Morwood 1

Justin Morwood

Kade Parry

English 2010

19 March 2017

Censoring: To Make or Break Education

Is literature meant to be read unchanged from its proper form, or must literature be

fixed to adhere to the standards of absurdity? There is controversy in the topic on whether or

not schools should try and protect students from offensive content or allow them to experience

literature how it is, untouched by those who want change. Parents and school administrators

across the nation fear that leaving books how they are is damaging to their students, but

censoring limits the growth and development of a students education. School districts should

not censor literature due to this impedance, realizing that censoring takes away the intended

meaning of some content, merely increases the problem, and interrupts the progression of

education. Because of the limitations that would be placed on high school students educations,

school districts should avoid censoring and banning literature from their students.

Authors include offensive content in literature to illustrate their points and to allow

students to see the significance of the situations in their works. Although inappropriate material

can be shocking for the minds of young students, as Mark Twains uses of racial slurs are in his

works, its there for a reason. In Martha Moores article Huck Finn Navigating Choppy

Waters Again, she explores the basises of Twains intentions. Moore writes, [Twain] put it

there because he wanted people to struggle with it, (1). When students read the vulgarity in

Huckleberry Finn, they are being shown a representation of what life was like in the 19th
 Morwood 2

century. Because of the unpleasantness of the words, students feel uncomfortable, therefore

prompting school administrators to remove that content from their hands, when actually that is

what the students need to read about. Twains depiction of racial discrimination opens the eyes

of young students to the misdeeds of the world and gives them an accurate understanding of the

seriousness of the issue. However, the language may be intolerable for many students, making

reading the book impossible for those who take offense, but most will undoubtedly be affected

for the better. Nevertheless, there will always be some who seek the restricted information,

which will further increase the problems of censorship.

When schools attempt to censor literature, students are drawn to the content, which

distracts their focus from what needs to be learned. Educational progression is limited by the

chains of censorship, and students focus will be redirected if content is restricted. The article

Ban a Book, Draw Readers by Colete Bancroft describes a personal experience that illustrates

the effects that censoring has on students who are told not to read or discuss specific material.

Bancroft, when talking about a censored portion of her literature assignment in Moby-Dick,

states, Making a chapter, or an entire book, forbidden fruit is a much more effective way to get

kids to read it than making it homework (1). If a student is told they cannot associate with

mysterious and potentially offensive content, their desire to unravel the conundrum will increase,

leading them directly to where they are restricted. When talking about the content in class,

students will be less absorbed in what is bad and more focused on what it is they are supposed to

learn. Unfortunately, there may be times that students will have their interests sparked when

hearing and learning about the inappropriate material, but, for most occasions, teaching the

students how to deal with such material and warning them against following the examples of the
 Morwood 3

characters in the novel would be more beneficial than harmful. This controversy is only solved

by openly allowing students to, instead of being distracted by announced offensiveness, get what

they can out of the literature they are assigned and learn how to know and understand

inappropriate content ahead of leaving the classroom.

Banning literature in schools obstructs further education for students by not letting them

experience a reality outside of their own lives and classrooms. In the article, Lets Talk About it

Instead of Banning it, by Jordan McNeil, a situation is described where a nine-year-old girl

came to her parents about some seemingly inappropriate content she found from her literary

book, and she confused by the meaning. The writer then goes on to state that that incident led to

school districts removing the book from even the high schools later on. McNeil writes, By

removing or banning books from schools, you are depriving the students from having these

experiences and learning from them, (1). McNeil believes that students should be exposed to

some material because of the protection students will have once they leave school. If high

schoolers are unable to learn of the world outside their classroom, they will be unprepared for the

questions reality will bring. The future parents would be clueless, and they would not have

sufficient answers for those who desire to know down the road. McNeil then says, Reading

about something that doesn't affect them, or occur in their day-to-day life, can open up

conversations about the world around them, (1). The author suggests that instead of closing up

literature with a lock and key, school districts and parents should speak with students about the

content. Being able to discuss the reasons and means for the inappropriate material would allow

the students to explore their world and expand their arms of knowledge, permitting them to be

more confident when faced with content they come across.

