On Banning Books (Banned Books Week Manifesto)

Starting tomorrow, libraries across America (and my library in Thailand) will celebrate Banned Books Week.  It's a celebration of the American freedom of reading, a celebration of the right of people to read what is available.  This year's focus? YA books, a commonly banned or challenged genre, mainly because the content includes violence, or sex, or drugs, or some combination of the above factors.

As an avid reader of YA lit, I can appreciate that there would be challenges to these texts.  I know that challenging books comes from a good intention, from the desire to protect a child from something sensitive.  I understand that reading about sex (or whatever) may be difficult for an adult to condone.  In my role as a youth librarian, though, I can't imagine anything more important than stepping into another's shoes and practicing the empathy that books create in us.

I'm keeping books very vague on purpose, because I think that even silly content can teach empathy and understanding.  Even books with seemingly no value can help us understand something new about our world and the humans within it.  I am the perfect example of this.

When I was a kid, I liked books.  I still like books.  After I read the Lemony Snicket series, Goosebumps, and Dear America, I moved on to romance novels.  First, I read romances for teens, and then I moved on to romance novels for adults.  As a teenager in high school, I read through the entire library's romance section (in two towns).  I remember that the librarian in one of the towns was not remarkably supportive of my reading choices, but that my stubbornness overcame that challenge.  I collected romance novels.  My bookshelves were right next to my bed, and included titles stacked two deep, two tall, and on three shelves.

I have read thousands of romance novels, many that I can't remember, some with vague memories.  Johanna Lindsey, Diana Palmer, Nora Roberts, more and more.  I can stand in a store and read through a romance novel in a remarkably short amount of time.  I can read through a Harlequin Presents novel in an hour.  I'm only slightly embarrassed to mention my addiction to this genre.

I know that my choice of genre is not the most accepted in general populations.  I know that it is not a respected type of book.  But, they are not without value.  They transport me to different places, to other countries, to different times, to the minds of different people.  There are opportunities to learn new words, because even romance writers are trying to use their vocabularies.

Other things that I like are similarly disregarded as valid art forms.

Rap music and hip hop music, my favorite genre because of the beats and the rhymes and the rhythm in the music, is not a respected art form.  They are wordsmiths, but it isn't seen that way.

Graphic novels are not respected either, and in fact, are banned more often than traditional YA literature.  The genre isn't understood or respected.  I didn't like the books until recently, when I read American Born Chinese in graduate school.  We also read Maus I and II, in the break before the spring course begun.  I took several books home with me to Iowa for Christmas, with even more on CD.  After finishing Maus, I explained the premise to my mom, and she picked it up and read both texts cover to cover.  This is outstanding to me because I've rarely seen her read fiction.  The newspaper, sure, especially on the way to the crossword puzzle.  But a fiction book?  It wasn't the thing she wanted to do with her time.

She read both that day, and it opened up a conversation.  I also read books during that vacation about lesbians, high school secret societies, gossip, and vampires.  The reading brought questions that I wanted to ask my mother about, and I did.  I doubt I would have breached the subject of homosexuality without having a great book (Annie on My Mind) to spur me.

I think about this when it comes to books, particularly YA books.  There are many things that I learned from books... how to communicate when I generally preferred to observe, how to observe more deeply when I was only seeing one side, and how to read the emotions that I saw on faces.  My family didn't always want to talk about issues, as atypical things are rarely spoken about in small towns.  I explored in books issues that I didn't know existed and it brought me to where I am today.

It doesn't matter what a kid reads, as long as they are reading something.  They can read manga, or romance, or fan fiction, or John Green, or anything.  Whatever they are reading helps them to get into a story, helps them see a perspective that they may not have known existed.  If they read about drugs, maybe they see that they're not that interested, or that they should exercise caution.  They may read a book that features a normal boy who happens to be attracted to another boy, and realize that they are also attracted to boys.  They may read Harry Potter, where the main character has some serious issues with authority (seriously, did he ever follow the rules?).  Despite this, they may see that some things are worth fighting for, and that protagonists are rarely perfect.  Characters have flaws, but books help you realize that you can make those mistakes and find ways to have integrity and acceptance.

Most importantly, I think books help you think of questions that you hadn't considered.  These questions could be innocuous, or serious, but often new.  Anything from "how can I deal with a broken heart?" to "how far is too far when it comes to sex?"  That uncertainty unnerves adults sometimes, especially if they're part of the equation, with questions being asked of them.

Recently, some adults have said the same things to me.
"Well, how do we know a book isn't too advanced for a kid?"
"What if a kid checks out something that they won't understand?"
"What happens if there's violence in a book and they take it the wrong way?"

