In the past decades, the followings books have been ‘challenged’ for removal from libraries and school reading lists:
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (Mark Twain)
The Ox-bow Incident (Walter van Tilburg Clark)
Forever (and everything else by Judy Blume)
The Harry Potter series. (J.K. Rowling)
The Handmaid’s Tale (Margaret Atwood. This was in an AP English class).
The Bridge to Terabithia (Katherine Paterson)
Soul on Ice (Eldridge Cleaver)
I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings. (Maya Angelou)
This is only a partial list.
When I was in school, I remember seeing several copies of The Ox-bow Incident, I know Why the Caged Bird Sings’, and Huckleberry Finn in the school library.To my knowledge, no one ever complained about them, let alone actually try to get removed. I suppose Los Angeles in the late seventies and early eighties was more enlightened.
Why would anyone want to ban these books? We've all heard the excuses. Harry Potter promotes Satanism. Huckleberry Finn 'has that word' in it. Judy Blume encourages kids to sleep around. All of these reasons are smoke screens. The real truth is, these books don't present easy answers to a complicated world. They raise unpleasant questions and uncomfortable issues like mob violence, the deaths of parents and/or friends, the messy terrain of love and sex. (And how adults can and do abuse both). In other words, these, and other books, get kids to thinking. And that's too damn frightening for many adults. (Including the Vice-presidential nominee for a major political party. Fortunately, she never managed to get anything banned. But what does that say about this country?)
Book banning (or the attempt) says so much about people, and none of it is good. When you try to ban a book, any book, you’re announcing to the world that you are muddle-headed, intolerant, and afraid. It says ‘I’m so insecure in my own beliefs that I must smother any competing ideas.’ and ‘I’m terrified that my kids might actually become educated, and thus get out of my control’ and ‘Hey, think I’ll try to control everyone’s kids while I’m at it’.
I understand that people are afraid; things are moving too fast. We’re all trying to make sense out of a world that’s more and more chaotic. Of course there’s a tendency to close ranks, circle the wagons, raise the drawbridge, etc. None of this is effective. The only way to deal with the world is to meet it head-on. Nobody ever made the world an easier place to live in by banning books. In fact, you’re liable to make it worse. (Nazi Germany, anyone?)
There’s also the problem of Forbidden Fruit. No doubt many ‘Christian’ children, denied the wonders of Harry Potter at home, read the books at school, or at the houses of friends. In the early sixties, my mother got hold of a contraband copy of LadyChatterly’s Lover, which was still banned in this country. She said the social commentary was interesting, but the ‘racy stuff’ that got the book banned was disappointingly tame.
An educated populace is a free populace, able to think on their feet, better equipped to handle a world that’s going to get messier before it doesn’t. Just read the headlines. Climate change, economic stress, terrorisms, etc, aren't going away any time soon. Overly-sheltered little drones, who never learned how to think for themselves, will never be able to cope with that.
So, the next time anyone tries to ban something from your local school or public library, fight back. Protest. Name-call if you must (no one likes being called a Nazi). This is not a time to sit back and let things ‘sort themselves out’; they won’t.
The other week I finished Victory of Eagles, the fifth installment of Naomi Novik’s splendid ‘Temeraire’ series. I think it’s the best of the bunch so far. It’s much leaner (and meaner) than the previous books. Novik’s alternate history is entirely believable, even with the presence of dragons. (Admiral Nelson is safely dead at the and of this one.) And I’m eager for the next thrilling development.
Novik is up to 1807 I believe. Considering that her Supreme Bad Guy (thank you, Rinkworks) is Napoleon himself, she could write several more adventures before we get to Waterloo. She shows no sign of slacking off. So, how do writers keep things fresh, four years and five books into a series? Or seven books? Or even three?
I don’t know.
Check out the on-line reviews of Breaking Dawn. There are a lot of disappointed fans here. Now, not every fan is going to like every installment, but when that many ardent fans of the earlier books post negative reviews, it’s clear that something went wrong.
I read some excerpts from the first book, Twilight, and was not impressed enough to buy a copy of the book. A lot of kids liked it, and that was no skin off my nose. But I thought that they could do much better. So what happened?
From what little I remember from Twilight, there really wasn’t much to this story.Teenagers? Vampires? Werewolves? Been there, Buffied that. (I’m a huge Buffy fan). Aside from the well-worn premise, there was little substance or insight, in either the characters or the story itself. True, Stephenie Meyers might have been in a hurry, under pressure from her publishers. Or perhaps there just wasn’t much there there to begin with.
Since some people have, in all seriousness, compared Meyers with J.K. Rowling, I’ll mention a few things. It’s clear even in Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone that this is more than just a kid’s story. There’s wry, satiric humor, genuine pathos, and terror. These are glimpses of greatness to come. Nothing in Meyers’s work comes close to this. I don’t remember any intentional laughs in Twilight. Now it looks likeher meager gift has burned itself out. Yet Rowling kept things up over the course of seven books.
Perhaps it depends on both the overall premise and the authors’s skill. Not to mention the author’s own investment in the story. Rowling once told an interviewer that she hated to kill Cedric Diggory, even though she knew it was vital to the story.Meyers, on the other hand, explains away her lapses by saying that in fiction, you can make your character do anything you want. No wonder the series ended with a thud.
Now check out Patrick Rothfuss’s wonderful The Name of The Wind. It’s only the first book in a trilogy, so I have no idea if Rothfuss can sustain things over two books, let alone three. But this first installmentis so vivid and written with so much brio that I have high hopes for the sequel (it comes out next April). There's also C.S. Mark's Elfhunter trilogy, another work written with energy and passion and deep affection for the chacaters and their story. I'm on the third book of this one, and it's the best entry so far.
The question is on my mind these days because I'm reading several series, as well as preparing the second installment of my own. Does it hold up? Writers are seldom the best judges of their own work, either for good or ill. I can only say, I hope so. Because I don't have the 'secret formula'. When it comes to writing, or pretty much anything, there's no such thing. Writers can only have faith in their work, and hope that it comes out right on the page.