When it comes to books in general, as a librarian I take appreciation for all books. Now that is appreciation which is defined as "recognition and enjoyment of the good qualities of someone or something" (Webster Dictionary, 2023). With that being said, does this mean I think every book in my library is something enjoyable? For me as an individual that is an obvious no, but for someone else there is a different stance on some books. As an example, I cannot stand Fifty Shades of Grey due to the fact that when it comes to relationships and romance books, this did not appeal to me in the least. Plus, the writing style is not what I would consider to be of merit (as a writer, but that's just me). However, there are many in my work and personal circle who love this book. My point is this, we all have different views of book titles and authors and guess what. . . .THAT IS OKAY! Not once and I mean not once would I say that this is something a person should not read when I am either in the library or just being myself. This also goes for trying to "rid" books because of who knows what.
For the past few years, I have been looking at titles and the reasons behind the censorship that continues to affect both school and public libraries today. James Howe once said "Banning books is just another form of bullying. It's all about fear and assumption of power. The key is to address the fear and deny the power." This spoke to me because this is exactly what we face each time our state is faced with proposed bills that try to criminalize a simple job we as librarians do. We are not here to judge but we are not here to harm anyone.
When I was in middle school, one book we had to read was To Kill a Mockingbird. This book had a profound effect on me not only as a reader and student, but as a person. This is because I got to see what my grandparent's generation had to face all over the states whether segregation was happening or not. I also got to see the culture of a community that was shown by Lee's writing. I learned more about our nation's history of humanity from Harper Lee than I did in my own history class. Now jump ahead about 10 or so years, I find on the news that this book was being challenged by a school in the southern United States for using foul language and vulgar content in the year. . .2022.
This to me is a case of making a few strides forward, many steps backwards situation. While I was working in the library, this didn't affect my work, but it did affect me on a personal level. There are many reasons, but I will stick with my top two reasons.
1. Saying that the language is foul.
2. Showing a "White Saviour" complex for Atticus Finch
I think we as readers forget that our culture today is much more different than what it was during the time period of the books we read. That being said, we also tend to forget that books can transport us to the past into a time we the reader never had to live in. With this in mind, my first point is in the language. While I did learn a lot from reading this book, I learned more enhanced personal connections from my late grandmother who knew what it was like to live not only during the Depression but during a time a segregation. She was lucky enough to live in a community where segregation did not happen often, but relatives in the south had different circumstances.
She told me at one point in time, that while people who did not care for black people were called the racial slur's shown in the book. In today's time it's not okay to say certain racial slurs, but back in the times Mockingbird took place it was cultural norms for a majority of people in the south. They did not want to change their ways and said and called black people horrible things. While yes, this language is hurtful and not accepted today by society. This was something of a societal norm in the historical sense. However, people had different cultural norms they followed. Language is something we all learn from those around us. Thus, whatever we hear, we learn and say, and language is universal for all dynamics in today's culture. To finish this thought, the language in the book was depicting a culture where this language was accepted and normal for the time and place, they were in. In a sense this book shows the history of human behavior and cultural norms of the 1920s in Alabama.
My final point and one that kind of upsets me the most is the "White Saviour" complex that seems to have been bestowed on the patriarch Atticus Finch. If anyone has read the book, we know that Atticus is assigned to defend a black man accused of a crime. I always liked to believe Atticus knew the outcome of the trial before it started, but he did something that he knew was going to be difficult to accomplish because of the cultural divide and also the ones who were accusing his client. He knew he would not win, but he went in defending him because he knew it was the right thing to do.
The superior complex I think comes from two viewpoints: his children Jem and Scout and then the black community of Maycomb. The kids are young, and they really do not know what extent of what was going on with their father's case. These are children who see their father as a person who knows everything and can accomplish anything. They are aware that people talk about what's going on and they see that their father is the hero in people who are blamed for things they do not do. We see Jem's vison of this get cracked when the case does not go in his father's favor. He sees that the hero of his father, as an ordinary man trying to do the impossible of this time. This upsets Jem because he's trying to process what just happened.
The other side is the black community standing in the top of the courthouse. They continue to stay in the courtroom as Atticus is getting his belongings around and walks out with his head held high. They stand and are in silence out of respect for Atticus, not because he's white. The town is very small so there are only a few lawyers in the area, and Atticus was appointed to defend the man. The community understands that Atticus did his best to defend in winless trial, but still gives him respect for what he did and to me this is also a step to closing that divide of racial inequality in the story.
I can go on about more in-depth reasons about this book, but I will end my reasons here. I have a huge respect for this book, and to see it get challenged and ridiculed is upsetting to me. In most schools in my area, it's a required reading. I take this personally speaking, as a way to try and erase a part of history that was not the most positive time. However, once it happens you can't erase it and for me this is an effort to try and erase something we all need to be aware of, so we don't make these same mistakes.
References
Harper, L. (1960). To Kill a Mockingbird. J.B. Lippincott & Co.
Webster Dictionary. (2023). Appreciation Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
"In a sense this book shows the history of human behavior and cultural norms of the 1920s in Alabama."
ReplyDeleteYou make excellent points about the importance of retaining elements of history despite their unacceptability today. Uncomfortable as it may be, it would be difficult for a person growing up today to understand the background and context of things like the BLM movement without books like To Kill a Mockingbird. I took a class in undergrad that was focused on literature of oppression, and it taught me a lot both about history and about what oppression looks like in different parts of society. It gave me a better understanding of the struggles that have formed the basis of today's movements. Sometimes literature is the best or simplest way to reach people, particularly if they're not paying attention anywhere else.