In response to banning books in schools, while I do not agree, I understand why it is done. When a parent hears word of their children reading books of which they do not approve, they contact the principal, and basically fight until their children are excused from reading the books. While usually the parent's reasons' are ludicrous, related to, as someone mentioned earlier, the books not being read in context, it is simply easier for school boards to avoid the conflict, rather than face it. What I have always wondered though, was how they ban books for sexual references, when Shakespeare plays can just as easily be taken out of context, and have similar references. They want to ban works written about, or during the time of slavery, with the 'n-word' being used, because today that is an offensive, unspeakable term. But what about Hamlet? There are so many things that would make Hamlet inappropriate if it were written today. Not only would the huge age-difference between Ophelia and Hamlet be considered statutory rape, but within the scene about the Mousetrap (Act III I believe?), Hamlet mentions lying in Ophelia's lap. He is making remarks indicating that his and Ophelia's relationship was sexual in nature, which would be statutory rape. At the time, it wasnt considered rape, but what makes Shakespeare plays different than To Kill a Mockingbird, or any other banned book?
Post edited at 6:10 pm on Feb. 2, 2008 by ariellexo
580 users online 
173662 members 
You have 1 new message.
Ad Free
The Bible is perhaps the most banned book in the present century through out the world, and perhaps any other age, from what I understand. Just a statement of observation. 
