Nelson 1

One Man’s Trash

“Read, read, read. Read everything—trash, classics, good and bad, and see how they do it” (“William”). So begins William Faulkner’s advice on how to learn to write. However, the advice also speaks of the difference between “trash” and “classics.” Many community groups throughout the country have tried to ban books they deem “trash.” However, tolerance and critical thinking skills are vital in our global world; a school or a library is charged with the task of instilling these qualities in its patrons. Many “trashy” classics incite discussion that leads to tolerance and critical thinking skills; therefore, book banning inhibits public institutions from doing their job.

Most challengers argue that “trashy” books could corrupt their kids. However, parents have more power over their children than a bound mass of paper. They also claim that the students learn profanity from the books (Gourley). Students are not learning profanity from literature; they are learning it from their peers or from their parents. There is more trash talk in a hallway during a three-minute pass period than in any canonized work of literature.

Many authors have explored tolerance in their works; two of the best-known to Americans are John Steinbeck and Harper Lee. Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath tells of a family’s arduous trip from Oklahoma to California on Route 66 during the Great Depression. The novel was burned by the St. Louis Public Library because it contains “vulgar and profane references” (“The Dangerous” 68). Similarly, Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbirdhas encountered many banning attempts. The book has been labeled as racist because it contains the word “nigger” (Tougill). However, there is more to these classic works of literature than meets the eye. Steinbeck’s novel is described by others as “a bold dramatization of the plight of the dispossessed everywhere,” and Lee’s novel presents Atticus Finch, a character in who is not afraid to stand up against racism and intolerance(Steinbeck and Holliday). Students and parents complained that the books madestudents feel uncomfortable in class. That is great. The readers should be uncomfortable. Theseclassics are not warm and fuzzy stories. They are thought-provoking masterpieces.

Like Steinbeck’s masterpiece, Mark Twain’s Adventures of Huckleberry Finn presents a wonderful account of tolerance; like To Kill a Mockingbird, the novel contains the word “nigger.” In fact, most of the banning attempts are centered on the book’s 215 iterations of the word “nigger” (Kaplan ix). However, as African American author David Bradley points out, “nigger” does not mean the same thing now as it did in Twain’s time. Furthermore, Twain’s novel is canonized largely because of its groundbreaking use of the vernacular. Huck Finn could not call Jim, a Negro slave, an “AfricanAmerican” because that would be historically inaccurate. Twain’s work has incited criticism from groups who would like to call it rubbage. They should not use that word, however. Huck invented it (Powell). Throughout time, Huck has caused controversy almost everywhere his raft has landed. The Concord, Massachusetts, library led by Little Women author Louisa May Alcott, and Ralph Waldo Emerson’s son, banned the novel because it was “trash and suitable only for the slums” (qtd. in Kaplan x). As time has gone on, the book has continued to incite passions. The book was also condemned by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, and a public school administrator labeled it “the most grotesque example of racist trash ever written” (qtd. in Howard).

However, one man’s trash is another man’s treasure. In a foreword to the novel, Justin Kaplannotes that Twain’s novel created a tradition in American literature to explore historical issues, such as race and gender(Kaplan ix). Similarly, Ernest Hemingway, the 1954 Nobel Prize winner in Literature, famously stated that “All modern American Literature comes from one book by Mark Twain called Huckleberry Finn. . . It’s the best book we’ve had” (qtd. in Kaplan viii). Also, in an essay entitled “What America Would Be Like Without Blacks,” Ralph Ellison says, “No Huck and Jim, no American novel as we know it.” (qtd. in Kaplan viii). Interestingly, Mark Twain knew that no publicity is bad publicity. He saw the banning attempts as free marketing (Kaplan x). In fact, he thought that the Concord censorship would sell at least another 25,000 copies (Stanek 20).

To put it bluntly, banning books is appalling and is un-American. First, it is appalling because challengers often go after the best literature. The Modern Library Association published a list of the one hundred best novels written in English during the 20th century, and the American Library Association reports that over one-third of the books on the list have been challenged (“The Dangerous”). Judith Krug, the Director of Intellectual Freedom for the American Library Association, explained the phenomenon in an article for American Libraries. “The literature that speaks to the human experiences and issues of importance at the time of its creation automatically means that controversy attaches.” (“The Dangerous” 61). This controversy often leads to a book being removedfrom a library; thus, students are unable to learn from it. The irony of this is that most of the books that are challenged teach about open-mindedness, self-worth, and diversity; we must have texts that teach us about sexual, racial, and ethnic diversity so we understand each other (Holliday; Gerand; Maxwell). Second, we live in a society that loves to debate. Our newspapers are filled with letters to the editor and editorials, and our presidential candidates engage in a series of debates before an election. Most of the books that are banned meet their fate because they foster debate. Patrons who witness a book banning observe that a government body would rather suppress healthy discussion than talk about the issues the work raises (McGowan 15).

