Now that the dust has settled somewhat and I have calmed down from my initial reaction to the article in the Wall Street Journal about YA literature yesterday, I wanted to make a more thoughtful, critical approach with my thoughts on Ms. Gurdon's article. My initial reactions were anger and frustration. Now, however, my feelings have cooled, somewhat, to sadness and frustration (I can not escape the frustration in regard to this piece). I say sadness because the knee-jerk reaction is, once again, that these books should be censored. Don't get me wrong, I understand that some readers may not be emotionally prepared for some of the books referred to. That's fine. There are certainly books I would not have been prepared for, myself, at that age. However, there are also books I could definitely have benefited from.
To say that these books should be banned or censored does more harm than good. What of those readers who just might need to read a book featuring characters experiencing, facing, and overcoming difficult situations? What of those readers who just might learn something about sympathy for those in situations different from their own? What of those readers who need to know that they are not alone in their struggles? It is the height of hubris to say that books about life's weightier, more difficult issues should be banned or censored. If there is a concern that a book not appropriate for certain readers' sensibilities will fall into the wrong hands, why not take a more active approach to your children's reading habits? Read with your children, gauge what they might be capable of reading, and discuss it with them. Sticking your head in the proverbial sand about the existence of difficult issues (in the article referred to as "depravity") does nothing more than cause a disconnect between parent and child. I speak from personal experience on this one, both in observing the lives of friends who encountered terrible situations and battle my own, personal demons and home life issues.
The mother referred to by Ms. Gurdon also troubles me a great deal. As a parent in my own right, I can not fathom her position. She says she saw nothing but books with "lurid and dramatic covers" containing "all vampires and suicide and self-mutilation, this dark, dark stuff." Ms. Gurdon goes on to say the available material is, "So dark that kidnapping and pedastry and incest and brutal beatings are now just part of the run of things in novels directed, broadly, at children from the ages of 12 to 18." The extraneous usage of "and" aside, such broad, blanket statements are dangerous things. Sure, these topics do exist in some YA novels, but not all YA novels. Making such statements without the benefit of having done the proper research to back it up is (to use one of my favorite words in relation to this article) asinine. As Abraham Lincoln said, "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt." Ms. Gurden does have rights to freedom of expression, which allows her to write without fear of prosecution. However, her generalizations and misconceptions made her come across in a very foolish manner, especially in light of her comments toward librarians, book sellers, and publishers who stand up against censorship. As a journalist, I would have thought she would have been more on board with the notion of free speech. From the appearance of her article, she appears to be only interested in her own right to free speech while begrudging authors the right to theirs.
My favorite analogy in relation to the situation in the book store was posted on Twitter. Statements such as the one made by the mother would be akin to walking through the produce section of a grocery store with one's eyes closed and then saying that the store sells only meat. That is essentially what happened here. This mom, with no research in hand and poor guidance from a store employee, could not see the forest for the trees.She overlooked all of the books she would have approved of in favor of those that made her uncomfortable. This is a sadder situation still for her seeming willingness to jump to conclusions about YA lit as a whole. Where is the informed decision-making in this situation? I certainly don't know, but it will serve as a lesson for me, in any case. Now I know what not to do as a parent in relation to my child's reading habits.
I couldn't agree more with what you've said. Censorship is not the answer to deal with what children read, discussing is. Also, as you say, everyone has different needs, tastes and maturity which have to be taken into an account when choosing a book to read.
ReplyDeleteI have always read ahead of my age, and whereas most of my peers would be confused by what I read, I benefited a lot from those books.
I read the article myself and was like you I was appalled by the obvious lack of research.
This was a great and up to the point post.
It seems to be the age-old fight with book censorship. They do so with classics and now they're attempting to do so with contemporary literature for youth. Marla, I completely agree with you about the narrow manner with which both the mother and the journalist have taken in regards to YA literature. I'm almost certain that if the mother would have looked a bit more closely at the store, she would have found more than the "dark" books.
ReplyDeleteAs a librarian, it's frustrating to know that they are trying to censor the entertainment of young adults, an age where they start to lose interest in reading. One thing we definitely try to do in the library is encourage the parents do be more active with their children's reading selections. If something seems questionable, talk with your children and explain to them why this book might be better suited for them when they are older.
I know some would say, "Well, that's easy for you to say, you're a librarian and have more access to the materials." It's not that I have more access, I just know where to look for the information. I pay attention to reviews, read summaries, and scan the books (particularly graphic novels) if I'm unsure about a title. Even just doing that small research on an unfamiliar title can help a parent decide if a title is appropriate for their child. And if you don't have time, ask the librarian or bookstore staff since they're there to help.
Excellent response to the WSJ article, Marla, my compliments.
~DJL
love the owl theme.
ReplyDeletethoughtful arguments.
When I read the WSJ it reminded me of something we're struggling with here in Australia, the implementation of an R18 rating for video games. Lobby groups say the same sort of things Gourdon complains about, they're dark and violent and they'll have negative ramifications.
ReplyDeleteThe main thing with both YA books and video games is that these detractors seem to know nothing about the subject they're complaining about. YA isn't simply for readers between 12-18, it ranges up to 25 and some theorists even include ages up to 30 within the YA market and the median age for video game players is 35.
The key to both issues lies with the parents. I don't condone censorship but as you said, as a parent you should take an active role in what your child plays/reads for entertainment.
Good response!
I felt frustrated too when I read that article. The mother mentioned in the article I think upset me more than the writer. She (the mom) must have had blinders on to only notice the "dark" books in the YA section. I see those books too, but I keep on walking. There are so many other wonderful books out there; it's hard to imagine someone grouping all YA books into the same category. Wouldn't that be considered stereotyping? I really expected more from the WSJ. So sad.
ReplyDeleteVery well thought out! Thank you! :)
ReplyDeleteNicely put. Thanks for posting this. It's nice to hear from an actual parent-reader.
ReplyDelete