 Morwood 4

The censoring and banning of literature restricts educational circumstances and invokes

on the rights of students in high school. According to Fenice Boyd and Nancy Baileys article

Censorship in Three Metaphors, removing material from literature takes away from the

freedoms of students. These authors feel that high school students would be unable to read

certain desired literature, and they think that there should be no barrier between students and

what they read. They state, censorship impinges upon First Amendment rights of children and

adolescents and severely limits their opportunities to expand their worldviews, (659).The First

Amendment of the United States Constitution holds the powers of freedom of speech and of the

press, and prohibiting material to anyone, including students, would remove their rights from

them. Although reading material seems minor when it is juxtaposed with the freedom of speech

or the freedom of religion, the issue is still real. Bailey and Boyd also refer to censorship as a

barbed wire, restricting passage to important knowledge and not letting students get inside--or

outside--the walls of the classroom. This metaphorical wall will not only limit education, but

remove opportunities to students who have the right to experience.

Offensive content is not as damaging for students as the absence of it. Exposure to the

content, although seemingly the worse choice, actually saves students from hurt and confusion.

In Bobbi Swidereks journal entitled Censorship, she discusses all the troubles that censorship

can bring if it is enforced by school districts on young people. She says, children are

inexperienced, but not innocent, and their pain and unhappiness do not come from books. They

come from life, (592). Swiderek believes that controversial material should not and does not

affect students like life does, and students should be able to read what they wish, regardless of

the fears of some parents and school districts. Their innocence is better corrupted sooner than
 Morwood 5

later, and real life is the source of pain. Later, she writes, To be educated means to be allowed

to think and wonder about ideas and their consequences, (592). If students are able to discuss

what they are reading with trusted adults like parents or school faculty, then they are learning.

The elements of education include discourse of studied topics, causing the students to mindfully

consider the rights and wrongs of what they find in their literature. Students, when they read

about inappropriate and difficult ideas, come to understand why the author writes them into the

story. High school students can witness the meaning of the work as a whole and know that they

should not repeat the actions of characters in the literature, prompting a safer and more

knowledgeable society to come forth, and influencing people to fight against the censorship of

books.

Aversion to censorship permits students to reach their full potential and learn what they

are going to school to learn. Diane Chapman speaks against censoring literature in her article

Defense Tactics: Combating Censorship. Chapman wishes to bring parents and school

administrators to her side of the fight and ban censorship before it bans books. Chapman says, It

is our professional responsibility as educators or librarians to ensure that books are not hidden

from children, but made freely available, (78). She wants to ensure freedom to certain

literature that would otherwise be banned, so students can truly learn of the world outside their

classrooms. Her desire to leave books as they are for high school students is controversial, but

she feels it is correct. Chapman then writes, Let us teach our children to read widely, to talk

back to books, to enter into dialogue with a book's author and with each other until they are able

to defend for themselves their freedom to read, (78). Chapman pleas for independence in

reading because of her love for the originality and meaning of works. She believes that students
 Morwood 6

should come to understand what they need to and spread their knowledge to their posterity,

eventually ridding school districts of censorship. Surely, some parents or school administrators

could argue that students should not need to learn about all inappropriate material, but others

could debate that high school students are old enough to decide what is best for them to learn.

Becoming familiar with threats students will be faced with in college, their future careers, and

other affiliations will open their eyes to the truth, keeping them aware and protecting them from

the stresses of reality. Students will not fear the secrets that can be produced by censorship, and

less obstacles will hold them from reaching their potential.

School administrators and parents should not prioritize the students comfort over their

education. In an article written by Roger Copeland called, Classroom Censorship does Not

Protect Against Real World Experiences, Copeland discusses the importance of not becoming

distracted with what a student may think about inappropriate material. If schools are focused on

the students feelings, their education will be stolen from, and the students will no longer be able

to acquire the knowledge they need. When talking about famous literary works commonly used

in schools, Copeland writes, what Greek or Shakespearian tragedy could possibly avoid

sparking unpleasant memories, disturbing emotions or unsettling ideas, (1). So much can be

learned from just these two literary categories, but someones offence while reading them is

inevitable. Content displayed or mentioned in all literature should not be removed due to this

offence. Instead, students and teachers should be able to comfortably discuss the material they

read and move on, not worrying about their own personal fears or stresses. Copeland believes

that the idea that educators should attempt to anticipate -- and palliate -- every variety of

subjective response their teaching might elicit is both absurd and unrealistic, (1). It is
 Morwood 7

outrageous to attempt to obtain everyones approval when teaching literature. In most cases,

there will always be a few who detest the content they are reading due to its upsetting language

or references, but school districts need to ignore the idea of appealing to all. Education thrives

when the district places it as their primary concern instead of minor needs and worries.

