Mrs. Moritz's 9th Honors English

Tuesday, October 10, 2006

Censorship

You can respond to all or pick just one...

1. Is it okay to have books on making bombs in the school library?
2. Will banning books keep people from reading them?
3. Television shows are censored, so are song lyrics—what makes books different?

posted by mmoritz at 10/10/2006 01:32:00 PM

24 Comments:

  • I chose the second question, and I believe that it would make people want to read them more. Some people would see why it was banned first and then maybe read it or not. For people who like to break rules they will read the books even if they don't like it. It's like sending an invatation to read it, when before it was ban they might have not even pick it up.

    By Blogger Damian L., at 2:05 PM  

  • Responding to #2:
    I don't think that by banning books that will keep people from reading them. If it is a subject that someone believes strongly in, nothing will keep them from learning about or reading it. Also, alot of times if something is banned it will cause more people want to read it. It works the same way that when you tell your brother not to do something he will do it more persistently. It is in people's human nature to challenge things. That includes thier rights. People will take advantage of their rights as American citizens. The main thing that it prevents is from the book being taught in schools.

    By Blogger Chelsea, at 2:33 PM  

  • This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    By Blogger KylieYoum, at 3:05 PM  

  • When you watch a TV show or listen to songs, you get the same effect from hearing someone drop f bombs as you do if they skip the word, or replace it with something a little different (and G-rated). In a book, I think that when you read about a character that uses these words, the author is trying to paint a perfect picture for you of the character's behavior and attitude. If they were to censor or change the speech, you wouldn't feel the same effect, and the message might not get across to you the way the author wanted it to.

    Since reading isn't something you hear or see (the imaginative plus to reading), the bad words are just another way of voicing emotions in a book. On TV or in songs, their tones and gestures do this for them!

    By Blogger KylieYoum, at 3:11 PM  

  • In response to the second question:
    No it won't. People will want to read them more. It is the nature of human beings to disobey rules and challenge the system. People want to see wht is so bad about what was banned or prohibited and form their own opinion about it.

    By Blogger Barry Tischler, at 3:42 PM  

  • #2
    I dont think that banning a book will keep people from reading it. I think that it will reduce the number of people that do read it, but not completely prevent people. If a person thinks they will be offended by what it says, based on why it is banned, then they wont read it. On the other hand, if they could care less, then they could choose to read the book if it sounded interesting.

    By Blogger Natalie Jones, at 4:11 PM  

  • Responding to Question #1...

    A quick question: by this, do you mean books mentioning others making bombs or do you mean instructions on how to make a bomb? Or neither?

    If you mean books about others making bombs, I think that's ok. We need to know about what's happening and what has happened in our world concerning such military devices. North Korea recently tested a nuclear bomb, and I for sure wanted to know THAT! It's so scary! Also, we should be able read about what has happened in the past, like the bombing of Japan, and learn about how devastating it was. Should we enter a war with North Korea, we need to remember how absolutely devastating and destructive the bomb we used on Japan was and consider that before entering a nuclear war (not that we will, but just as an example...)We should learn from the past.

    If they are books that are basically instructions on how to make a bomb OF COURSE they should most CERTAINLY NOT be in a school library...actually, for that matter, they shouldn't be in any public library AT ALL! No one, especially HSchoolers, should be able to read up on how to make a bomb. Normal everyday people have no good reason to either own or use one unless it's for murder or revenge or something unpleasant like that. Only the US gov't and military should have access to THAT kind of information because they are the ones involved in foreign affairs.

    By Blogger AlisonB, at 4:14 PM  

  • Hahaha, darn, other people got here before me! Well, hello everyone. I'm chosing to respond to the post about whether people will read books even if they are banned. I believe that the response to this question all depends on perspective.

