their own opinions.

           

            Those in favor of banning books might argue that many books have offensive language and content that is disturbing for the reader. For example, Huckleberry Finn has been challenged by many for its use of offensive language. Terms like Injun Joe, half-breed, and nigger are replaced in some editions as “Indian Joe”, “half-blood” and “slave”. However, Mark Twain felt the need to use these words to paint a realistic picture of the time and place he was writing about. It is completely inappropriate to manipulate an author’s writing. No one person should be able to limit others’ options. Mark Twain is using very specific language to force the reader to really think about the negative connotation of certain words. When discussing the censorship of these words, Jones, head of the Office for Intellectual Freedom at the library he works at, says, “Twain put it there because he wanted people to struggle with it. I think, as a country, we're big enough to struggle with it.” As a country, we need to be able to face issues like racism that have defined our country’s morals for a long time and contributed to our relationships with each other. Some say that books like this set bad examples for students, but talking through an issue like racism or death in a classroom can help students deal with these issues when they come into contact with them.

            The reason why many people ban or censor books is to take away their power and try to shelter themselves from the issues present in the book. However, declaring a book banned or challenged makes it even more desirable. It makes people curious as to why it was banned, and what content it could possibly contain that would cause it to be considered unacceptable. For example, when Ralph Ellison’s book Invisible Man was banned from schools in Randolph County, North Carolina, it sparked peoples’ interest in the book because, as one reader wrote to the newspaper, there is “No surer way to elevate a book to the Must Read list of teen readers than to ban it.” Those who are upset by issues discussed in books that they read should stop and think about what they are reading before they cast it aside. The reason that authors use powerful language and describe horrifying realities is to make us stop and think about the world around us—not hide from it. Challenging a book is a way that people hide themselves (and in some cases their children) from the issue discussed in the book, and the reality of hiding from conflict is that you will not be ready for it when it suddenly appears in your life.

            The issue of censorship is very controversial, especially when dealing with banned books. It is inappropriate for anyone to ban or censor someone else’s writing. Not banning books makes it easier for us as readers to appreciate the literature that exists in our world. It causes the reader to really stop and think about issues in the world around them and face ugly conflicts in our history that may have even spilled over into our lives today. Although there are many arguments in favor of banning books, they can all be effectively refuted because they are based on personal opinions which should not define other peoples’ standards.

Bibliography

1.      Moore, Martha T. "'Huck Finn' Navigating Choppy Waters Again." USA TODAY. 06 Jan. 2011: A.3. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web.

2.      Petri, Alexandra. "Searching for Offense." Washington Post. 19 Oct. 2013: A.13. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web.

3.      Zucchino, David. "'Invisible Man' May Appear Again." Los Angeles Times. 25 Sep. 2013: A.8. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web.

           

           

           

Social Justice Project

Article—Gay Bashing

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/gay-bashing-attacks-rise-city-article-1.1430370

            This article is an example of injustice based on orientation, which is something that no one can control. I feel that gay-bashing attacks are very unjust because it is never right to beat up someone just because they go against your personal beliefs. This makes me think about all the times I have heard the word ‘gay’ used as an insult and how unfair it is that people will hurt others (physically and emotionally) over something that they don’t even have a choice in.

Observing the Neighborhood

In our neighborhood I have noticed:

·         Most of the babysitters are black women, the kids are white

·         Most of the delivery guys for restaurants are Hispanic men, the owners are white

·         Most of the homeless people are black

·         There are a lot of homeless people

·         There are some kids with very racist attitudes

·         People assume that every white kid in Park Slope has lots of money

            Just as a phobia is an irrational fear, racism is an irrational hatred. It can be subtle or overt, obvious or hidden, and it can be directed towards any race. In observing my neighborhood, I noticed several examples of racism/classism (which sometimes go hand in hand). One thing that was interesting was seeing how these different examples relate. For example, because the vast majority of nannies are black and Caribbean women, kids are learning from a very young age that the role of a black person in their community is to be some kind of servant. This also contributes to my fifth point that many kids are racist and disrespectful towards black people, especially grown-ups which is not good because children should be taught to respect their elders, no matter what color. This attitude is why people from outside the neighborhood believe that every white (or white-looking) kid from Park Slope has a lot of money. Although people don’t usually associate racism with bias towards white people, this issue does come up, especially when race and class are working together. Of course, racism towards people of color is a much bigger problem than what some white people might experience. We need to put an end to this because it adversely affects not only the people that are being stigmatized, but the offenders as well.

