Home » Posts tagged "censorship" (Page 2)

Musings: “We Have Always Been At War With Eastasia” : Future-Proofing The News

The Monster Kid tells me he is writing a dystopian alternate history, beginning in 2012, where there is perpetual war. “You know, like in the book where we have always been at war with Eastasia but then they change the news.”

In case you aren’t familiar with it, this is a reference to George Orwell’s 1984, in which the main character works in the “Ministry of Truth,” destroying or rewriting past news that doesn’t reflect the current reality the government wants people to buy into (in this case, an ongoing war with Eurasia ends and a new one with Eastasia begins, and history has to be rewritten to erase the war with Eurasia). Creepy, but in a fictional way, right?

Reality is so much worse. In M.T. Anderson’s YA biography of composer Dmitri Shostakovich, Symphony for the City of the Dead: Dmitri Shostakovich and the Siege of Leningrad, Anderson has to return to the reader again and again, to explain that there is no good way to untangle the contradictions in the stories about Shostakovich’s life, even the ones he told himself, because of the contortions the truth had to go through to be acceptable to the Stalinist regime and prevent him from suffering a truly horrific ending. Reading this, I realized that 1984 is a pale shadow of the reality of repression and brutality under the Soviet regime and its effects on the arts, literature, and the press, especially under Stalin (and that doesn’t even begin to cover the horrors of the siege of Leningrad). I can’t recommend this book highly enough– it’s an outstanding, if horrific, book for both older teens and adults.

In The Infernal Library, Daniel Kalder asserts that dictators have not only repressed the press and the arts, in some places they even managed to completely erase history. Many of the little provinces and countries that were drawn in to the U.S.S.R. at the beginning of the 20th century had a limited number of literate people, and when the U.S.S.R. dissolved, the president of Turkmenistan completely invented a history and religion for his country, complete with his own cult of personality, and with no press and few additional books available for comparison (I don’t recommend this one for purchase, but the chapters on dictator literature from some of the lesser-known dictators are fascinating, so see if your library has it. Did you know Saddam Hussein wrote romance novels?)

So how can we keep this erasure and rewriting of history from happening, especially in our era of “fake news”? Honestly, it’s pretty hard to do. History usually gets written by the winners, and, just like in 1984, it’s not that difficult to destroy and rewrite the version you want, or to make it impossible to report on anything that could make you look bad. In Future-Proofing the News: Preserving the First Draft of History, Kathleen Hansen and Nora Paul report that even when nobody is deliberately trying to prevent the news from being accurately reported, time and environmental conditions can destroy it. Many of the formats news has been recorded were ephemeral or are now obsolete. Newspapers and magnetic tapes get brittle, hyperlinks break, devices used to record and play back break down. And there is such a quantity of news that many places are unable to store it or make it accessible. Just as a concerted effort needs to be made to repress the press, concerted efforts need to be made to save the news of the past for the present and future. If you are a historian, journalist, archivist, librarian, or otherwise interested citizen, this is worth reading.

We can’t guarantee that primary sources will always be accurate in their reporting. Both in the past and present there have been a multiplicity of sources and points of view, although I’d say that’s truer today than ever before. But sometimes there is only fear shaping the reported facts, as was the case under Stalin, or there is nothing there at all, as in Turkmenistan, and that is terrifying. The free press is not an enemy: it is essential to keeping civic discourse, the arts and literature, and democracy, alive. When you vote tomorrow, keep that in mind.

And please, do vote. Regardless of what you think, your vote matters.

Posted on November 6, 2018 by Kirsten, Reply

Musings: Revisiting Stephen King’s Rage

I wrote about Rage five years ago, just a few months before the Sandy Hook school shooting. Shortly after the shooting took place, King released a Kindle single titled Guns that spelled out his thoughts on gun control (he is a gun owner, but supports restrictions) and was very accurate in describing the way the media, politicians, and the public perceive mass shootings (He also mentioned handgun violence in urban areas, although it wasn’t the focus of his essay), and the blame that settles on the culture of violence. The aftermath of the Parkland shooting has followed a much different pattern, but in 2012 there weren’t as many teenagers on social media, news didn’t travel as fast, and parents were the ones who took initiative. Many things are different now, but much of what he wrote is still relevant.

Much of his essay connects to his feelings about his novel Rage, which he wrote a first draft of when he was still a teenager himself, and which was published under a pseudonym in 1977. Rage is about a student who shoots and kills his teacher and then holds the class hostage, and in the 1980s and 1990s, four incidents involving four different boys led to them acting out scenarios from Rage. Two of them fatally shot and killed multiple people. King asked that it be pulled from publication– it is the only novel of his to have gone out of print. Of course we have the Internet now so you probably can track down a copy if you really want it.

My son brought it up last night.

I thought maybe I had spoken about it around him in the past, since I’ve written about it, but I was wrong. Some kid on the bus told him about it. He said it was easy to get a copy of it and asked if my son would like to read it. Can I tell you how disheartening it is that King withdrew the book from publication and now this book is not only easy to get ahold of, but middle school kids are recommending it to each other? The Monster Kid knows where to draw the line as far as what he knows he can handle, and he said no, but even as a freedom-loving First Amendment supporter, I don’t know what I would do if he brought it home now.

At any rate, here is a link to the original post, written shortly before the Sandy Hook school shooting. And I do recommend checking out the Kindle single, Guns, that he wrote shortly afterwards. Any profits go to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

Posted on March 29, 2018 by Kirsten, Reply

Musings: The Same Old Arguments About H.P. Lovecraft

H.P. Lovecraft was a racist.

It’s not an argument we are going to have here. He was a racist, and it’s clear as it can be from his writing that he was racist, misogynistic, and anti-Semitic.

I often hear apologists say “He wasn’t any worse than anyone else at the time.” That’s a terrible argument. Other people being racists at the same time doesn’t excuse Lovecraft– it just shows that an appalling number of people were racist.

I’ve actually seen someone compare him to Abraham Lincoln (I’m totally willing to say that Lincoln was not an angel, and he certainly held racist beliefs. But that’s one of the most bizarre comparisons I’ve ever come across). Lincoln’s racism isn’t an excuse for anyone else’s racist beliefs, either.

Also, can we please get past the idea that people who object to Lovecraft’s racism are destroying literature? Or that any literature belongs to any one person? Lovecraftian fiction is more popular than it’s ever been, and his racism isn’t stopping a lot of people from reading and enjoying it, or even writing it. And authors and publishers who address the problematic nature of Lovecraft’s work are producing some amazing work. Victor Lavalle’s The Ballad of Black Tom, a response to The Horror at Red Hook, received rave reviews. Silvia Moreno-Garcia at Innsmouth Free Press, published and co-edited She Walks in Shadows, an award-winning anthology of Lovecraftian fiction.

I’m not a fan of Lovecraft at all, but I don’t think Lovecraft’s work should be banned, or shoved under the table. Just because he wrote about shadowy creatures doesn’t mean he and his work should be hidden. He existed, and regardless of what you, or I, or anyone else, think of him, he made tremendous contributions to horror literature, and his mythos, at least, has solidly embedded itself in mainstream culture. As individuals, we can each decide whether his problematic attitudes toward race, women, and Jews are enough to keep us from reading his work or even loving it. But they shouldn’t be forced on anyone.

But this back-and-forth on “is Lovecraft a racist” is taking the focus away from some really brilliant writers who have already recognized that he is problematic, and are facing that head-on. Let’s see how far-reaching the diversity and creativity of today’s writers of Lovecraftian fiction can take us as we acknowledge his racist past.

Posted on September 3, 2017 by Kirsten, Reply