Kids get things.  Kids are sensitive little humans who instinctively know that the violence in this book is not the success in the story.  They know when they should ask something and when to keep their knowledge quiet.  Their online lives are full of things that we don't understand, things that they know to keep quiet because the adults will disapprove.  Trying to keep them in the dark does nothing for them, because they can find whatever inappropriate content they want with a simple Google search when their parents are asleep.  Banning the nuance that a text gives brings them just their simple search results with YouTube comments (which are generally harsh) or Tumblr posts (which are often un-researched, or researched quite well, but you're never sure what you're seeing) or whatever else they can find.

If it doesn't make sense, the kid will likely abandon it.  If they can't handle it, they'll put it down, or endure practicing the perseverance of getting through a challenge.  If it is sensitive, they'll talk about it with whoever will understand, or ruminate over it on their own.  Have a little faith in them, and let them surprise you.

I read romance novels, and I am still a functional member of society.  Other read manga, or comics, or ghost stories, or fanfiction.  Any book in a student's hand brings them that much closer to being the empathetic and sensitive adult you're hoping for.  Give them a little credit and let the kids read.

Can Asians Think?

I've been reading this book with this mighty shocking title.  The author (a Singaporean) talks about Asia as.... everything.  I expected the book would be more about education, but it centers mostly around economics and politics.

He talks about the west being somewhat hypocritical in their methods of approaching other nations.  They believe so much in democracy, so they force it onto countries without the economic stability to reinforce or take ownership for.  They forget that their method doesn't work everywhere for everyone.  They forget that their method barely works in their own country.  They forgo involvement and moral concerns when they aren't threatened.

Some interesting pieces:
(57-64)
Good government doesn't necessarily mean democracy.  In many Asian nations (including the one I currently live in), the nature of the government is very different.  There is a King who is encouraging development and the health and wealth of his people.  Thailand has come a long way under this King.  The government, while not without issues, is pretty darn good, and it is considerably different than the US.

He mentions that the West often is putting the ideals of democracy prior to the goal of economic development.  It's difficult to live up to; without every person having a stake in their economic development, neither will succeed in the way the West hopes.  He goes on to say that Japan is a good example: they underwent a huge transformation after the war because of reforms imposed by MacArthur.  No democratic leader could have instituted those reforms and (therefore) the growth that they created.

I think he has a point.  Cambodia has "democracy" that the West implemented with the early 1990s... and look what has happened.  It is corrupt and unable to stand on its own two feet.  It's neighbors have had so much more economic growth with their varied political structures.

(87)
In Singapore, criminal behavior is dealt with fairly harshly.  As he puts it, the common interest in safety rises above the ideas of due process.  Singapore made this choice and lives with this choice.  The West prefers to wax poetic about their democracy as they allow the sale of drugs on their street corners, which is another choice.  However, they have no right to judge others for their choices and the consequences that are faced.  In this, he gives an example.  He visited the newspaper offices of four great American newspapers, and realized that if he left at night and walked 3 blocks in the wrong direction, he could find himself in a great deal of trouble.  In Singapore, crime near the newspaper office in nonexistent.  The West goes to other countries to try to instill their morals, despite not being aware of the hypocrisy inherent in their judgments.  The US is far from perfect; education and health care, just to name a few, could be vastly improved.  It would help if the US learned from other places and peoples... and listened and changed... but instead they try so often to walk into other countries and say how things should be done.

(99)
Speaking of which, the US cannot continue on this trend.  The US is facing enormous fiscal issues, and turning its back on solving the problems.  Mahburani calls it "massive social decay," the fact that violence, single parent homes, and divorce rates have risen at an alarming rate.  And yet, still, they parade into other countries, especially the East, where social institutions and families are a backbone of society, to preach democracy.  There are huge troubles in the future of the States, and they seem unprepared to deal with them.

(178-192)
Cambodia.
The chaotic era of the Khmer Rouge is directly related to the West and their business in SE Asia.  This essay is called "Pol Pot: the Paradox of Moral Correctness."  He begins by talking about meetings between Churchill and Stalin, and the fact that Churchill's dealings with a genocidal ruler have not tarnished his reputation.  However, Thatcher never met with Pol Pot, because the west 'didn't deal with genocidal rulers.' Even though the actions that took so much from the Cambodian people were condemned by those in power, no steps were taken to try to come to a peace agreement.  He talks about the Paris Peace Conference in 1989; the Khmer Rouge weren't invited to come to a peace meeting because they were condemned by so many leaders, but by not coming to the conference, no peace was to be found.  Instead, the Vietnam invasion was accepted.