Barricading education with the chains of censorship will only slow down the progression of

students and take away from the reasons for proper schooling.

Too often literature is categorized by its content and not the meaning of the work as a

whole, which demotes high school students from learning the messages in the novel, play, or

book. One should not judge a book by its cover, but this becomes more common when

censorship comes into play. Adriana Lopez helps deliver this idea in her article, "Literary

Censorship in Schools Impedes Progress, and she states that literature in not the problem.

Parents, teachers, and students should not be afraid of what they could easily learn about with

little effort and awkwardness. When talking about books that are either banned or censored,

Lopez says, By caving into the desire of a small group of people, schools fail to do their job of

providing their students with a wider understanding of the world they live in. Literature that

expounds upon things such as racial and sexual discrimination, war, and lives of less advantaged

people are often found to be marked as inappropriate or wrong to read about. These labels

discourage students from reading the works, which prevents them from acknowledging the

reality and the gravity of such situations. High school students who are unaware of what is going

on around them in the world will be astonished once they leave the comforts of the school.

Although they may know certain aspects of education, students who fall victim to censorship

will not have a well-rounded education, and their knowledge of the outside world will be very
 Morwood 8

limited. If school administrators allow their students to read freely and not restrict works from

them, a higher understanding of what to expect in the future lives of the high schoolers will be

achieved, and they will be able to pass on their knowledge freely to their own discretion, creating

a much more knowledgeable and safer place. Schools need not place literature into

offense-related categories, and instead they should focus on what can be learned from the work

and teach their students what they need to learn.

The censoring of literature does more harm than not. Students who are exposed to all

literature and do not feel the effects of censorship will be more successful and knowledgeable

because they will learn what it is they need to learn in high school. Censoring or outlawing

books takes away from education, impedes progress in academics and other aspects, distracts

students from their primary focus, does not allow students to learn of the realities of the outside

world, invokes on the rights of students, takes away the meanings and significances intentionally

placed by the author, and can take away the meanings of works. I believe that school

administrators should not worry about the effects of reading inappropriate or offensive content in

schools, and I feel that students will be better off learning everything and not just a choice

amount given to them by the educators. Like the sources I have gathered, I discourage

censorship in schools. The comfort of students or parents should not come before the purpose of

public education, and school administrators need to always take responsibility for educating the

people of our future. Being a senior in high school, I have experienced both sides of the

controversy, so I understand the consequences of either action, but I know that the censorship of

literature is not the right path for school administrators and parents to take. We should not risk
 Morwood 9

losing education to the fears of discomfort, and we should be encouraging the expansion of

knowledge, not chaining it down with the destructiveness of censorship.

 Morwood 10

Works Cited

Bancroft, Colete. "Ban a Book, Draw Readers." Tampa Bay Times, 29 May 2016, pp. 1. SIRS

Issues Researcher, http://sks.sirs.com.

Boyd, Fenice B. and Nancy M. Bailey. "Censorship in Three Metaphors." Journal of Adolescent

& Adult Literacy, vol. 52, no. 8, May 2009, pp. 653-661. EBSCOhost,

search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=39260018&site=ehost-live.

Chapman, Diane. Defense Tactics:Combating Censorship, Childrens Literature Association

Quarterly, volume 9, number 2, Summer 1984, pp. 77-78

http://muse.jhu.edu.lib.snow.edu:2048/article/248297/pdf

Copeland, Roger. "Classroom Censorship does Not Protect Against Real World Experiences."

University Wire, 20 Nov, 2015, SIRS Issues Researcher, https://sks.sirs.com.

Lopez, Adriana. "Literary Censorship in Schools Impedes Progress." University Wire, 18 Apr

2016, SIRS Issues Researcher, http://sks.sirs.com.

McNeil, Jordan. "Let's Talk about it Instead of Banning it." University Wire, 15 Feb, 2016, SIRS

Issues Researcher, https://sks.sirs.com.

Moore, Martha T. "'Huck Finn' Navigating Choppy Waters again." USA TODAY, 06 Jan 2011,

pp. A.3. SIRS Issues Researcher, http://sks.sirs.com.

Swiderek, Bobbi. Censorship. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, vol. 39, no. 7, 1996, pp.

592594., www.jstor.org/stable/40017469.