Marcus Kim, Suhani Mahajan, Sofia Mang, Dhruv Singh, Caleb Smith, Grace Yang

In the first episode of our two-part series, host Caleb Smith discusses the wave of book bans sweeping over America and the effects of categorizing books. Listen on Spotify or Apple Music! 

Caleb Smith: “Love who you want to, and do it unapologetically, including that face you see every day in the mirror.”

“Many of us connect with each other through trauma and pain: broken people finding other broken people in the hopes of fixing one another.”

These quotes from All Boys Aren’t Blue by George Matthew Johnson advise us to practice self-love and healing from trauma, practices that almost every single person would promote as healthy and beneficial. What happens when we condemn texts that encourage youth, the future leaders of the world, to love themselves and heal from their pasts? Is the restriction of books a necessary action to help avoid explicit material to our youth? What becomes of our society when we restrict literature to black-and-white categories of either “acceptable” or “unacceptable”? Who determines this? Is this new wave of book bans driven by political agendas?

Hello and welcome to Point of View where we give students a place to listen, learn, and lean in. I’m your host, Caleb. Join us on episode one of our two-part series on Book Bans as we dive into these questions and the implications behind the recent surge of book bans in America.

Please note that this episode references sensitive topics including suicide, violence against minorities, mental illnesses, and sexual violence, and may not be suitable for some listeners.

On January 10, the McMinn County School Board in Tennessee voted to remove Pulitzer prize-winning graphic novel Maus from its curriculum, effectively prohibiting teachers from teaching the book. The board’s reasoning for this ban, as stated on its website, was due to the book’s “use of profanity and nudity and… its depiction of violence and suicide.” The book tells about the horrors of the Holocaust from the authors’ parents’ point of view as Jewish people, themselves. Art Spegielman, the author, stated he believes the real reason the school board removed the book was because of its focus on the Holocaust, but the school board did release a statement that it values “teaching our children the historical and moral lessons and realities of the Holocaust.”

Additionally in Texas, multiple books are being pulled from school library shelves due to complaints from parents and school districts’ reviews of the books. Several of these reviews and complaints were spurred by an inquiry from Republican representative Matt Krause back on October 21, 2021. Krause compiled a list of 850 books and asked Texas school districts for information on their whereabouts and costs, then asked schools to review books that deal with topics ranging from human sexuality to people of certain races or sexes being inherently oppressive. An associate editor at Book Riot found that around 60% of the books on this list include LGBTQ+ themes. The North East Independent School District started reviewing the books on the list and removed more than 400 books dealing with race, sexuality, and gender. The district received backlash with an online petition of people who believed this review was hurting colored and LGBTQ+ students.

Texas governor Greg Abbott has also contributed to the banning of books by sending a letter to the Texas Education Agency to “investigate any criminal activity in our public schools involving the availability of pornography.” In response to this statement, many parents have challenged books with the claim that they are pornographic. Authors rebut these claims, saying they come from reading isolated passages, and that the book as a whole encourages teens to act on their desires safely. Other complaints have been filed about books that deal with race; parents claim they make kids feel guilty for being white.

More recently, Forsyth county in Georgia removed eight books from its media centers shelves after a parent complaint of sexually explicit material. Of these eight pieces, four of them feature POC main characters. Four other titles were moved to only be available in high schools. These books include Looking for Alaska by John Green and The Absolutely True Diary of a Part Time Indian by Sherman Alexie.

This censorship of literature impacts students the most, so we sat down with a few high schoolers and a teacher to discuss their thoughts on these book bans.

Ashley Ulrich: Hi, I'm Ashley Ulrich. I am a teacher at Northview High School. I'm one of the co-chairs for the English department. And I've been teaching here, this is my 15th year, and I primarily teach 10th graders and juniors.

Book banning is not a new concept. It has been a political controversy for forever, it feels like. I have definitely taught books that have in times and places been challenged or banned by groups at different times.

