A discussion of popular or well-known novels that have been under fire or criticism due to their content. Perhaps even discuss why that book was banned and whether those books should remain banned or not.
Really good topic. There are loads of books to discuss. Have a look at Baudelaire's Flowers of Evil. – Rachel Elfassy Bitoun9 years ago
Since this topic is broad, it would be best to either approach it with different sub categories of reasons why they were banned or just focus on one aspect. For example, I know 'The Fault in our Stars' was banned from a middle school, and John Green had a response to that. So this could be books banned from schools, or something else. Just a suggestion! – YsabelGo9 years ago
There are lots of articles out there already on banned books -- maybe focus this one on current or recent books. I don't know that the internet needs another examination of why Huckleberry Finn was banned. – Monique9 years ago
One especially to consider is Alison Bechdel's graphic novel Fun Home that was given to college freshmen (at Duke I believe?), which many students declined to read, and even protested, because its of graphic depictions of lesbian sex. It's a complicated issue, considering there are even more liberal people who agreed that freshmen shouldn't be forced to read something of that nature. I, on the other hand, totally support the school's decision to use the book. That's just a more recent example in case you're looking for one! :) – southdakoda9 years ago
I've noticed that a lot of banned books are young adult novels. For example, Harry Potter, Thirteen Reasons Why, Perks of Being a Wallflower, Looking for Alaska, and so many more. I find it interesting that they make these books banned when each one has very important lesson and young people could benefit from reading them. – diehlsam9 years ago
Discuss what aspects of specific YA novels or YA series (e.g. The Hunger Games trilogy, the Harry Potter books, etc.) make these works interesting and engaging for adults despite the fact that they were written for a teenage audience.
Hello! I've done a bit of research on this myself most especially on the Hunger Games and Harry Potter, and have read a plethora of adult books. I can say quite surely that the interest in YA books for adults is that the books are different. A lot of those in the adult genre follow a script based on the genre and therefore they all eventually sound the same and are predictable. YA books are more unique because the authors have more freedom and are more creative and adults crave that in order to break up the monotony of real life. – cconte36129 years ago
^^Monotony of life is spot on. Books, like most media, are an escape. The core themes of YA fiction line up perfectly with the "drifting off day dreams" of adult life: Rebelling against a system, feeling of being a "chosen one" picked out of nowhere, self-importance, etc. Adults look at these stories in the scope of a fun dream reality, where as the teens and younger readers that the works are skewed towards read them as a potential future for themselves. – KJarboe9 years ago
In Vladimir Nabokov's novel, Humbert Humbert refers to Clare Quilty as his shadow, haunting him and Lolita as they travel across the United States. Quilty is also viewed by many readers as Humbert's doppelganger. Explore the relationship between Humbert and Quilty and the role of the literary doppelganger.
The word "shadow" describing Quilty could also mean that Quilty is the "bad" ephebophile to Humbert's "good" and not just as Humbert's doppleganger (at least in terms of the unreliable narration since Humbert would consider himself the "hero" of Lolita and Quilty as the real villain). – dsoumilas9 years ago
I wrote a paper on a similar topic back in high school, actually! About how Clare Quilty and H.H. are doppelgangers that ultimately unite in the end (a la "we rolled over us"). – txl9 years ago
Ignatius Reilly of the late Toole's A Confederacy of Dunces is one of the most mercilessly disgusting, crude protagonists in literature in his words and his public display of impolite bodily functions such as belching. The mention of his pyloric valve is a special motif, sometimes inconveniencing the protagonist with its pain.
How does Toole use Ignatius's digestive function and the function of the valve to convey how Ignatius preaches his blasphemous and pretentious ideas.
I think this can also be connected to other authors and works like The Marquis de Sade and Rabelais. Many of their characters use the same bodily functions in "public" for uses that have ranged from the political to the carnivalesque. – DClarke9 years ago
Each time I log into Tumblr, I see short clips of poetry written by people as young as thirteen all the way up to adulthood. There are gifsets of film adaptations of famous works, such as Pride and Prejudice, all over the website, with thousands of notes and opinions below them. People share the books they hated, the books that changed their lives, the books that have been favorites since childhood. Historical background is given on different stories and rhetorical strategies and writing styles, such as Shakespeare writing in iambic pentameter because it matches the heartbeat's rhythm. Tumblr has begun to become an epicenter of literary conversation and influence. What does this say about the digital/millenial generation, and the creation of art and passions?
