There is an article in the 11/29/2010 issue of The New Yorker, "Are You the Messiah?" by Lauren Collins, wherein the reader comes to find that political economist Raj Patel, through no fault of his own, becomes the embodiment of some cult's messianic figure. The cult, represented by Share International, states that their Messiah, known as the Maitreya, represents the Messiah figures of every major world religion. Apparently there was some heated debate over whether or not Raj was indeed the Maitreya or some kind of Share International version of the anti-Christ.
Obviously, Raj Patel is not the Maitreya or any kind of Messiah, he is an ordinary human being. If in doubt, finish reading the The New Yorker article where Benjamin Creme, executive head of Share International, states that Patel is not their Messiah, that their Maitreya is still lurking in the shadows, for some reason, waiting to aid a world that is already in deep shit. Such is the life of a Messiah, any Messiah, always waiting for the right moment to come in and save the day for humanity.
Are there any recorded moments in documented world history where some Messiah figure descended from heaven and saved us from the repercussions of our own mistakes? Oh, sure, there are plenty of unsubstantiated reports from antiquated holy books, but can anyone mark a real date in history? There are certainly verifiable times in both the distant past and the recent past where human beings have worked together to pull humanity out of the darkness such as: The establishment of the Greek city-states in 800 BC which heralded the beginning of western civilization and paragons of philosophy such as Plato, Aristotle, and Socrates; the dawn of the Renaissance in 1450, when civilization rose from the ashes of the medieval era and brought about a renewed focus on art and science; the American Revolution, begun in 1774 with the takeover of Fort William & Mary, where the American colonies united against the tyranny of the British Crown. There are many similar examples, just crack open a history text book.
Humanity cannot rely on some outdated prophecy of a Messiah to save the world. Just as in any other epoch of history, we must rely on ourselves to fix the mess that we have made of our world. The people of Earth are religious creatures, always have been even since earliest recorded history, but that should not sway us from taking care of our own mistakes, fixing our own problems. We, as human beings, need to stop waiting for the Messiah to grant us a "do-over." We need to take matters into our own hands, as our forefathers did, and take responsibility for our actions. This is the only way we can save ourselves.
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Parents v. Literature: Should Controversial Books be Banned.
Below is an essay that I wrote earlier this year for a college composition class . I post it here because it covers a topic that I vehemently oppose, book banning. When time permits, I will post some of my more current ramblings.
Parents v. Literature: Should Controversial Books be Banned?
I believe that every opinion, every perspective, should be available for everyone to learn about. Adults challenge books that they want banned from libraries and schools to remove opinions and perspectives that are deemed too controversial or too difficult for children. According to the American Library Association (ALA), from 1990 to 2009 they received 10,676 challenges to a multitude of books. Of those 10,676 challenges, 6,010 were issued by parents against schools and libraries (ALA.org).
Parents should be concerned with what their children are reading. Some children are not mature enough to deal with difficult concepts such as death, drugs, and sexuality; in this case, the parent should, ideally, give their child guidance as they read a conceptually difficult book. In extreme circumstances, the parent should prohibit the child from reading the book until the child is mature enough to handle the content. As parents, we have not only a right, but an obligation to monitor and potentially censor what our child is reading. That right ends at our child. Banning a book that no child, no matter their level of maturity or intellect, can read is unfair and a potential detriment to society.
According to the ALA: Free Access to Libraries for Minors (an interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights), “Librarians and governing bodies should maintain that parents—and only parents – have the right and the responsibility to restrict the access of their children—and only their children—to library resources” (ALA.org). A librarian or government official who ignores that guideline violates the First Amendment. Parents may decide that a book is bad for all children based on the book’s theme and challenge to have the book banned, but that eliminates the perspective the book may impart. With some adult guidance, a child should have the option to be exposed to all viewpoints pertaining to religious, social, political, or sexual issues.
Children are often confronted with difficult ideas and information throughout the course of their daily lives. Death, sex, and drug use are things that children can be exposed to without ever having to read a book. Watching legitimate news broadcasts or reading a newspaper could expose a child to depictions of drug use, violence, and sexual situations, but with the presence of an adult to explain those topics, the child can learn much more about the world he lives in. Likewise, books that cover controversial subjects can give both the child and the parent a way to confront and understand a topic so that they can form a well-informed point of view. The ALA states that books that are sexually explicit or contain “offensive language” are the most frequently challenged. Sexually explicit material tops all others by a large margin (ALA.org).
What books fall under “sexually explicit” and “contains offensive language”? In Banned Books: Literature Suppressed on Social Grounds, one can find many literary classics that have been targeted over a timespan reaching back into the medieval era and continuing into the mid- 1990’s. Some of the more recent attacks target books that have been challenged for decades such as J.D. Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye. Published in 1951 and the subject of numerous attempts to ban, The Catcher in the Rye was challenged in the 1990’s by schools in Pennsylvania, California, and Florida for “lurid passages about sex” and profanity (Sova, 71-72).
The Catcher in the Rye tells the story of a young, urban, middle class man taking refuge from his disenchantment with life by immersing himself in the dark side of the adult world. In the end, while recovering in a rest home, the main character predicts that he will be going back to school in an attempt to bring some meaning back into his life (Sova, 68-70). After being challenged in the states mentioned above, in each case the school board reviewed the book, denied the challenge and returned it to the library or put it back on the school reading list with a stipulation that a student could read an alternate book if the student considered The Catcher in the Rye objectionable (Sova, 71). According to Dawn Sova in Banned Books: Literature Suppressed on Social Grounds, Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck (195-198), The Lord of the Flies by William Golding (176-178), and Brave New World by Aldous Huxley (53-55) are a several other books that have been challenged on the same grounds as The Catcher in the Rye, and like Salinger’s novel, after review by the school board, none of them were banned.
Some parents may say that the perspective shown in The Catcher in the Rye, and similar books, is a dangerous one for a child to read about. These same parents say that books like The Catcher in the Rye glorify recreational drug use and sexual promiscuity and are, therefore, unsafe for children. Mature material like sex and drugs may be unsuited to some children, but that is for the parent and the child to determine together. Children who are mature enough to understand that a perspective is written about doesn’t mean that they are encouraged to agree with, or participate, in the activities suggested by that perspective. A mature child should be able to read a controversial book and make his own decision. If a child is so impressionable that he will try anything put forth to him on the written page, then his parents should censor what he, and only he, reads.
Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson states, “That they (the Boards of Education) are educating the young for citizenship is reason for scrupulous protection of Constitutional freedoms of the individual, if we are not to strangle the free mind at its source and teach youth to discount important principles of our government as mere platitudes” (West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624). The government of the United States insures the right of its citizens to freedom of speech. This freedom includes reading books that may be controversial in nature. This freedom is extended to all citizens, including our children. To deny children the right to read a book like The Catcher in the Rye not only violates the First Amendment, it also deprives children of the chance to think for themselves and gain an understanding of someone else’s opinion and lifestyle. No book should be banned from our schools or libraries. Books should be read and understood that we may all achieve enlightenment.
Works Cited
ALA American Library Association website. American Library Association, 2010. Web. 4 Oct.
2010.
Sova, Dawn B. Banned Books: Literature Suppressed on Social Grounds. New York: Facts on File,
1998. Print.
West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)