Smith: Book bans have been around for centuries, with America’s first book ban taking place in 1637 on Thomas Morton’s New English Canaan, which critiqued Puritan practices. Since then, our country has grown much more accepting, welcoming people of all religions, races, and sexualities. Some of this societal progress can be attributed to books that push people to be uncomfortable and face reality. For example, Uncle Tom’s Cabin, published in 1852, exposed the cruel nature of slavery to the public, strengthening the abolitionist movement.

Literature pushes the boundaries and tells about all facets of society.

Ryan Li: So like if you only approve certain texts, you only learn what those texts are teaching you. You don’t have the vast variety of, you know, different points of view, which is what makes literature so special.

Smith: It is a unique form of communication as it defuses ideas from all kinds of people. Anybody’s ideals may be challenged with literature, be they democrat, republican, or anything in between. No book is objectively correct or incorrect.

Ulrich: I think most sources are not that black and white. So it becomes tricky without picking out the most outliers of examples to, I think, pin down on a spectrum of, you are terrible, and you are great. There is a lot of gray in the space between objectively promoting good and objectively promoting bad.

Smith: For example, the “Handmaid’s Tale” offers Christians a critique on the possibility of the overbearing power of religion. It is written through a female point of view that shows the flaws of a male dominated society that is often seen in religious texts. Stripping away the political ideas associated with a story like this, we reveal a genuine warning about how individual rights may crumble under an overpowering government. Beneath the political veil that society has given “The Handmaid’s Tale”, lies a genuinely amazing piece of literature that critiques our status quo regarding religion and power structures. Putting “The Handmaid’s Tale” into a strict black or white box of either being pro-conservative or pro-liberal takes away from the story and the message it is trying to send. By reducing this work to a binary, the heart of this book is lost.

This pattern of exposing the worst parts of humanity in hopes of achieving reform or simply to make people think, can be seen in many popular books, whether they are taught in schools or not.

Li: It’s not really sort of something I can put my finger on exactly, it’s just sort of a feeling you get after you read a book. It sort of expands your worldview on things, like a subliminal message, things that slowly change the way you view the world through reading different texts, through reading things that concern these controversial topics that sort of, you know, expand your knowledge on them.

Smith: For example, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, a book in the curriculum of many school districts across the nation, discusses uncomfortable topics such as mental illness and the terrible treatment that mentally ill people have received historically. The content makes readers think about the conditions in the medical system as well as about the bigger questions, such as things that are worse than death. In One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, the setting is a mental asylum, where the patients are often rambunctious and punished for this behavior. The setting could lead readers to believe that there is something innately wrong with people who have mental illnesses. Rather than moving Cuckoo’s Nest to the ‘no good’ box immediately, an inspection of the book reveals how it uses the setting as a critique of the treatment of people with mental illness.

Ulrich: With a book, there is a writer, that writer is writing for an audience to communicate a message, and understanding the purpose of the message that they're trying to communicate and the audience that they're trying to reach. And what they hope to accomplish with that is important with any text, whether it's a speech, or whether it's a novel or any other form of communication.

Smith: Actually engaging and reading the book shows how the setting itself presents the mistreatment and horrors that happen in a systemic institution for people deemed ‘insane’. While Cuckoo’s Nest is a controversial book, it is not being targeted in this most recent wave of bans, along with many other hard reads. They are still being taught in schools across the country, and there is one defining factor about these books: they are from the so-called “normal” perspective, that being of a straight white man. Both the protagonist, Randle McMurphy, and the book’s author, Ken Kesey, come from this majority.

Vangala: Honestly, if you look at the publishing industry as a whole, even though there are so many people of color, so many LGBTQ people in America, it’s a largely white straight world. I think by banning these books and preventing people from accessing these kinds of stories, you’re showing them that only one kind of story is valid, and one kind of story is acceptable.

Smith: This doesn’t mean that Cuckoo’s Nest is any less important of a text, but it is a glaring pattern in these bans.

