The debated-on matter of whether or not the stores should, take the authors who’d been, involved in immoral behaviors, off their shelves…off of the Front Page Sections, translated…
The libraries, the publishers in the U.S., and bookstores had always been, against the government’s checking what they’re doing, since 1982, the American Library Association would host a “banned book week” from the end of September to the beginning of October, this year, the date is from October first to the seventh, the theme is “Allow Us to Read Whatever We Want”, and they’d worked with the American libraries’ “Freedom to Read” program, gained wide popularity with the bookstores, the publishers. The goal of these activities, none other than to show, that despite how some groups, some people have a difference of opinion of what the public should have access to, due to political preferences, religious beliefs, to restrict what’s put out in print in the public libraries, the bookstores.
Back to Taiwan, this year, the #MeToo movement had, burned from the politics, to the entertainment industries, the scholastic, recently, there’d been the writers in print, who’d, been accused, the storm circles had, affected the book sales, the publishers, not only were the bookstores, that were in support of the movement, which had, taken the accused writers’ works off the shelves, there’s the, chill effects from the “recommended by the famous” too.
But, what’s different of the books and other realms: politics, entertainment industry, schools, is that the writer, should be examined through the moral or legal angles, but, the books should not get, deshelved, for instance, if the husband or the wife had wronged, the children should, NEVER, get the blames for what the parents had, done. The Chinese professor of Taiwan National University of Education, Chih stated, that on the character and work of the authors, actually, it’d been looked into in the ancient times, but, the quality of writing doesn’t equal the characters of the writers. A writer with a problematic character, doesn’t mean that the work is flawed. Hitler is considered one of the worst in history, but the bookstores would NOT take his “Mein Kampf” off the shelves, and, those who read this book, doesn’t mean that they are in support of Hitler; by the same token, those who’d read “The Golden Lotus”, aren’t those who are, addicted to sex.
In the earlier eras, there were the restrictions by the police on what the publishers are allow to put into print, the checks of the books, but, after the authoritarianism era of Chiang Kai-Shek, that’s all done away with. The writers, Lin and Wang, although both were caught in the sex scandals, but the libraries, the bookstores, would NOT, take their books off the shelves, and it’s up to the readers to decide, whether they want to purchase, or to check their books, out.
But, a couple of years ago, thee were the publishers that started, the “self-evaluation processes”, and changed the author, Tsao’s book “China Debated”, to change all the mentions of “Mainland China” into “Chinese”, to the point of how the mentioning of how “Columbus had found the New Worl”, changing into “Columbus had discovered New China”.
So, the publishers are, reminding the editors, to NOT carry any preferences in their political beliefs, and change the names used in Chinese. The publishers are fighting against government’s checks, and they should NOT evaluate what they print themselves either.
like this! From online
Same for the bookstores too, you can’t take someone’s books off the shelves, just because you hold the prejudices against the writers, even the X-rated books, you can only, label them as, “restrict contents”, to restrict the ages of the readers, and NOT take them off the shelves in the libraries.
The #MeToo movements, even IF the authors had been involved, their actions, are rarely, related to the contents of their, books, there’s, NO need to take their works off the shelves, this was, the biggest difference compared to the entertainment industries. To purchase or to not purchase the books, it’s the freedom, the choice, the rights of the, readers.
To start, this is, about, morality, I mean, WHO, would want to read the books of writers, who’d, preached about something righteous, but actually, does, exactly, the opposite? And, to appease the consumers, the stores may, take the works of these, immoral people, OFF the shelves, and that would be, against the freedom of the press. But, the bookstores are, a business, and its, considerations may be that if we put the books by those, writers who couldn’t behave right, then, we lose the, customers, which is why they may be more than likely to, take the volumes of these writers off the shelves.
But, this debate is on banning books, and, I believe, that books should NOT be banned, but they can be labeled as “restricted”, to help warn the readers, that what they’re picking up may have some, “adult content”, like the movie ratings. You wouldn’t BAN the theatres, because they showed the R or X-rated films, would you? Of course not.
Besides, these are, independently operating business, outside of the government’s, controls, and government should NOT dip its, filthy hands into this.
You must be logged in to post a comment.