    In America, for example, you can read whatever you please. Heck, if you feel like it, you can walk around reading romance novels until hearts come out of your ears, or learn to make bombs from another book! But in places where the governments are...well, I guess the nicest way to phrase it is "a little stricter"...the price you'd pay may not be worth the book. If someone could kill you on sight if they saw you reading How To Ride A Bike, it is pretty likely that only very brave or very stupid people will be caught reading it.

    Another look at different perspectives of banned books is this: how much do you honestly care about what you are about to read? If your belief is strong enough, by golly, you are GOING to read How To Ride A Bike even if it does get you killed! This example is espically clear when it pertains to religious books, such as the Bible. But if the book strikes you as disturbing, digusting, worrisome, or just not worth your time, it isn't going to bother you so much that it is banned.

    Thanks for reading my post, pals! See you all tommorrow!

    By Blogger CMeghan, at 4:31 PM  

  • I think banning books increases the want to read them. You know when there's something that's out of bounds, you have a strange attraction to whatever is out of bounds. Making reference to Harry Potter (because I LOVE those books), when the Quibbler is banned at Hogwarts, more people began to read the unpopular magazine just because it was banned. They would have never picked it up in the first place.

    By Blogger Rachel L, at 4:32 PM  

  • In response to question number two, I think that banning a book will not stop people from reading it. If anything, it will make the reader more curious and interested in the book that is supposedly so "bad." This idea of knowingly doing something against the rules is just too appealing to people for them to pass up the chance to challenge the system. I agree with Damian when he says that banning a book is like "an invitation to read it." Although I think that some books can be inappropriate for certain age groups, I also think that banning a book solves nothing because it suddenly draws all kinds of attention to a "bad" or "inappropriate" book that most people never would have considered reading in the first place.

    By Blogger Rachel K, at 5:32 PM  

  • Question 2

    I don't think that banning books keeps people from reading them. There are so many great books that have been banned for stupid reasons like talking animals in Alice in Wonderland. But, like Alice in Wonderland, many of the books are classics. So a book banning won't discourage people from reading them. Also, at least for me, banning a book makes me want to read it more as opposed to if it wasn't banned. If I see a book and learn that it's banned, I want to read it because I want to find out why it was banned. It's kind of a way to fight the system without doing something totally outrageous.

    By Blogger haleycc, at 5:59 PM  

  • I am responding to question number two. I do not think that by banning a book that people will stop reading that book. It makes people want to read the book more because of pure curiosity of why the book was banned. They might also read the book is because the want to challenge the system. It is perfectly O.K too that they would want to read the book because it is legal even if that book is banned. Humans are very curious and will find out things for ourselves even if we are told not to. So I think that even if a book is banned, it will not stop a person from reading it.

    By Blogger kayla f, at 6:39 PM  

  • In response to #2...
    Banning books will not keep people from reading them. In fact, probably quite the opposite. As humans, we naturally feel a need to do the thing we are not supposed to. Take toddlers. If you specifically tell them not to touch something, you can be 99% sure they're going to turn around and touch it.
    Kristen brought up the example of the Bluest Dye being banned at AHS and consequently students wanting to read it. Our past history has proven this also. Take the American Prohibition in the 1920s. Alcohol was banned in the US thinking that there level of consumption would drop. Ironically, during it's banned period, more alcohol was consumed than ever before in the US.
    Banning books is in essence putting a huge neon sign on the individual book saying READ ME.

    By Blogger Martha P., at 6:46 PM  

  • Response to Question 2

    Banning books doesn't really keep people from reading them. If anything, I think this makes people want to read them even more. When people are told not to do something, it appeals to them even more. Banning books just means that they can't be taught in school or something along those lines because some parent thinks their kids aren't mature enough to read that material so they want to penalize everyone else for it. Banning books is just another way people try to ruin everything. They are trying to get rid of more than half of the American classics which everyone should read. People will also read banned books because they either want to "defy the system," or because they just want to see what the book is about, and if it is legitably banned.

    <3

    By Blogger .hardcore.love., at 7:11 PM  

  • Responding to Q #2

    It's human nature to be curious about what a "banned" book is.