Ulrich: We're seeing right now, a lot of questioning of writers that are not from the majority population, people of color, people who are from the LGBTQ community, and a lot of superficial elements of texts are being used as the justification for why books can be banned outright for all people in this you know, whole school or home school district or whole state. And in doing so, there is an implied argument that people like that don't have a place that we shouldn't be listening to what they have to say that to me is problematic.

Smith: One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest is comparable in content, albeit a bit more serious, to The Absolutely True Diary of a Part Time Indian. The Absolutely True Diary of a Part Time Indian was banned due to profanity and reference to sexual acts, but Cuckoo’s Nest is much more violent and contains more sexually explicit material, and has not been challenged in the newest wave of book bans. This raises the question of whether sexual content is being used to ban books or if the real intention is to prevent students from reading books showing a certain viewpoint.

Ulrich: I am more inclined to see the removal of whole groups of texts, because they're written by a certain type of person, or because they have, you know, content of this type or that type or this type or that type. I think that oftentimes, we can sometimes use those labels as a hide, for a real reason why sometimes a book might be banned, that we might say this content is what is objectionable, but really, it's a challenge to the status quo, or it's a challenge to the viewpoints and the feelings that people have. That is, at the heart the problem.

Smith: The striking difference between One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest and The Absolutely True Diary of a Part Time Indian is that Sherman Alexie, the author of The Absolutely True Diary of a Part Time Indian, is a Native American author showing the day-to-day life of a different culture, and Ken Kesey, author of One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest is a straight white man.

Vangala: I mean, it’s the same kind of idea where if you see the acceptable stories, and it’s The Great Gatsby, and it’s The Catcher in the Rye, it’s stories of white men. And then you look at the stories that are banned, and it’s about the Holocaust, and it’s about Melissa, a transgender girl, you’re seeing very obviously that one type of voice is seen as acceptable and some voices are seen as unacceptable, and when you identify with a voice that’s seen as unacceptable, it’s really damaging to your growth.

Smith: On Goodreads, a book review website, a parent reveals that she started reading parts of The Absolutely True Diary of a Part Time Indian and crossing out sections she thought were inappropriate for her child. It is an honorable task to be a parent and every parent wants to be the best for their children.

Ulrich: If a parent is really concerned about content in a text, as a parent, they have the right to determine what is appropriate for their child, in the same way, they should have that right to determine what a child can watch on television or see in a movie or playing a video game or listen to in music.

Smith: But allowing opinionated parents, often acting on a political agenda, to pick what is “too harsh” and to restrict those texts for all students across the board can be dangerous. Media has an effect on people's worldview, and it makes sense that a parent would want some knowledge and control over what a child is exposed to in their formative years. However, there is a difference between this contained parenting and the sweeping actions of a larger administrative board.

Ulrich: Speaking as a teacher and as a person, I think there is an inherent difference, which is probably come across in some of my other comments between a parent making a choice for their child, and someone making a choice for entire groups of kids or entire groups of populations that they may not intimately know. Those two things to me are very different circumstances. I see the biggest issue when someone thinks that they know best for whole groups of people without having any direct connection to them. A teacher, a parent, even an administrator who's directly involved in the lives of that group of kids, to me, is in a better place to make a judgment call for what feels like a more founded reason than making sweeping judgments from a position that's very detached and removed.

Smith: The themes of racial prejudice, sexual desires, and domestic abuse in The Absolutely True Diary of a Part Time Indian and other heavy topics addressing the LGBTQ+ community and sexual assault have become more relevant, but have also been more targeted in recent bans.

Li: I don’t think I’ve read many books concerning these themes outside of school, which is why I think implementing book bans is especially harmful, because sometimes school is the only place you’re exposed to these types of themes.

Smith: Banning these books across the board insinuates that the bigger ideas in these books are outright wrong, and can push them to be seen as part of political agendas.

