Censorship is Murder

Literature inspires within each of us the most dangerous of mental fixations in modern society. Literature has expanded widely beyond the text that we read from our public libraries, which are houses of thoughts waiting to be explored, to the messages we receive from television shows or films. These messages affect us whether they are conscious or subliminal. It is not necessarily just the fault of the literature that creates the danger to Americans, but the thoughts provoked from our ability to freely write about any topic with any given standpoint that we choose. At times in history, the dangers of literature have been put on the top of the pedestal for its critics and supporters to debate over. From the words themselves, to book banning, to lyrical censorship, to the all-to-American verbal protests, literature has become a topic of controversy that many have strong feelings about.

Words themselves have very little meaning, but can inspire to no end to an individual. If you can find an attachment to a phrase or ideal in a piece of literature, then you have created the danger within it. There is no piece of literature that is dangerous to everyone, but every piece of literature is dangerous to someone. In the book Into the Wild, Chris has been inspired from many transcendental works and chooses to follow their paths to a more enlightened lifestyle. Indirectly this is the reason that Chris died. But in this sense death was not a morbid thing; it was the end to his journey, an end that he accepted. The book also goes on to show that Chris was clearly not the only one ever killed from reading a piece of literature and following what it says, but that many others have as well. Before each of us die, we should be allowed to look back upon our lives and realize that we did what we set out to do. The words within the readings that we believe in just help us to find that meaning we are searching for, just like they did for Chris. Literature itself was not the sole cause of his death. Words help to give inspiration to new thoughts within our own minds, and are just tools that help us build ourselves into who we will become. Literature can only be dangerous if we allow it to be.

Lyrical censorship has become a major issue recently, with the restriction of free speech being the main goal of the FCC. A recent example of the power of the emotions stirred from one's spoken literature revolves around the release of a CD by Marshall Mathers called "The Eminem Show." Senator Joseph Liberman, in front of the US Senate spoke on the topic of lyrical censorship saying how horrible "the impact of anti-social and violent music has on its listeners." Another member of the same committee, Senator Condrad Burns, spoke on behalf of Eminem's lyrics saying that it "tears at the very moral fiber of a nation and of a society." They later go on to how detrimental this all will be over impressionable children. If literature had no impact or lasting effect upon its constituents then there would be no danger to being exposed to it. Clearly those in charge of the nations laws felt that literature on controversial topics will open the minds of its listeners to thoughts outside of the social norm, thus making them unfit to reside in our society. This is a direct threat to everyone who wants to live in a peaceful nation. No one is forcing any of these listeners to listen to the lyrics, yet the threat still exists that the listener will create an attachment to a phrase or idea that comes across in the music. Writers use their words as a way of expressing themselves, or their ideas, for others to understand. No one has to agree with them, or even like what they are saying, but to classify their ideas as dangerous is just outrageous.

Another form of censorship that directly declares literature to be dangerous is book-banning. This commonly happens in public schools, restricting student's access to books with ideas that are deemed harmful or wrong. Literature is truly understood by interpretation of what is being said, and to ban a book is telling the students that they do not get to have their own interpretation because every possible way of doing so would be harmful to their mental health. It's impossible for someone to pick up a book, read it and interpret it, and completely change their lives to follow the ideals held in the book anyways, so why do we ban it for being dangerous? If this was true, than students who pick up a copy of the bible would then change their lives to live completely void of sin. The literature that is banned could possibly mentally prepare the youth for what is going to happen in the world after their protection is up, and they are forced to see things for their true value. The literature within these books is all up for interpretation, but no one can safely say that there can be no positive lesson to be learned from the text. Especially with writing about controversial issues, they inspire new thoughts which are fuel to our changing nation.

There is one type of literature that cannot be censored or stopped, and that is verbal protest. After visiting a country where this is unheard of, and moving to America where people protest every possible action the government takes, one can truly appreciate the act of a peaceful protest. People who disagree are given a chance to bring to the attention of those who have the power to make change why they disagree, and what they feel should be done about it. In an essence this is what many books have been written about in the past, about issues that are almost taboo to speak of. But why not take a stance on something you believe in. The words used to deliver this message go a long way, because if there is a way to create a connection between your words and the audience of your message, you have created a lasting effect. For example, in the past few years I have seen several anti-war rallies, some of which were successful and some of which were complete failures. The failures were there protesting the war just because they felt it was wrong. They offered no sense of why it was wrong, just that we shouldn't be doing it. Successful rallies had people telling their stories of why it was wrong, and made an attachment to each person in the crowds. They offered other resolutions to the conflict and thus made a much bigger impact in their cause. It is in this sense that literature possesses danger and the possibility for change.

It doesn't matter what the type of literature is being examined, it is literature that inspires thought and creativity. Whether these thoughts turn into dangerous actions all is determined in the way that it is interpreted. No one piece of literature will affect everyone in the same way, therefore it is a ridiculous concept to say that because several interpretations will be taken in a detrimental way, that the piece should be banned from being viewed. Literature may be dangerous, but there are numerous other things in the world that are just as dangerous, if not more so. Literature has the potential to do good for all, depending on what types of attachment we make to it.