There were power plays that the West was blind to; Vietnam and their invasion was seen as a rescue of Cambodians, though that wasn't the case.  They refused to deal with the Khmer Rouge and it led to a greater evil.  The prime minister (who is still in power) tried to start riots and confused the Western media (most of them, at least).  The UN was brought in to hold elections, which appeared to be a nice decision, though rumor has it that the UN brought more disease than stability.  This essay places a lot of blame on the West, for appearing so distraught, then refusing to help where and when it counted.  Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge, as well as Hun Sen, were (and are) well funded through various channels in the country.  The non-communist parties couldn't raise enough foreign investments to become viable candidates.  The UN couldn't gather the appropriate funds, even as the tragedy was all over the Western media.  It says something about the appearance of morality.

I'm no expert on this, not at all.  This was a painful read, though.  I think of how the West is operating in Cambodia.  They give millions of dollars in aid, a bulk of which lines the coffers of the wealthy and powerful.  They are running a tribunal which wasn't instituted by Cambodia, spending millions on prosecuting those who are almost too old to be on trial.  The country is visibly corrupt, and it is shocking to me as I live here in Thailand, how much more apparent it is for me.

I've heard that before Singapore gained their independence and began planning their city, they came to Phnom Penh to see one of the best cities in Asia.  Cambodia had a golden era, full of art and music and film, and it was all destroyed.  Between Vietnam, and the West, and the forces that were taking hold of the country, that golden era didn't stand a chance.  And look at them now... I am crushed at what once was and what it has become.

fin

The book is wonderful.  It is an enthralling read for anyone in development, especially in Asia.  There are pieces about the UN as well that I found interesting.  Money, economics, influence, power... these things are all in here, and they are well written and thoughtful.  I highly recommend this book (considering I just wrote an essay for fun about it).

10 Books That Have Stayed With Me

I've been seeing the "10 Books that Have Stayed With You" posts going around on Facebook for awhile now.  No one has tagged me, but I'm going to do it anyway.  Here, because I can.

Influence: Science and Practice, by Robert Cialdini

I read this book in college, for a May Term class about Social Influence and Film.  It was incredibly interesting to me, these sociological themes about the hold that others can have on you.  The book made me question some of my own behaviors.  I began to wonder why I was operating in certain ways, and was able to become more self aware because of it.

Bel Canto, by Ann Patchett

I have a very poor memory for most of the books that I read.  Very few things stick with me, and if they do, they are short snippets.  I usually can't recollect an entire book's summary off the top of my head.  This one, though, has stuck with me.  There is vivid imagery in this book, both with images and with sounds, and it hasn't left my memory.

Daughter of Fortune, by Isabel Allende

I remember as a younger girl seeing this book on my stepmom's shelf.  I was always curious because it looked like a memoir, but only read it recently.  I fell in love with it.  I couldn't stop reading her words.  And now, I know a coworker who has actually knows the author and her family, and I'm even more engrossed in the tale that was woven.

The Handmaid's Tale, by Margaret Atwood

I couldn't put this down.  It is one of the best books I've ever had the pleasure of reading, bringing together a mix of incredibly interesting themes and genres together.

The Mysterious Benedict Society, by Trenton Lee Stewart

A YA book, this one has clever kids with different strengths, and I responded so well to the idea that a hero has no specific set of skills, but a collection and a community from which to draw from.

Me Talk Pretty One Day, by David Sedaris

I read this book about a year into Peace Corps.  In the book, he is learning French, and trying his best to have conversations in this foreign language.  He's in a class with a native speaker, a Muslim woman who was in the introductory class to improve her reading and writing skills.  One day, in the spring, they have a communication, this whole class and this Muslim woman, about Easter.  They explain Easter in their limited French vocabulary, talking about "a party for the little boy of god who call his self jesus." "He die one day on two... morsels of... lumber."  I've never laugher harder at a book.  I sat in the hammock under my house and laughed until I cried having faced exactly the same thing in my quest to Khmer learning.

The Money Book for the Young, Fabulous, and Broke, by Suze Orman

She's my idol, I'll admit it.  Her book got me into a plan for myself with money.  It is incredibly important to me and I will continue to appreciate her advice.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo trilogy, by Stieg Larsson

I saw the American version of this in the theatres with no knowledge of the story, no preview watched, no anything.  Immediately afterward, I got the book on my Kindle.  Within a month, all three books were read.  I love her strength, her awkwardness, her intelligence.

Speak, by Laurie Halse Anderson

I read this book for graduate school.  It is a YA book involving the rape of a high school girl, and it is heart-wrenching.  It is a powerful, honest book.

Literacies of Power, by Donald Macedo

This is an education book that I read for a class about multicultural issues in education.  It discusses the power that education brings, and I was reading it right when I came back from Cambodia.  It put great emphasis on the wealth of education and how it is distributed.  It still sticks with me.