Abortion Rights to Assassinations. Can They All Be Blamed on a Book?

The Power Of Books.

You know I love books, but some are more influential (dangerous?) than others. Should we ever ban a book, is it better to keep it in the open and enable us to debate, or should we force it off the bookshelves.

As a white woman, outside the US, mother of a woman, grandmother of girls (and boy) I need to speak to a topic high on the media agenda right now.

Whilst this issue obviously isn’t unique to the US, it is the one that has pushed it to the fore in the current media storm.

Gilead, a fictional world?

Texas has highlighted the current terrifying Gilead* theme to politics. Without going into details, they have outlawed abortion after six weeks. A covid mask an alleged suppression of human rights, but removal of the right to abort, even in horrendous abuse situations, not. The irony of this alongside long-running arguments about women’s rights in e.g. middle eastern countries, whilst fundamental rights are being blatantly undermined in the US, is frustrating to the global audience.

*In The Handmaid’s Tale written in 1985 Margaret Atwood did as George Orwell did so brilliantly in his books, she highlighted a future we never imagined. I’d recommend the book first, then catch up on the TV adaptation. Both are terrifying and enthralling in equal measure.

I could talk about the very long history of abuse of power over women. Instead, I’ll refer you to Kamala Harris in 2018, when she asked this question…

“Can you think of any laws that give government the power to make decisions about the male body?”

This isn’t to argue about any rights to life, but to draw your attention to books. I love books. I truly believe they are the measure of society.

I’ll drop a reading list at the end of this post. Books you may wish to read about women and books in society.

Does a book give us the real reason behind the abortion laws?

This (not new) L A Times article mentions a book, The Birth Dearth, which may just show why it’s not about women, or saving lives.

Is the recent law change really about maintaining Western arm’s business, the old cold war, continuing dominance over developing countries or purely to secure or protect white supremacy? The fear of white societies for their race is not new, or limited to a book.

The brilliant Grayson Perry highlighted precisely this point in his recent TV show tour around the US.

Search ‘falling birth rates’ on You Tube for discussions over the years about this rationale. Russia, Italy and US amongst others get a mention in regards encouragement programmes for (white) women to have more babies.

Is the book to blame?

Should The Birth Dearth be available on bookstore shelves, or is it right that you can only currently find it on ‘illegal’ download sites? What about Hitler’s book, or Salman Rushdie’s?

Many years ago I read a fascinating article about assassins, sadly I can’t find a reference to it now. Commentators speak about killers reading The Catcher in The Rye by J D Salinger alleging it gave subliminal messages to justify their deadly missions. I’ve read it a few times, will read it again, but have yet to find the messages they suggest.

You can read the wiki page about this infamous book here.

The article argued each of the high-profile killers also had the bible at hand. No one can prove whether that is because they captured some in hotel rooms, with the free bible in the bedside cabinet, or even if they used either book as inspiration. So why has J D Salinger’s book become demonised and revered in equal measure?

Are books dangerous?

“Yes, books are dangerous. They should be dangerous, they contain ideas.”
Pete Hautman
https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/2762.Pete_Hautman#:~:text=%E2%80%9CYes%2C%20books%20are%20dangerous.,dangerous%20%2D%20they%20contain%20ideas.%E2%80%9D&text=%E2%80%9CWe%20connect%20through%20our%20dreams.

Who decides what we can, or can’t read?

Who decides how we interpret the contents. As adults, should we should give anyone the right to control or restrict our reading?

There has been much discussion lately about older outdated books being removed from infant and junior level schools. Many no longer reflect our multicultural world. The arguments to keep them have totally confused me. Times change, our bookcases should reflect that change.

Children should ‘see’ themselves in the books they read.

Our school literature should be accessible, relevant, and educational. We should positively encourage younger children to read. To make up stories that are fun. To absorb stories that reflect their lives, their aspirations, their dreams. They should educate them about the world, where they fit. Make them feel valued.

With my grandchildren, we make up stories almost every night. They usually involve dragons, dinosaurs, woods or boats, ourselves and adventures. I’m happy with that.

When they are teenagers, I look forward to deeper discussions and will be happy to share my eclectic and ever-growing book collection.

As they get older, we can tackle controversy and political arguments in depth.

I study 19^th Century literature. The racist and misogynist themes are shocking, not always obvious or expected, but unsurprising.

My studies were and are eye opening, but I feel they are lessons for older readers who have more societal awareness, knowledge of self and can distinguish between the arguments. When they can rightly debate the rights and wrongs, the perceptions and realities.

“Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so, too.”
— Voltaire
https://www.azquotes.com/author/15138-Voltaire/tag/censorship

I could consider many of the books in my study curriculum history books, with the additional benefit of being able to be read for enjoyment. The writing in them is often skilful and beautiful. Sometimes downright cryptic. Political agendas were cleverly, by necessity, hidden behind metaphor and symbolism.

Can we use a book as a defence for killing?

The major religious texts and various re-writes have given fanatics the excuse to do so for generations. Do books influence someone with tendencies to a specific action? Yes, of course.

However, don’t the same arguments we use for gaming apply? Millions of people play violent online games. Whilst they may influence youngster’s behaviours, they do not turn everyone into killers.

Can we ever hold a writer liable for the actions of its readers, right or wrong?

Should we ban books?

I’m torn. It’s a complicated argument, isn’t it?

High-profile writers, including Philip Pullman and JK Rowling, have seen their works removed from some bookshelves.

As with anything we ban, from sports like boxing to books, banning them forces them underground. They gain more illicit and non-regulated power and are subject to abuse and misuse.

“Banning books gives us silence when we need speech. It closes our ears when we need to listen. It makes us blind when we need sight.”
— Stephen Chbosky
https://www.theguardian.com/childrens-books-site/2015/aug/29/banned-books-quotes-dangerous-books

You can buy copies of many ‘banned’ books on illegal download sites should you choose to.

I wonder how many of the Texan legislators have The Birth Dearth on their bookshelves or hidden in e-readers.

I truly hope the mental and physical wellbeing of everyone, including women, our mothers, sisters and daughters, will become a global priority.

I am keen to stress that everyone has a voice, and should use it. You must write your book. Story should be told. Not just ‘his story’ but all story.

But where should we draw the line?