Interview—Rachel Odo (mom)

Q: What do you think is good about our world in terms of social justice and equality?

A: There have been a lot of changes over time working towards bringing equality to everyone, and attempts by people of every age to bring our world together despite the fact that there has been injustice in every era. There have always been people aware of it and working to fix it.

Q: What do you believe is unfair about the world?

A: Distribution of wealth and class differences lend unfair advantages and disadvantages to different groups of people. These often fall along racial or gender lines and systems are set up to keep those who have power in their positions of power, and those who are poor stay in a state of poverty. However, there are always parts of society working to fix this.

I agree with many points that were made in this interview. I have been noticing lately how unfairly power is wielded to keep underprivileged people in poverty and keep money in a few circles of rich politicians and celebrities. I respect those working towards social justice and I recognize that some people have been fighting for human rights their whole lives. Adding on to what she said about advantages/disadvantages falling along racial/gender lines, other bias is directed towards orientation, and controversial opinions such as pro-life vs. pro-choice. I also agree that there are parts of society as a whole who really believe that we can fix these social justice issues, and we have been taking steps in the right direction.

News Clip

http://www.cbs.com/shows/cbs_this_morning/video/CxTDgCpOlE6Ldp2MKsx8eRc87vsafxFI/labor-of-love-activist-dolores-huerta-still-fighting-for-change/

            In this clip from CBS, Michelle Miller talks about and interviews Dolores Huerta, a Hispanic activist for workers’ rights who was a prominent figure in the Civil Rights era. Huerta did not get the lasting recognition that she deserved probably because of bias against Hispanics and women in general. It is hard for me to put myself in her shoes, but if I were her I would probably feel proud of everything I have done and grateful that somebody finally recognized my efforts. I would also feel weary, probably, because of all the injustices I had suffered. Dolores Huerta is a brave person to fight for her rights when all the odds were against her. It is amazing that she is still doing it, and empowering other women to do the same.

Interview--Doctor Franklin Odo

Q: So what is the basis of your ethnic studies program?

A: Ethnic studies began in 1968 when people were led by students and younger faculty (which I was a part of). In that period, there was a tremendous amount of anti-war (Vietnam) activity but also a lot of racial unrest, mostly directed towards African Americans, Latinos, Native Americans, and Asian Americans. So, the question that all of us were asking was, “What is happening to our country?” We didn’t understand, but we knew it had a lot to do with racism. We saw that the attitude towards Southeast Asians was that their lives were not worth anything and killing them was okay. American military leaders had no restraint when it came to dropping bombs on villages or shooting women and children because they felt that it was no big deal. This was the same attitude that most white people had towards anyone of color. Now we were wondering, “How can we stop this?” Education is supposed to provide answers to questions like these, but history courses did not discuss our country’s racial background and was taught from a white person’s point of view—everything they did to people of color was totally justifiable. Political science classes did not talk about who holds power, and anthropologists saw people of color as groups to be studied. They saw people with a heritage, a past and stories to tell as history, and people who did not have those things as specimens that belonged in a museum. Unfortunately, they dismissed the idea that people of color had a rich history as well. However, this idea is slightly nuanced because in the whole hierarchy of civilizations, Europeans saw Asian histories as a little more legitimate, than that of other races. Black and Native Americans were viewed as savages with no stories to tell. In the late ‘60s and ‘70s, those of us who were trying to figure it out rejected the lies that Europeans are superior, but we had no scientific evidence to make the rejection legitimate. So, why not create a field of study that allows us to, without bias, study this and gather evidence. This is what our ethnic studies program is. In 1968, the first serious outbreak of study on this topic happened at San Francisco University. People of every ethnicity came together and went on strike because the faculty refused to teach these classes. This was the beginning of a movement that people of every race were involved in, and women as well. At the beginning no one knew it would become such a huge movement. If you follow things in Ferguson right now, some protesters believe that this is the start of the movement. Now, we have thousands of colleges with ethnic studies programs. The history of the African American population is most widely recognized, the Latino population is the largest, and the Asian Americans are the most organized group. Native Americans struggle to get the recognition that they deserve because there are less of them left. The AAAS (Association of Asian American Studies, an association that I am part of) is one of the organized groups with around 700 members.

Q: How did you (personally) get started with ethnic studies?

