Response to Levithan

The first thing I noted about this article was that, among the criticism of “Boy Meets Boy” is that it’s considered too utopic. Unlike some authors who write about LGBT characters, Levithan doesn’t choose to focus on “agonizing over being closeted or coming out.” Instead, a lot of his characters are already out and are accepted by their families and friends. These kinds of narratives are just as, if not more, important than the closeted or coming out narratives because they humanize LGBT characters. They show readers that these characters are just normal people with concerns and issues outside of their sexuality. They show LGBT characters that they can be loved and accepted for who they are and that they’re allowed and encouraged to be comofortable with themselves and happy with their lives. Levithan’s books show that LGBT people can also be athletes and that they don’t have to fit a certain mold just because of their sexuality. The fact that “Boy Meets Boy” features more LGBT characters than non-LGBT characters is phenomenal and reflects how revolutionary it is to feature this underrepresented population.

So many books are banned or challenged for containing LGBT content. Many parents feel that these books force their beliefs on their children when, in fact, all the majority of them do is humanize LGBT people, which I don’t think should strike anyone as offensive. If anything, it’s these parents forcing their beliefs on their children and not allowing them to make up their own minds on the issue. Every underrepresented population deserves this kind of opportunity, to be depicted in a way that humanizes them to other people and to themselves.

David Levithan’s Response

David Levithan’s thoughts about queer YA fiction was an interesting article to read about this type of genre for children’s literature. I feel that by understanding his story I am able to see the importance of spreading the news about this type of fiction. Although, his book titles are straight forward they send a message to his audience and other readers to want to find out more about his books. I understand that queer kids need more authors to want to tell their story as well. I am open-minded to explore Levithan’s books to have a deeper understanding of this type of genre for children’s literature.

Censorship – Captain Underpants

maxresdefault

by Dav Pilkey

 

The banned book I chose for my censorship paper is the Captain Underpants Series by Dav Pilkey. This series is a long-lived debate amongst educators and parents for its toilet humor and disdainful attitude.  Captain Underpants has been my favorite book since the second grade. I was not aware of the severity that educators and parents had on regarding to the content of the book. I too can relate that one reason why it is my favorite because of the underlying message of potty training “toilet humor”.  This quote from Captain Underpants and the Preposterous Plight of the Purple Potty People states “It’s been said that adults spend the first two years of their children’s lives trying to make them walk and talk, and the next sixteen years trying to get them to sit down and shut up.” This quote represents the difference in the humor of  adults and young children that is found within the series.

The book relies on two main characters: George and Harold. George likes to write and Harold likes to draw. With their capabilities of being creative, this is when Captain Underpants the superhero is born. One main reason for banning the series is for the insensitivity and chiefly being unsuited for specific age groups to read. This series also advocate anti-bully themes for young readers to acknowledge. As a future educator and experiencing both sides of the spectrum, reading is fundamental. If a book or comic book encourages children to read, why not support the positivity it possesses.

David Levithan Article

What I found most interesting about this article is when Levithan discusses how he is upfront with his titles and covers of his books. On the cover of Two Boys Kissing, it openly depicts two boys kissing. I think that this needs to happen more often. For one, the title of the book is going against the norm of what you usually see in LGBT literature. It tells you who and what the book is mainly focusing on.

 

I also notice how most of his books include a LGBT character. In Nick & Norah’s Infinite Playlist, the main characters bandmates were gay. More and more books are appearing like this. It does seem like books that focus on these type of characters have a more sad tone. Levithans other book Boy Meets Boy is quite the opposite. The story is more joyful and uplifting.

 

The nature of narrative

I think Levithan is spot-on, especially with this statement: “Because, at the most basic level, what LGBT people are being asked (absurdly) is to prove that we are as much human beings as anyone else. We know this is true. And slowly but surely, other people are realizing it’s true. By getting to know us. By talking to us. By hearing or reading our stories.” And a good story is worth hundreds of straightforward attempts to change someone’s mind by facts and arguments.

When we read nonfiction, we tend to read critically, evaluating what we’re told according to what we already believe. But when we read fiction, we can (if it’s well-told) immerse ourselves in the story and empathize with the characters: we care what happens to these people, and we understand some of what they’re thinking and feeling. We can’t help seeing them as people, just as human as we are.

There’s another point he (as well as the article writer) made which I think is very important: “he went on to explain the progression of queer YA fiction throughout the past decades as going from ‘death, then death of your dog — dogs would die when you were making out with somebody in the 70s… — and then there was misery.'” A pretty significant proportion (maybe even most?) of LGBT+ lit, especially YA lit, right now is coming out stories and tragedies. (Or both.) There’s value in those stories, but the spread of plots really needs to be expanded.

