Dear Mrs. Berner
In my opinion, young adult books should not be banned, regardless of the child's age or content, including sixth graders. A child can read whatever their parents see fit ,and if their guardians support this type of literature then they should have access to it. Ellen Hopkins the author of Crank essentially agreed stating “If you don't want your child to read a book take it away ". She then goes on to express how parents have no control over children except of their own . In present times, young adult fiction does have grotesque content but many still enjoy reading it ,so banning is not the solution. Warnings of explicit content allows children to be aware of the mature nature of the material and whether it is appropriate or not for them to read. In addition, such instructions promotes the monitoring for the parents. The most important factor of all is however is that one person cannot be allowed to ban the book for everyone because there are many whom could still enjoy them.
These young adult books should be kept because of the many who enjoy reading them, and one's personal opinion cannot be put over the educational benefits for many. Bill Moyer also expresses his opinion stating one person cannot "deny an entire community's curiosity." This means that one person cannot ban a book for many . Regardless of the graphic content of the books , children can easily choose not to read them or simply get a different one. Sherman Alexie, the author of The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian, states that many adults are only protecting their idea of what literature should be. This is true, just by looking at how many books are challenged by adults, the mature people. Banning young adult books should refer to the children, because it is them who are really affected. The most effective way to have both ways is warning those who don't want the explicit content about it, and those interested end up with a section of books that they like.
Take recently the challenge of a classic Fahrenheit 451. Diana Verm and her father objected the book and although given an alternate assignment her father insisted on the book's removal from the curriculum. The main reason for this request was the description of the burning of a bible. What they don't understand is that the author wanted that portrayal to be disturbing. It was a dystopian world after all! The message of the entire book was that banning free thought and books is unhealthy for the public. Ellen Hopkins expresses her opinion by stating " I don't sugarcoat but neither is the content gratuitous, something would be censors could only know if they'd actually read the books rather than skimming for dirty words." In this case there were also many objections with students speaking in support of the books. Showing the difference between those who read and those who censor This shows how adults have their own privileged opinion of what literature should be.
Parental control should be exercised on individual base, for the need of each family and child. The individual parent should be responsible for drawing the limits of supervision of sensitive material. As long as a warning is made public and children are aware of what they are about to read, there is no need to ban the material. After all it is picked by their own choice. If books were to be banned, in the first place, children should have the say somewhat in the decision making, instead of having grown ups try to comprehend children's literature. There is a reason why there are books for children and books for adults.
