Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird, a Pulitzer Prize-winning novel published in 1960, has become a staple in American literature and education. Despite its acclaimed status, the novel has also faced numerous challenges and bans since its release. The decision by a school board in Biloxi, Mississippi, to remove To Kill a Mockingbird from the eighth-grade curriculum is just one of the latest instances in a long history of attempts to censor this iconic book. This article delves into the multifaceted reasons behind these bans and explores the ongoing debate surrounding this American classic.
One of the earliest and most notable attempts to ban To Kill a Mockingbird occurred in Hanover County, Virginia, in 1966. The school board in this instance sought to remove the book from county schools, citing concerns over the novel’s theme of rape and labeling it as “immoral.” These initial objections set a precedent for many of the challenges that would follow in subsequent decades. The controversy in Hanover County, however, sparked public outcry, including a response from Harper Lee herself, who questioned the reading comprehension of the school board members in a letter to the Richmond News Leader. This early case highlights the immediate and often passionate reactions that attempts to ban To Kill a Mockingbird can elicit.
Harper Lee in a portrait reflecting her authorship of To Kill a Mockingbird and its lasting literary impact.
Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, challenges against To Kill a Mockingbird persisted. School boards and parents continued to raise concerns about the book’s content, labeling it as “filthy” or “trashy” and objecting to its use of racial slurs. These objections often focused on specific elements within the text, such as strong language, discussions of sexuality and rape, and particularly the frequent use of the n-word. James LaRue, director of the American Library Association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom, notes that these recurring challenges typically revolved around these specific content-related issues.
In more recent times, the reasons cited for banning To Kill a Mockingbird have become more nuanced, and in some cases, more ambiguous. The Biloxi School Board, for example, justified its decision by stating that the book “makes people uncomfortable.” This rationale, while vague, reflects a shift in the nature of the challenges. LaRue finds this argument particularly unconvincing, arguing that classic literature is inherently meant to challenge readers and provoke critical thinking. The idea that discomfort is grounds for censorship raises questions about the purpose of education and the role of literature in confronting difficult and sensitive topics.
Despite the various attempts to ban it, many educators and literary scholars argue strongly for the continued inclusion of To Kill a Mockingbird in school curriculums. They emphasize the book’s powerful message of racial tolerance and its ability to spark crucial discussions about justice, empathy, and prejudice among students. In a society grappling with issues of racial inequality and social injustice, To Kill a Mockingbird can serve as a valuable tool for fostering understanding and critical engagement with these complex themes. Furthermore, proponents argue that shielding students from challenging content ultimately does them a disservice, hindering their ability to grapple with the complexities of the real world.
However, alongside the defense of To Kill a Mockingbird as a tool for racial tolerance, there has been a growing movement to reassess its effectiveness and approach to discussing racism. Writer Kristian Wilson, among others, argues that while the novel should not be banned, its pedagogical use should be re-examined. A key critique centers on the novel’s narrative perspective, which is told through the eyes of a white narrator, Scout Finch. This perspective, critics argue, positions Atticus Finch, Scout’s father and the central figure in the narrative, as a “white savior.” This narrative trope, while seemingly well-intentioned, can inadvertently center white experiences and perspectives within discussions of racism, potentially marginalizing the voices and experiences of people of color.
Further complicating the legacy of Atticus Finch is the publication of Harper Lee’s second novel, Go Set a Watchman. This novel, written before To Kill a Mockingbird but published later, presents a more complex and arguably more flawed portrayal of Atticus. In Go Set a Watchman, an adult Scout confronts her aging father’s prejudiced views, including his sympathy for segregation. This depiction has led to a re-evaluation of Atticus’s character and the themes of To Kill a Mockingbird, prompting discussions about the limitations of viewing him solely as a heroic figure. Scholars have long pointed out that even within To Kill a Mockingbird, Atticus’s defense of Tom Robinson, the wrongly accused Black man, does not necessarily equate to a desire to dismantle the systemic structures of racial inequality.
In conclusion, the reasons behind the repeated attempts to ban To Kill a Mockingbird are varied and have evolved over time, ranging from concerns about language and mature themes to more contemporary critiques of its narrative perspective and portrayal of race. While the book remains a valuable piece of American literature that can foster important conversations about racial tolerance and justice, it is crucial to engage with it critically, acknowledging its limitations and complexities. Rather than banning the book, educators and readers should strive to approach To Kill a Mockingbird in a way that encourages nuanced discussions about race, perspective, and the ongoing struggle for equality, recognizing both its historical significance and the evolving conversations surrounding race and representation in literature.
