Movie banning

The school system at Quince Orchard High School has devised a new plan on regulating the "age-appropriateness" of movies in classrooms and has, in effect, removed many titles that have been used for years. "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest", "Romeo and Juliet", "The Count of Monte Cristo" and "Psycho" have been pulled from shelves because the leadership team"did not feel that it was necessary to show R-rated movies as part of the instructional program" (Sedam). The superintendents voted that all rated-R movies are officially banned and PG-13 movies can no longer be shown in middle schools, such as "Romeo and Juliet". Teachers aruge that these movies have never been controversial to use in the past and have helped students when the literature was too "risqué" to read. The leadership team that makes the decisions for the school district is comprised of three deputy superintendents, five associate superintendents, six community superintendents, three union presidents and other senior staff members including the superintendent’s chief of staff and the director of the Public Information Office (Sedam). Teachers argue, though, that they were not involved in this decision making process. The associate superintendent, Jody Leleck, says that there is no real advantage of movies in the classroom and they simply do not help kids better understand the curriculum. Teachers, though, feel that education is multi-faceted and this decision takes away the ability to use various teaching methods: ‘‘We’ve cut down on the number of spices that teachers can use in their lessons" (Blum).

When I read the article, I was floored because finally parents and teachers were on the same page. They did not want to see the movies pulled from the shelves, but the superintendents demanded that these new stringent rules be enacted. The opening paragraph aligns teachers and parents: "The school system has gone too far by pulling movies adapted from classic works of literature out of the classroom, some parents and teachers say" (Sadem). I thought, 'finally!' But then I read on...it is the higher administration that is pulling the plug on movies because it is not age-appropriate and they do not see the advantages of movies in the classroom. May I ask them, then, if they would rather the students read books with sexually explicit material? If they can do that, then something hypocritical is going on here. And since when is media not a useful tool in the classroom? Not only does it give a break to the regimented schedule, but it allows students to see that literature is not just a hobby inside the english classroom. People make movies because of its significance to the outside world. Without this connection, students do devalue literature. Plus, isn't media becoming highly common in classrooms, with I-Movies, computers, proxima use, etc.? How are movies exempt from this category? In addition, middle schoolers cannot watch PG-13 movies...why??? "Romeo and Juliet" is rated PG-13...so now they cannot watch that movie. How ridiculous! Do you think they are not watching rated-R movies at home and at the theatres? Instead of pretending like students are these innocent children who go home and do chores for 5 hours and are the most puritanical of all people, why not try to relate to them by showing a movie they have interest in? Are superintendents afraid they may enjoy it? How silly of an idea...

source: http://www.gazette.net/stories/120705/montedu192725_31903.shtml

Harry Potter Book Burning

Censorship has many forms, from banning books from shelves to advocating against sex, drugs, and other "bad" ideas literature is written about. Book burning, though, has been in existence since the first records of written documentation. Many people burned books because of political, religious, and moral reasons. However, it is not completely gone from our society. In numerous areas across the globe, book burning still occurs. More recently, with the Harry Potter explosion, advocates against sorcery and witchcraft have held public book burning demonstrations to show the evilness of the literature.
The Jesus Non-demoninational Church in Greenville burned numerous Harry Potter books because they felt that it went against the Bible. Pastor Tommy Turner, "I don't want anyone to go to hell, and the bible says if people use sorcery and witchcraft they will go to hell" (HPANA). The group also burned cds from groups such as *NSYNC and rationalized that since the music was not glorifying God, it should not be accepted (HPANA).
Other people act in similar ways. In 1999, when the 3rd Harry Potter book was published, David Williamson of Columbia, South Carolina argued that the books teach "the overall context of the occult -- witches and how Harry is being trained through this school he goes to to be a better wizard" (CBN News). He uses Bible verses to justify his opinion and his group of followers believe that Harry Potter books are a hindrance to the separation of church and state (CBN News).

I have read a few of the Harry Potter books and have never thought of them as trying to corrupt me. I thought they were entertaining and a good read. Never did I think that witchcraft and sorcery, along with rebelliousness, was being condoned. If people approach books like that, then isn't the Bible about death, controlling others, and violence?
I could not believe that people still burn books. How terrible it must be to be a writer of a book that is being burned...what a criticism to the author! How dare people think they are better than the writer and to purposely damage a text that has taken numerous years to create? There is just no justification for such behavior. If the American flag cannot be burned, then why are books any different? Aren't books a reminder of the democratic freedoms we have in this country? Therefore, shouldn't they be held with as high regard as the American flag, another symbol of liberty? Wow...the priorities are not correct here.



Sources: http://www.hpana.com/news.17092.html, http://www.religioustolerance.org/potter2.htm

Censoring Adults??

Not only does censoring literature affect students in schools and libraries, but also adults who wish to read more complex books. Human Events, a conservative journal, recently compiled a list of the "Ten Most Harmful Books" of the 19th and 20th centuries. Topping out the list was The Communist Manifesto, by Marx and Engels, Mein Kampf, by Adolf Hitler, Quotations from Chairman Mao, by Mao Zedong, The Kinsey Report, by Alfred Kinsey, Democracy and Education, by John Dewey, The Feminine Mystique, by Betty Freidan, The Course of Philosophy, by August Compte, Beyond Good and Evil, by Freidricj Nietzsche, and General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money by John Maynard Keynes (Apple).
I do not quite understand how calling this books "harmful" is justified. After all, we learned the most valuable lessons from these books and they idealize some of the founding philosphies of countries such as the U.S. and China. If these books were ever censored, children would never understand the full ramifications of the Holocaust because they could not read Hitler's actual words, nor would they comprehend the ideas of Mao Zedong, which are considered to be important fundamentals of the Chinese society. Even considering to create such a list of books is detrimental to society and I shun the person, or people, who decided to do it. Are people that bored or senseless to devise a list of books not to read? How can you tell people what to read and what not to read, especially when it comes to adults? If we can vote and drive a car legally, then we should be able to read whatever we want, from The Little Mermaid to a book about how cults affect society. Just because someone is reading Mein Kampf does not mean they are antisemitic or want to take over the world.
Michael Apple, author of Dangerous Reading, points out that if we censor these types of books, shouldn't the Bible be censored as well? After all, it did start many wars and genocides and is the cause for most religious persecution in the world. But, we do not censor the Bible...because we are a biased society and we are unjustified in our actions. Will it ever end?

Source: Dangerous Reading. Michael W. Apple, 2005