I think this is interesting because of it bypasses the normal approach to literary discussion and criticism. Until now, literary criticism has been the sole domain of a particular class of respected college graduates. It will be important to explore in this article the old structure of literary discussion (based on the foundation of scholarly articles, books, and such) and compare/contrast it with the rise of tumblr as a forum for sharing ideas about literature. While I would avoid being judgmental about either the new or the old, discuss the advantages and disadvantages of both, and how they might be able to coincide for a more productive and inclusive literary community. – OddballGentleman9 years ago
The Tumblr culture is one that breaks barriers in culture today. This website allows one to be anonymous and to post what they really are feeling and to express their thoughts of controversial topics within judgement (most of the time) Tumblr, in my eyes, is definitely ground breaking. It allows the expression of individuality without the fear of caring essentially. I believe this says that this opens up the gates of getting more information about views on topics and sometimes merely entertainment. out there and that is a huge thing for our society to have. – caitlinndwyer9 years ago
We all know that Dracula is evil, Frankenstein's monster is a brute and the hidden gods of Lovecraft drive humanity insane but could we be misinterpreting this? Harker gets a posse together to brutally slay Dracula while he is helpless, Victor Frankenstein creates his monster and abandons him and Humanity has forgotten about the Lovecraftian gods in favour of newer kinder ones. Could it be that each of these stories (and many others) can be read in an alternate way such that the "monsters" are actually mistaken, misinterpreted and working from a "good" motivation? This can transcend the canon literature and even look at modern day monsters
"Beauty and the Beast" anyone? – smartstooge9 years ago
Hey there,
I don't think that we should create "monsters" like Frankenstein, or wipe them out without knowing whether or not the "monster" in question as actually a monster. A monster is something intrinsically evil...it works for evil, and doesn't repent and turn back to good. Many people would call Hitler a "monster", but the truth is, Hitler was a human, and that means he was fully capable of making moral decisions, and even loving every single person he had control over. "Monstership", I believe, is something that pertains to nature, not choice. You can't become a monster unless you ARE a monster.
I'm not sure how helpful this note was, but it's some food for thought! – Hedekira169 years ago
This is a great opportunity to talk about how subjective morality is. For example - if a vampire has to drink blood to survive, and do so, are they truly evil just because humans have decided it is an evil act to drink blood? Why are vampires in fiction considered 'good' if they drink animal blood instead of human blood, when it makes no difference to them because they are a different species anyway? It would be interesting to discuss humans imposing their moral system on other creatures. – Grace Maich9 years ago
Uh, I thought Frankenstein's monster was a victim? The author of the novel made his plight entirely sympathetic, and despite all his faults and flaws, Frankenstein's monster was pretty remorseful and set out to kill himself after his creator die. I'm also currently reading Dracula, so I'll get back to you on that, but from my understanding, Dracula really is just plain ol' evil. And from my understanding, Lovecraftian gods have a sort of bizarre morality, where our concepts of good/evil don't really... work with them. This isn't the first time this topic's been explored, but I welcome you to take a stab at it. – Helmet9 years ago
I think one of the issues in Frankenstein was also that of education. Or maybe the more accurate term to use is cultivation? When the creature was born, he was a blank slate. He had equal potential to be either a blessing or a curse to mankind--what settled it was the treatment he received. The creature himself says, "I am malicious because I am miserable." – chemis37 years ago
Analyze his short poems, specifically, The Red Wheelbarrow, A Sort of Song and This is Just to Say. Talk about its historical placement in modernism, but also, how we can understand his work living in a post-modern world? How can we continue to learn from such brevity?
Called both the most racist book of all time, and also a book that fights against racism, analyze Huckleberry Finn and its cultural implications. Is calling Twain a product of his time excusing his racism? Is Jim a complicated black character? Can the repeated use of the "n" word exclude this book from being a great piece of American literature?
Ah, I believe that when Huckleberry Finn was banned it was because of this very thing. I think analyzing Huckleberry Finn should be separate from analyzing Mark Twain. In any case...there are many ways to argue this. What is politically correct changes over time. That doesn't mean one is a racist produced and excused by the times. Also, Jim is portrayed as innocence, if I remember correctly. This would be a great article for someone to take on as a way of lightening up readers who see the "n" word once and refuse to read the book. Then again, maybe someone has an opposite opinion that they can back up with persuasive quotes from the book. BTW When you say "cultural implications" do you mean what it implies about "Mark Twain's" culture or what it implies about our present culture? – Candice Evenson9 years ago