A: I was teaching at Occidental College in LA, a private liberal arts college. I had been trained in Asian studies, and was planning to teach Japanese and Chinese history when my wife prompted me to become more political—we went to demonstrations and protests as I got more involved with Asians in America. So a group of us started asking questions. “Is the way we are being treated similar to the way Europeans are treating African Americans?” and we decided to research this as scholars.

The way that Dr. Odo changes the world is by opening our eyes to the cultures of other races, and enriching our education by teaching us about Asian American culture. Learning about different groups of people makes us (as Americans) well-rounded and able to accept people no matter where they come from. America is the “melting pot”, meaning that it is not just European (white) culture, but that American culture is made up of belief systems and customs from all over the world. Dr. Odo is a Japanese American man who grew up in Hawaii, and unlike most of his generation, left Hawaii to attend college on the mainland. He attended Princeton and Harvard Universities. Another interesting fact about Dr. Odo is that he is my grandfather!

Poem analysis

“The Ballad of the Landlord”

by Langston Hughes

Landlord, landlord,
My roof has sprung a leak.
Don't you 'member I told you about it
Way last week?

Landlord, landlord,
These steps is broken down.
When you come up yourself
It's a wonder you don't fall down.

Ten Bucks you say I owe you?
Ten Bucks you say is due?
Well, that's Ten Bucks more'n I'll pay you
Till you fix this house up new.

What? You gonna get eviction orders?
You gonna cut off my heat?
You gonna take my furniture and
Throw it in the street?

Uh-huh! You talkin’ high and mighty.
Talk on-till you get through.
You ain't gonna be able to say a word
If I land my fist on you.

Police! Police!
Come and get this man!
He's trying to ruin the government
And overturn the land!

Copper's whistle!
Patrol bell!
Arrest.
Precinct Station.
Iron cell.
Headlines in press:
MAN THREATENS LANDLORD                                                                                     TENANT HELD NO BAIL
JUDGE GIVES NEGRO 90 DAYS IN COUNTY JAIL!

            This poem deals with the issues of racism and classism. Considered one of the greatest leaders of the Harlem Renaissance, Hughes felt very strongly about issues of equality, especially dealing with race (he was African American). This poem illustrates how landlords would take advantage of their black tenants. They had the power to do this because the court would always favor the rich white landlord over the poor black tenant. The third and fourth stanzas are inappropriate demands and then threats that the landlord makes, and then when the tenant retaliates, he/she gets put in jail. This is an infringement of human rights on a very basic level. Landlords like this are cheating their tenants out of their money, and the innocent ones are being sent to jail because of racial bias.

The Breakfast Club Response

      The movie I chose to watch was The Breakfast Club because I feel that it clearly portrays teen stereotypes.

      The way that “normal” teens are portrayed depends on the stereotype and the message that the movie is trying to get across. Usually, a normal teen has a stable family situation, is middle/professional class, and serves as a secondary character in a film because people want to see the main character as the one with the drama in their life. Generally, these teens are white, living in a small town (in America). The amount of money depends on the stereotype. The stereotype can determine class, which determines the amount of money that the character has. The Breakfast Club portrays the perfect teen stereotypes with a twist. There is the rich/popular stereotype, the nerd, the jock, the weirdo, and the criminal. The popular girl, Claire, is pretty, has nice hair, nice clothes, lots of money. The nerd, Brian, wears “geeky” clothes (baggy sweaters and pants, sneakers), has a slight speech impediment, does not want to break the rules, and can’t seem to stop talking about math once he gets started. The jock, Andrew, belongs to the same crowd as Claire. He’s on the wrestling team, is great at trading insults but isn’t the sharpest tool in the shed, and can’t seem to think for himself. The weirdo, Allison, has shaggy hair that covers her face, wears dark eyeliner, has a baggy coat on all day and carries a bag full of odds and ends. She moves in a strange way, and at the beginning, the only sounds she makes are squeaks and growls. Everything about the criminal, John, is rebellious. He has shaggy hair, piercings, wears leather gloves, and enjoys knocking everything over as he enters a room. He insults the teacher, keeps weed in his locker, and is always the ringleader. These stereotypes are taken to the extreme, but the twist is that every one of these characters has a vulnerable side, a part of them where they can all relate to each other, a part where we, as viewers, can relate to all of them. These images of teens make me think that no matter how hard you try, you cannot fit yourself (or others) into a box because there are bits that will always spill over into someone else’s box. I know that no matter what someone’s life seems like on the outside, you have to peel back a few layers to find out who they really are, and what is actually going on in their life. For example Claire, who seems to have the best life in the world and everything she could possibly want, actually faces difficulties in her family and between her parents. She says that they use her to get back at each other. On the other hand, John’s home life is what is expected. He has an alcoholic, abusive father, and a mother who doesn’t seem to be able to do anything about it. However, there is a good person somewhere inside of his hard outer shell. When he almost gets the others in trouble, he tells them to go and creates a distraction, because he know that it’s his fault, and he is prepared to suffer the consequences. This movie made me feel like the normal, average people aren’t always represented, and I think this is because people don’t find the “normal” teen very interesting. I also noticed how real people are almost never exactly the stereotype, and usually has a little bit of every stereotype in them.

