Dear Editor: Censorship in public libraries is inconsiderable, unreasonable, and absurd. It must be eliminated from the minds of our town council. If a book is not acceptable for patrons under eighteen, I feel either the patron’s parents or the patron himself should decide so. The town council and the public library have no idea whether a patron is responsible enough to read a book with possible adult themes. Censorship is also ridiculous because most classic novels involve questionable language, or somewhat violent material.
By displaying this collection of extensive research, the author hopes to communicate to the reader that the efforts of Halliburton are deleterious in a multitude of ways, and that its contract with the military needs to be stopped. Granted, with the help from Halliburton, the military enjoys some luxury of not having to directly provide essential needs for the soldiers. However, this book outlines the management corruption and overall excessive costs of contracting with Halliburton. Also in his book, Pratap Chatterjee discusses the relevance of the Global War on Terror and how it interrelates with the operations of Halliburton. In the last 20 years, Halliburton has been heavily involved in helping the military.
Also, it changes the whole book. If somebody other than the author changes the book it no longer is that authors book. The language in old literature should not be changed, it’s how the author wants it to be. Changing the racist language into less offensive words ruins the character of the book. Finally, you have to be careful who reads it.
Censorship is strictly review by an authority of any material before publication or dissemination, with legal right to prevent, alter, or delay its appearance. Censorship for authors is that they have to face what people believe that certain of their books contains material that is objectionable on political, moral, or religious grounds and should be banned from classrooms in order to protect their children from exposures to allegedly harmful ideas. Most school boards have responded by physically removing books that are written by some author from school library shelves (“Censorship”). J.K. Rowling is well-known for her book, Harry Potter, which has been censor and banned by school libraries. As a child, Rowling enjoyed reading and writing about fantasy stories to her little sister.
The government, like any other from a different country, has censored a lot of information from us that shouldn’t be. Our world may seem under control and going well, but really when we think about things, its because we don’t know something, it has been blocked from us for any reason, or they (our government or any ruling power) try to eliminate things because we don’t want to loose control. On the contrast, like any argument there’s an opposing side. There is a large amount of people who believe in censorship due to information being taken in could cause physical or psychological harm. Also, other factors that could cause harm: national security, pornography, and privacy.
Llosa believes that science and technology cannot do such things, only literature can. Snow’s view on Llosa’s statement is questionable because of its relentlessness with the polarizing thought process of the modern-day community of literary scholars in that it apparently appears to be downgrading science to an inferior point in which concerns to the pursuit of solidarity knowledge. Llosa argues about what he describes to as a “widespread conception,” basically that literature has become a “dispensable activity.” Llosa believes that the marginalization of literature will make people lose their abilities to survive in the real
THE VALUE OF THE GODFATHER In the article “What is the value of The Godfather?” David Clemens states that reading great literature may inspire students to behave as well as what they read. However, some books may have less value than the others may because it would lead the reader to a bad way in life. In addition, some books as Unabomber’s Manifesto, The Anarchist’s Cookbook, and American Psycho would not give any value to the reader, but they glamorize violence, drug use, or other illegal or immoral activity. For this reason, David Clemens agrees that The Godfather should not be made available in our public high school. I agree with David Clemens about banning The Godfather in our public high schools because the violent and criminal scene of the book as well as bringing the wrong impression to high school students that we embrace the intolerance worldviews in the Godfather First, The Godfather novel might present readers a great insight of the real world, yet this image is too violent to be taught for high school students.
Andrew Ofstad's "America's Decline in Literacy Reading: Grappling with Technology's Effects on the Print of Culture" and Ursula Le Guin's "Staying Awake: Notes on the Alleged Decline of Reading" are both essays that focus on the decline of reading in society. Ofstad explains what he believes are pros and cons to technology and how it could be used with literature. While Le Guin can only see a negative affect technology has on society and literature, she believes literature should not coexist with technological devices. I understand that reading is necessary for learning, but I also believe that strategic games also help with developmental brain growth. Ofstad and Le Guin see with literature as a way to improve writing and
Mr. Darcy is telling Mr. Bingley that Elizabeth is not pretty so he has no interest in her. These words were caught by Elizabeth, which makes her think that Mr. Darcy has excessive pride and starts to hate him. This situation, where Elizabeth dislikes Mr. Darcy, could be prevented if Mr. Darcy had not say these words out loud. So people should be careful of what they say if they would like to prevent a hard situation. Because prejudice builds up as time goes on, it can be magnified if the situation is not clarified immediately.
The article mainly uses provocation as a mean to lure people into reading it, but it is a dangerous method to use, as it easily could wind up offending the reader or give the reader a negative attitude toward the article after only reading a few lines. The title in itself is provocative, as it is a statement that, perhaps, many western parents would disagree with. Western parents might believe themselves to be the more overbearing parents, that when opposed to such an article as Why Chinese Mothers Are Superior they would feel obliged to participate in the debate. Even if it is just to point fingers and disapprove of the theories in the article. While reading the article one of the more noticeable things is the list on the front page.