LGBT historical fiction, mysteries, action-adventure stories, fantasy, science fiction, cheesy romantic comedies, epic quest stories… Gay spaceship captains zooming between planets, lesbian detectives falling in love while untangling thrilling murder mysteries, bisexual knights going on continent-spanning quests to save the world, asexual pirates crossing oceans full of mythical dangers, trans* royals and rebels duking it out over the fate of kingdoms, aromantic engineers solving problems and building communities on supposedly uninhabitable planets and moons!

The thing about fiction is that it is full of possibilities: you can never run out of stories to tell, and readers need to see characters like them–or unlike them–in more than just literary realism settings. And it’s hardly fair to restrict time travel, space travel, and fantastic worlds of every kind to straight people.

Perks of Being a Wallflower

Ironically, Nick and I seem to be doing the same novel, The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky. I chose to write about this novel because it had a heavy influence on me as a reader when I first read this as a teen. Many of the things that the characters went through were things that I could relate with, and I felt that Chbosky did a phenomenal job of creating those characters and relaying their experiences. What made me particularly interested in writing on this for the censorship paper was that it was banned for its homosexual content. This book was first published in 1999, a time when the gay rights movement was beginning to receive mainstream acknowledgement. We can see that as the gay rights movement progresses, more and more people want to push back against the “gay agenda” and prevent books/films/media like this from receiving exposure, particularly exposure to children. For this reason, I want to focus on how the gay rights movement inadvertently caused more push back against young adult novels like Perks to be banned in schools and libraries.

Diverse Books and Censorship: Please Offer Your Commentary

This excerpt from an article on David Levithan and his work captures a key struggle occurring in regard to the censorship of books for young adults featuring LGBT characters, themes, and situations:

‘Levithan talks about similar negative reactions to Boy Meets Boy in the tenth anniversary edition, saying, “we have to be vigilant about preemptive challenges. That is to say – we know to fight for the freedom to read when a book is pulled from the shelf, but we also have to fight for the freedom to read when someone refuses to put the book on the shelf in the first place.” Levithan sees the acceptance he writes becoming reality. “Why? Because, at the most basic level, what LGBT people are being asked (absurdly) is to prove that we are as much human beings as anyone else. We know this is true. And slowly but surely, other people are realizing it’s true. By getting to know us. By talking to us. By hearing or reading our stories.”‘

Read the full story here: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/06/17/1307392/-LGBT-Literature-David-Levithan

For your quiz assignment, please offer your comments on this issue by Monday, Nov. 16 at 12:00pm (so we can discuss further in class then).

Censorship Paper

The book I’m choosing to focus on is The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky. I’m picking this book because I’ve read it before and was surprised to learn that it’s been banned by some schools in the United States. Perks of Being a Wallflower contains some adult material like drug usage, sex, suicidal thoughts, among other things but it’s all handled subtlety and carefully. The novel focuses on Charlie, a freshmen whose having trouble navigating his new high school life while trying to move past the deaths of his aunt and a close friend. Charlie later befriends a group of seniors, led by a pair of step-siblings that take him under his wing as he begins to experience and enjoy his life as he never had before. The book has been banned since it’s been viewed as a negative influence on teens that are still impressionable during these times but it’s what essentially makes Chbosky’s novel such a special work. He’s not writing about them instead choosing to write for them. We know, are friends with, and used to be (or maybe we still are) these characters. I knew because of this, it would make a great choice for my censorship paper.

Where The Wild Things Are

The banned or challenged children’s book I chose is Where the Wild Things Are by Maurice Sendak. This book was banned because people considered aspects of the book witchcraft and supernatural. The story is about a young boy named Max. After dressing in his wolf costume, he causes problems around his household. He is sent to bed without his supper. Max’s bedroom turns into a jungle environment. He ends up sailing to an island inhabited by malicious beasts known as the “Wild Things.” After intimidating the creatures, Max is hailed as the king of the Wild Things. This book has been challenged since it became published in 1963 up until now. I figured that it was a great choice for my censorship paper since it’s extremely influential in children’s literature.

Censorship Paper (Extra Credit)

51K58jv0SEL._SY371_BO1,204,203,200_

And Tango Makes Three is very interesting to me because it is introduced to children at an early age and is a very much a banned book. I also did not think about the book is targeted towards young children, so I decided to change to a popular book called The House on Mango Street. The book was written by a Latino American, and it was about a little girl named Esperanza. It outlines the hardships of growing up Mexican in America and trying to hide her race to fit and conform to what the world sees as “perfect.” She idealizes the “American Dream,” and living on Mango Street was not what she envisioned. Esperanza also noticed how hard women have it living on Mango Street. There is violence and hardship throughout the book, but it ends on a good note in the end. Esperanza realized she would never be able to leave the women behind and she decides to stay.  51KEr5saI2L._AA160_