Reading Response-The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian

           Many people don’t notice the huge line between white and not-white, privileged and not-privileged. Many people decide to ignore this line, and instead choose to pretend that everything is fine. By doing this, they are effectively turning their backs on our country’s history, where racism brought out the worst of America. Sherman Alexie’s book, The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian, tells the story of Junior, and how he was able to straddle this line. Junior and his family live on the Spokane Indian Reservation (aka the “rez”) where a small community of Native Americans live and struggle to get by. Tired of all the hopelessness on the rez, Junior leaves it behind when he becomes the only Indian in the white school of Reardan, 20 miles away from the reservation. Junior knows that he has to cross boundaries and make sacrifices in order to have more options in his future.

            When he decided to go to a white high school, Junior sacrificed his relationship with his best friend Rowdy. “…Rowdy and I have spent around 40,880 hours in each other’s company. Nobody else comes close to that. Trust me. Rowdy and I are inseparable” (24). However, when Junior breaks the news to him that he is going to be leaving the rez Rowdy does not take it well. Rowdy, the only kid on the rez who hadn’t bullied or beat up Junior, the only kid who protected him, punched him in the face and left him on the ground. “I stupidly hoped that time would stand still if I stayed still. But I had to stand eventually, and when I did, I knew that my best friend had become my worst enemy” (53). This hurt Junior more than any time he had been slapped or kicked or punched. It was probably the greatest sacrifice that he made. Rowdy’s reaction was so strong because, like so many of the other members of the reservation, he had already given up hope long ago. Junior was like a beacon for Rowdy because he was the only one left on the rez who had not given up. That meant that Junior still had a fighting chance whereas Rowdy did not. But when Junior stopped going to school on the rez and Rowdy turned his back on him, Rowdy lost any bit of hope and strength that Junior was able to give him.

            Another thing that Junior sacrificed was his tribe’s respect for him. “…some Indians think you have to act white to make your life better. Some Indians think you become white if you try to make your life better, if you become successful” (131). A lot of people call him an apple—red (Indian) on the outside and white on the inside. It hurts a lot to be cast out of your community, and being called an apple is basically being called a traitor to your race. When he returns home from school every day there is always someone waiting to call him names or pick a fight. What they don’t realize is that trying out new experiences is hard for him, too, and he struggles with it all the time, especially when his school basketball team plays the reservation’s team and he goes up against highschoolers from his tribe. He feels lost because he doesn’t know where he belongs.

            Leaving the rez also meant that Junior had to sacrifice being part of that tight-knit community. He no longer had a place where he was completely accepted. It is almost as if he is being torn in two. One side is Indian (home, family, loyalty to his tribe, hopelessness,) and the other is white (future, options, career, hope, sacrifices). But, Leaving the community means that he is no longer tied down and he can expand his options. “I realized that, sure, I was a Spokane Indian. I belonged to that tribe. But I also belonged to the tribe of American immigrants. And to the tribe of basketball players. And to the tribe of book worms” (217). While he may miss having a place that he could truly call home, Junior did what was best for him in the long run, and by moving on from the rez he created openings that he never would have had if he had stayed. He went from being hopelessly resigned to his fate to hopefully looking forward to the future, and although it is scary to leave the place that one calls home, it means that there are many more open doors.

            Junior did the right thing when he made the decision to leave the reservation. Although he had to make many sacrifices, he will benefit from it in the long run. Junior had to face the struggle of being an individual but still part of his community and I think that he will be a stronger person because of it. Although it took a huge amount confidence and determination to cross the racial boundaries, Junior managed to do it which means that he will have broader options in his future. Junior’s experience can teach the reader that while crossing barriers (whether it is a racial barrier or another kind) can be challenging and take many sacrifices, it is worth it in the end.