    Not only would it not stop people from reading the books, it would increase their curiosity and desire for learning. Banning books would have the opposite effect intended.

    By Blogger RachelP, at 7:17 PM  

  • In response to the second question, i believe that nothing spurrs someone to do something than saying it is against the rules. Banning a book would simply make it more compelling to read. you would get more enjoyment out of it because the fact that it is something that you shouldn't know. For example, when alcohol was banned it became and underground activity and was done more and more.

    By Blogger Dan E, at 7:17 PM  

  • In resopnse to the third question, I think that books are different, because of the issue of responsibility. The difference is the third party that is involved in tv. With tv shows, the station most ofetn choses to censor somethig that a third party said, such as someone who is being interviewed, but the station would be responsible for if it were aired. With books, there are only two parties involved- the author and the reader. Therefore, the author can freely express what they want to say, if they accecpt the risks and resopnsibilities of this freedom. These responsibilities were recently displayed a year ago when a Polish newspaper printed comics that wer ofensive to the Muslim faith. both the newspaper and artist of the comics were targeted by Muslims because of what was printed

    By Blogger matt f., at 7:46 PM  

  • I am going to be a bit repetitive(sorry) in answering the second question but I do believe that banning a book will make people want to read it more because they are curious about what might be so dangerous and bad to read. It just seems as though it is human nature to want to posses a sense of power by doing something they aren't supposed to, therefore showing the authorities that they cannot be controlled.
    Another connection that can be made back to this subject is that people kind of take delight in watching or hearing about gory things-- particularily juicy bits of gossip, violence in movies, even ancient Romans watching men getting torn apart by hungry lions. It is gross, but I think people are curious and for some reason they want to see some really disgusting and also forbidden stuff.

    By Blogger Tina L, at 7:58 PM  

  • Question #2
    Banning books is not going to keep the majority of people from reading them. There are a lot of people who like to chalange the system, and would read banned books for multiple reasons. These include: They want to see for themselves if they think the book should be banned, they they think it's coll breaking rules, and they don't care about graphic content, and want to read the book for pleasure or something. Personally, I think it's fun to break the ocasional rule and chalenge the system.

    By Blogger kyle, at 7:58 PM  

  • This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    By Blogger kyle, at 7:58 PM  

  • Question #2:
    I think that if a book if banned, then people are going to want to read it more. It's like telling a kid that they can't go to a certain place, it just makes them want to go there even more. I think that people belive it is more fun to do something if it isnt allowed, therefore I think people would/will still read banned books.

    By Blogger SarahE2010, at 8:26 PM  

  • 2. No, were reading them in Mrs. Moritz's class aren't we? If people realy want to read a book they will just find an old copy or somthing. Commonly people do thing just to challenge the system so if they saw it was banned thet might read it just to see why they shouldn't.

    By Blogger Laine G, at 9:45 PM  

  • I chose the second question and I think that banning a book would not stop people from aquiring and reading it. If anything, I think it would make the book more desireable to have, just so that the questioner could find out the reason the book was banned and put in their own openion on whether or not it should be banned. *CONNECTION* In Harry Potter 5, Pr. Umbridge (sp) banned an issue of the Quibbler (sp) and when this ban had been posted, the students were interested enough to find copies of the magazine, discuise them and read them before the end of the day was over. Truthfully, I do not think that the people who would follow the rules and be good citizens would overpower those who don't. It is a natural instinct for human kind to resist what is forced upon them. In the end, the banned book would end up being read more if it was banned than if it was not.

    By Blogger Emma Grace, at 5:52 AM  

  • Question #3-
    People may censor TV and songs because they are used more by younger children, and profanities are not going to be in their books, so they dont need to be censored. On the other hand, some shows, may be censored but are still inappropriate for younger viewers. Books, although they are not much different than TV, books were not censored when they were made before so maybe that is why they are not censored today.

    By Blogger Liz, at 2:12 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home