Essay on Should books with objectionable words be banned?
Should books with objectionable words be banned? Essay : Banning books is an apparatus of censorship by the state, groups or individuals that has been executed since after the invention of the writing system in around 3400 B.C. The debate of whether books with objectionable words is an ambiguous one. To state that books with objectionable words objectively is imprudent and futile. Prior to banning books, it is essential to identify words that are objectionable and to assess whether the identified words are genuinely objectionable or not. Banning books with objectionable words is tedious work with its pros and cons.
2.0 Discussion
To ban books with objectionable words in them, it is necessary to identify which words can be deemed as objectionable. For instance, words such as ‘mad’ can have multiple connotations. Since its prevalence from 1300 B.C. the meaning has undergone regular changes. The rem was first referred to as individuals suffering from mental illness or disorders. In contemporary times, the usage of the word in such a sense can turn out to be objectionable since awareness of psychology has relatively become more widespread. Again the second meaning of the word ‘angry’ signifies anger which apparently assigns the word an innocuous sense making it completely unobjectionable. The third meaning of the word ‘mad’ is a limitless desire or liking towards another object or person which is not objectionable.
So, it is a near impossible task to deem a book objectionable with complete authenticity and ban it on the basis that its words are objectionable. It’s for the simplistic of reasons that the determination of what is objectionable varies with time and social context. To ban a book from a generalized perspective is ignorant and dictating in nature. The censorship of literary works needs to be checked as it hinders the freedom of expression of thoughts and revealing facts or perspectives necessary for originality and novelty. The meaning of the words varies from culture to culture. Banning words that are deemed to be objectionable may limit the scope of the book in its representation of a society in complete authenticity. For instance, Galileo was censored for printing his belief that the earth rotated around the sun that was contradicting the catholic church’s dogmatic beliefs in early 1600. On the other hand, banning books that may lead to internal conflicts in a society like communal riots would threaten peace and harmony thereby disturbing the balance of society. For instance, Salman Rushdie’s ‘The Satanic Verses’ were banned in India for it was apprehended that it would irk a particular religious community.
Hence, banning books with objectionable words is a meticulous and prudent task which would require the personnel entrusted with the task to be well-read and unbiased.
3.0 Conclusion
Banning books with objectionable words is a necessary evil. It curbs and regulates the freedom of expression but is necessitated by the demands of an orderly society. It poses itself as a major challenge to human civilization. In most years about 10% of books are removed or banned from schools or libraries. However in a progressive society with a greater spread of awareness and education, the percentage of banned books has reduced to 3%.
FAQs
1.) Which book was Galileo imprisoned for publishing?
Ans: Galileo was imprisoned for publishing “ The Dialogue on the Two World Systems”
2.) Which other authors were banned in India?
Ans: Jaswant Singh for “Jinnah: India, Partition, Independence” and Hamish Mcdonald for “The Polyester Prince
For more update follow our net explanations homepage