Why Is Catcher In The Rye Should Not Be Banned

The act of book banning could prove beneficial to the society because it could keep the students and youth of our culture away from books with a bad influence or things that would not help them in any way, shape, or form. “If a book is deemed offensive, some may argued, that it is promoting ideas which can have a detrimental influence on individuals (often children) and on society as a whole” (Aliprandini, Sprague 2016). This quote proves that those who believe that book banning is a good idea have valid reasons to believe so. Although books should not be banned, there is solid evidence that proves otherwise.

It is understood why somebody may think that books should not be banned at schools because by doing this parents are hurting their children by restrain their knowledge. When a quality book is banned, the children lose the opportunity to learn from that book. It is better supported that, some books should be banned from schools because they can introduce students to unacceptable topics and teach them bad or useless

School boards and teachers have a responsibility for protecting the minds of their students and covering age appropriate material. However, does this responsibility cover the extreme act of banning books from school classrooms? Does not the teacher have a duty to introduce to their students world issues in order to better the students ability to cope with problems in the world? How does a school decide which books should be banned from the classroom, and should it be left up to the teacher to decide what is decided in his/her classroom. By banning books from the classroom, we prevent our students from learning about controversial topics in a safe environment, and we also encroach upon the student’s freedom of reading what they want in

Books are a gateway to a world of imagination, but some schools are trying to shut those gates off by banning them. Books are some of the best teachers left, it's not up to a school to decide what a child should or should not read. Banning books can deprive a child of the opportunity to think. Books should not be banned because of the lessons they can teach, the fact that a school should not even be able to ban them, and it can deprive a child of the opportunity to think.

Although it is ridiculous to ban books, it is somewhat understandable. Some books are extremely heavy on the controversial side, and include a boat load of inappropriate content. “My corduroys. My boxers. Two layers. I could feel the warmth of her cheek on my thigh. There are times when it is appropriate, even preferable, to get an erection when someone’s face is in close proximity to your penis” (Green). It is easy to see why someone with a closed mind would take offense to this kind of content being in a book for young

The main argument for why certain books are banned in schools is because the students need to be protected from the content within the books. For example, 13 Reasons Why, a novel about a teenager who commits suicide and leaves behind thirteen tapes containing her reasons has been banned from schools such as the Colorado School District, and some Canadian schools. The book was deemed as “negative portrayals of helping professionals.” and according to Lora Strum writer of the article “Banning books like ’13 Reasons Why’ makes it harder for teens to open up to adults, the author says”, “the book glamorized suicide”. As a whole, the school districts either took

Another reason as to why I believe The Catcher in the Rye should be available to all students above elementary school is because censoring it would be ignoring the first amendment rights of free speech. “If librarians caved into every demand to remove materials from their collections, they would not have much left to put on the shelves. Only materials that offended no one would be spared. Such a situation might appeal to some people, but it would not serve the needs of our democracy or satisfy the constitutional requirements for free speech.” (Steffens). Including a diverse selection of books in a library or school setting would be the promotion of free speech and a diverse selection of opinions and views. However, if books keep getting censored and removed, that would be ignoring the first amendment and almost all opinion-based materials would be gone. Secondly, “As agents of the government, libraries are bound by the Constitution to promote free speech and diversity of opinion.” (Steffens).

The Catcher in the Rye has always been a book of controversy. Schools have banned it due to its vivid description of how a teeneger observes the world. Holden who is The protagonist’s sees the world as very morbid place for young people. Many people believe the book brings up controversial topics that should not be discussed among minors such as Holden Caulfield. Most of the topics expressed in the book could be acceptable in today's society but it caused many concerns and issues around the time it was released, 1951. In my opinion however this book has one of the greatest qualities in literature and thats relating to the reader. It should not be banned because adolescents have been able to identify with Holden’s

Banning books such as, The Catcher In the Rye infringes on the freedoms that America was founded upon. The Bill of Rights is one of the founding principles upon which America was established. The First Amendment clearly states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise there of; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press." (U.S. Constitution). Banning books undoubtedly contradicts the First Amendment.

There are people who would like to see The Catcher in the Rye banned from our schools because it contains disturbing issues. In my opinion they are overlooking the message that J.D. Salinger was trying to communicate. In this novel, the characters exhibit a wide scope of behaviors from honorable to ignominious. The novel presents issues such as respect for religion, or lack thereof. As though these issues were not enough by themselves, there is also the subject of intolerance of others. How, may you ask, should this novel be allowed in our schools? Well, the answer lies deep within the symbolism of the novel,

Is there really an age to be grown up? Should being grown up mean you have responsibilities, like a house, a job, car, and the actual age of 18? Is that what it takes to be called “grown up”. In my opinion I don't think that's the case. I don't think age means anything. It's all about if you are responsible, polite, respectful, mature etc. Especially when it comes to foul language. Should you have to be a certain age to be introduced to it? Even when the case has to do with books, and the school providing you to read them. The question is whether or not The Catcher in the Rye should be banned for age reasons and because of its language and sexual content. In my opinion it shouldn't be banned for its language and sexual content.

The Catcher in The Rye is one of the most banned books in America across schools, libraries, and book stores, but it should not be as looked down upon as it is. It is banned because partly because of all of the violence and the bad language it uses. Many parents or teachers do not want children to be exposed to those kinds of things so they try to shield them from books such as The Catcher in the Rye. Also, some schools do not want kids having the book because Holden is seen as a rebel because he is constantly getting kicked out of schools because he does not put forth the effort. Parents and schools do not want their children to get the idea that it is ok or even normal for kids to approach school the way Holden does. But, The Catcher in The Rye should not be banned from libraries, schools, or book stores because it shows teenagers how not to act, the importance of friends and family, and that children should not be in a rush to grow up.

Within the last couple of decades, schools have been banning books due to the reoccurring problems in modern day time, like profanity. Use of language should not limit what a student can and cannot read. Fahrenheit 451, one of the many books that have been put into consideration for being banned because of disputatious issues. The story of a protagonist who finds joy in his job as a fireman, setting fire to illegally owned books and their owners homes. However, the fireman soon starts to question the value of his job and his life. Throughout the book, characters are left to deal with censorship, restriction, and put in life threatening situations. Although the novel contains reoccurring controversial issues, Fahrenheit 451 should be included in middle and high school curriculums because it allows teachers and students to freely discuss the importance of language use included in reality.

School boards, principals, and teachers have a responsibility for protecting the minds of their students by covering grade and age appropriate material in the classroom. However, does this given responsibility cover the act of banning books from their classrooms? As an advocate for each student, does the teacher not have a duty to introduce the students to a these words issues in order to help the student cope with the different problems in the world? How does a school decide which books should be banned and how much say does the teacher have what should be left up to the teacher? Some say that banning books from the classroom, we prevent them from learning about different controversial topics in a safe and secure environment. In this paper I reflect on my research question: Why do schools ban books in the classroom?

It is my belief that since by the time the child is required to read such literature in school, they are at an age where they can distinguish between things that should and should not be said and it is the job of the parents to educate the child that just because they say it in a book does not mean he or she should.Another subject common to banned and censored books is sexuality.