Ulrich: When we take an entire group of texts, and give it a label, and then say that that is unacceptable, particularly if it is a flat ban, and across the board, instead of in an individual context for an individual kid, that to me can be very problematic, because it suggests that there is something inherently negative about the writer or the writers intentions. And that might be one person's view, or, you know, a group of persons’ views. But that's probably not a pan of a view for everyone. In fact, many books, unfortunately, find themselves, you know, for different reasons being challenged, because they might run contrary to the perspective that a group, you know, wants to advocate for and kind of make a political statement about.

Smith: The idea in modern American society that LGBTQ+ ideas are liberal and conservatives are anti-LGBTQ can be attributed to the current black and white, yes or no, of the American political climate. The world is not black or white, but a shade of gray. People cannot be labeled in a binary fashion, and to an even greater extent, the ideas that people share cannot and should not ever come close to a bilinear scale.

Ulrich: I try to include a variety of themes in the texts that we explore. I think questions about who we are as people, and what matters to us. And the way that we interact with other people are probably some of the most fundamental things that we can work with students about and have them think critically about, especially when we look at the world. On a bigger scale, once you're not in high school, I mean, interpersonal relationships and having a sense of who you are, and what matters to you. Those are fundamental things that shape every part of a person's life. So giving kids texts that are exploring identity, about sense of self, about how we relate to others, how we relate to people that are different than us, how we acknowledge that there are perspectives that are perhaps different than our own. To me, those are some of the most fundamental, important things that we can talk about. Because through that, we're addressing things that give kids the ability to make choices in the future about who they are, how they see themselves, the way they interact with others.

Smith: Katy Independent School District has banned the book and memoir “All Boys Aren’t Blue” by George M Johnson. In this memoir, Johnson explores the trials and triumphs of a black queer man growing up. Many could immediately label this as dangerous. It could expose our youth to sensitive topics such as sexual violence or uncensored sex.

Li: In terms of literature, most of the stuff that starts to, for required reading, that does deal with sexuality and things along those lines, happens in eighth grade. A lot of the reasoning behind these bans is that, you know, these people are too young to learn about these things but I feel like at that age, you’re already mentally mature enough to handle topics and themes of this nature.

Smith: The book could be labeled as liberal propaganda and be shoved in the ‘no good’ box and shipped away. However, as explained earlier, All Boys Aren't Blue explores topics of sexuality, masculinity, and consent, which aren’t topics that can be relegated to a political party. These themes include the discussion of the ‘republican father’, the idea of a strong breadwinning male figure, the explanation of consent and dangers of sexual assault, and even the talk of American childhood.

Vangala: When it comes to a book, you have to put, there’s so many people that work on a book. Even writing a book just takes years and years and so much thought that when it comes to a book, you know that there were a lot of eyes that went over it. When there’s sexually explicit conent in there, it’s for a purpose.

Smith: Forcing a label on a book antagonizes its contents. The stories that this work of literature can provide to society are lost through the attempts to section it off into a political party. There is something for everyone in books. Labeling them as black or white, red or blue, is a dangerous practice that prevents the dissemination of literature and stories within society.

Vangala: I believe that the people who are instating book bans are doing it with the belief that they are helping children, but by doing that they are actively hindering our education. They are, again, limiting our worldview and making us believe that only one type of person and one type of story is worthy of being heard.

Smith: We live in turbulent times that no one can predict. Literature and restrictions have been hand and hand for centuries. However, we have to critically analyze the reasons and how they are being restricted and ask the hard question of ‘is this okay to do’. The growth and development of our youth is at stake and prioritizing a political agenda can prevent them from learning the realities of the world and changing it for the better. Join us in our next episode to talk to the students, authors, and teachers these bans are affecting. Thank you for listening to the first episode on Book Bans. -For a transcript of this episode, head to the Point of View tab on our website nhsmessenger.org and follow us on Instagram, Twitter, or Facebook @nhspointofview for updates and new episodes. I’m your host Caleb Smith and this has been Point of View.