Sometimes the objectors are right. Books that foster hatred, such as Hitler’s Mein Kampf, should not be in public institutions. However, there must be limits. A work of literature should not be removed from a library because is shows that our history is not picture-perfect (Giese). To do this would be to revert back to the policies of Nazi Germany, where books were burned to get rid of unwanted ideas (Manley). The only assurance that the repulsive moments do not repeat themselves is knowledge, and books provide knowledge; literature tells us about the errors of our ancestors(Gerand). The United States Supreme Court concurs. The high court has said that an institution cannot ban a booksimply because the institution does not like the ideas contained in the book (Board).

All books contain ideas; ideas are vital to our free society. In fact, expression of ideas is in the First Amendment to our Constitution. As Supreme Court Justice Byron White said, “Our Constitution does not permit the suppression of ideas” (Board). Second, books do not speak. They require a reader to interpret their ideas, and readers interpret books in many ways. Most challenged works do not say that one belief is better than another (Giese). They simply allow the reader to learn about the different ideas.

Some ideas are good; some are bad. We remember some ideas; we forget others. Likewise, some books stretch our minds farther than others; however, a book should not be removed from an educational institution because a few people do not like the book’s ideas. To do so is to undermine the very cornerstone of America--freedom to think. In a world where diversity increases by the minute, we need to read. In a world where we can find an answer right away, we need to read. Literature has answers that textbooks cannot give. We need to read books. We must read trash.

Works Cited

Board of Education v. Pico. 457 U.S. 853 (1852).

Cronin, Blaise. “Burned any Good Books Lately?” Library Journal 1 Feb. 2003: 48. Academic Search Elite. EBSCOHost.

Gerand, Jean. “Book-banning Dangerous for US.” Christian Science Monitor 23 Nov. 2004: 6. Academic Search Elite. EBSCOHost.

Giese, Rachel. “Don’t Ban Books, Improve Teaching.” Toronto Star 9 May 2002. Newspaper Source. Academic Search Elite. EBSCOHost.

Gourley, Catherine. “Banning Books: Think and Write!” Writing Feb. 2001: 10-12. Academic Search Elite. EBSCOHost.

Holliday, Heather. “The Right to Read.” Scholastic Scope 2 Apr. 2002: 29. Master File Premier. EBSCOHost.

Howard, Douglas L. “Silencing Huck Finn.” Chronicle of Higher Education 6 Aug. 2004: C1-2. Academic Search Elite. EBSCOHost.

Hurwitz, Howard L. “PC Crowd Bans Huckleberry Finn because Mark Twain Used ‘N’ Word.” Human Events 15 Sep. 1995. Academic Search Elite. EBSCOHost.

“Is Your School Library Safe?” NEA Today. Jan. 1997: 22-24. Academic Search Elite. EBSCOHost.

Kaplan, Justin. Foreword. Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. By Mark Twain. New York: Ballantine Books, 1996. vii-xii.

Manley, Will. “In Defense of Book Burning.” American Libraries. Mar. 2002: 196. Academic Search Elite. EBSCOHost.

Maxwell, Marilyn and Marlene Berman. “To Ban or Not to Ban: Confronting the Issue of Censorship in the English Class.” Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy Oct. 1997: 92-96. Academic Search Elite. EBSCOHost.

McGowan, William. “Don’t Read This!” Scholastic Update 17 Sep. 1993: 15-16. Academic Search Elite. EBSCOHost.

Powell, Padgett. Foreword. Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. By Mark Twain. New York: Signet Books, 1997.

Steinbeck, John. Back Cover. The Grapes of Wrath. By John Steinbeck. New York: Ballantine Books, 1996.

“The ‘Banned Books Bogeyman.” American Enterprise Nov. 1997: 11. Business Search Elite. EBSCOHost.

“The Dangerous Modern Library List.” American Libraries Sep. 1998: 68-70. Academic Search Elite. EBSCOHost.

“William Faulkner Quotes.” BrainyQuote. 20 Apr. 2005 <