Most recent edit on 2005-11-19 22:15:50 by EschaTon
Additions:
Through much of history, many books and other literary works have met with supreme opposition. Works that today, we consider to be the backbone of literary genius. In history examples run from Aristophanes’ Lysistrata, all the way to Thomas Paine’s The Rights of Men. What effect does this have, seeing as censorship has plagued our history, on how free we truly perceive our nation?
[I think you should really consider in this final project is the different roles of censorship within a more open society like the US and a more closed society like the USSR. I would agree that in the US, censorship does seem to cause books to increase in desirability and popularity, but in more restrictive societies, it may have the opposite effects. Also, be very careful about making arguments in favor of censorship. You need to better define what you mean by "passive censorship" and what its role would be in the US.]
Deletions:
Through much of history, many books and other literary works have met with supreme opposition. Works that today, we consider to be the backbone of literary genius. In history examples run from Aristophanes’ Lysistrata, all the way to Thomas Paine’s The Rights of Men. What effect does this have, seeing as censorship has plagued our history, on how free we truly perceive our nation?
Edited on 2005-11-14 16:29:19 by HimEros
Additions:
Clark, Charles S. "School Censorship." The CQ Researcher Online 3.7 (1993). 14 November 2005 <http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre1993021900>∞. Document ID: cqresrre1993021900.
Wilson, John K. "Freedom of Repression;." Lexis Nexis. 1 Aug. 2005. 14 Nov. 2005 <http://web.lexis-nexis.com>∞.
Deletions:
Clark, Charles S. "School Censorship." The CQ Researcher Online 3.7 (1993). 14 November 2005 <http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre1993021900>∞. Document ID: cqresrre1993021900.
Edited on 2005-11-14 16:13:25 by HimEros
Additions:
Clark, Charles S. "School Censorship." The CQ Researcher Online 3.7 (1993). 14 November 2005 <http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre1993021900>∞. Document ID: cqresrre1993021900.
Michael, Simmons. "Case Threatens Freedom." The Daily Missipian. 2 Nov. 2005. 9 Nov. 2005 <http://www.thedmonline.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2005/11/02/4368b6c1646dc>∞.
Deletions:
Michael, Simmons. "Case Threatens Freedom." The Daily Missipian. 2 Nov. 2005. 9 Nov. 2005 <http://www.thedmonline.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2005/11/02/4368b6c1646dc>∞.
Edited on 2005-11-14 16:08:06 by HimEros
Additions:
WORKS CITED
Michael, Simmons. "Case Threatens Freedom." The Daily Missipian. 2 Nov. 2005. 9 Nov. 2005 <http://www.thedmonline.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2005/11/02/4368b6c1646dc>∞.
Edited on 2005-11-10 10:37:41 by HimEros
Additions:
Having made the argument for, and against censorship, I would have to choose sides. I would choose the side for censorship, and I would explore the ideas around the premise that this new form of passive censorship can help more people than it would hurt. Also, I would propose a new form of passive form of censorship, professors and academia reading these literary works, deciding whether they are factually sound, and then publishing their findings. This would allow citizens to make their own decisions, yet give them a solid factual sense about the work of literature before buying into it.
Deletions:
Having made the argument for, and against censorship, I would have to choose sides. I would choose the side against censorship, and explore the ideas around the premise that censorship helps more people than it hurts. Also, I would propose a passive form of censorship, professors and academia reading these literary works, and deciding whether they are factually sound, and then publishing their findings. This would allow citizens to make their own decisions, yet give them a solid factual sense about the work of literature before buying into it.
Oldest known version of this page was edited on 2005-11-06 16:54:18 by HimEros []
Page view:
Censorship
Through much of history, many books and other literary works have met with supreme opposition. Works that today, we consider to be the backbone of literary genius. In history examples run from Aristophanes’ Lysistrata, all the way to Thomas Paine’s The Rights of Men. What effect does this have, seeing as censorship has plagued our history, on how free we truly perceive our nation?
Having analyzed what effect this may or may not have had on history, I will show that censorship may have actually made select books more renowned then they would have been without censorship. In reality, without censorship, a few select works would have been nearly unknown. As a result, I would also like to explore the possibility that censorship, instead of working to stop the consumption of these books, actually enhanced it in the future. This idea of censorship actually being detrimental to its cause is actually quite radical, and I could not find any research on it.
In contrast, I will explore how censorship has been detrimental to many facets of progressive thinking. I will delve into how censorship keeps many different people ignorant. For instance, if the Catholic Church “disapproves” of a particular book, there are a large majority of its following that will not read that book. This is a substantial amount of people who, through the ages, have followed without question, simply based on faith.
Having made the argument for, and against censorship, I would have to choose sides. I would choose the side against censorship, and explore the ideas around the premise that censorship helps more people than it hurts. Also, I would propose a passive form of censorship, professors and academia reading these literary works, and deciding whether they are factually sound, and then publishing their findings. This would allow citizens to make their own decisions, yet give them a solid factual sense about the work of literature before buying into it.