Julianne Moore is dismayed. The actress, author of a children’s book, does not understand that her book has been retired from the 161 schools attended by children from military families. He never thought about seeing anything the same. In purity, the book has not been withdrawn … Nor prohibited: it is among the titles pending review by the Department of Defense, in compliance with two executive orders signed by Donald Trump and that have to do with gender ideology and racial indoctrination. It does not remain gravity to the matter, of course, but it does place the information in the place that corresponds to it.
And, call me Tiquismiquis, but the truth of the facts matters to me. We are not talking, then, censorship (still). What we would be talking about is a drive that has occurred throughout history and that is not new: the eagerness of the human being to silence the one who thinks differently and impose his vision of things. Already to Plato Homer’s poems seemed little edifying and his representation of frivolous and hedonistic gods seemed worrying. If I could, I would have censored it, I am sure.
And, since then, there has been no period of history in which no power, of the sign that was, resisted the temptation to silence the dissident. In fact, what surprises me is that Moore is surprised, as if it were the first time something like that happens. It does not seem to remember that, not so long ago, they retired from American schools titles such as ‘killing a nightingale’, by Harper Lee and ‘The adventures of Huckleberry Finn’ by Mark Twain.
There has been no period of history in which no power, of the sign that was, resisted the temptation to silence the dissident
And before these had already been others such as ‘The Great Gatsby’, by F. Scott Fitzgerald, ‘The grapes of anger’, by Steinbeck, or ‘The purple color’, by Alice Walker. I suppose it is because they retired in the name of diversity, equity and inclusion. And it is much easier to agree with totalitarian measures, or not even repair them, when the ideas in which they execute coincide with ours. The complicated thing is to oppose them always, in all cases.
Or, the same freedom of expression and creation that we claim for us, claim and defend it for everyone, and not only for those who think like us. Was Julianne Moore outraged when, in 2022 and in a Tennessee County, ‘Maus’ was banned, Art Spiegelman’s comic?
In the United Kingdom, it was intended to reissue the works of Roald Dhal to rewrite them without offensive terms. In Ontario specimens of Asterix and Tintin were destroyed for representing negative stereotypes. In Barcelona they retired from the library of some schools such as ‘Little Red Riding Hood’ or ‘Sleeping Beauty’ (among others 200) because the gender commissions of the centers concluded that they promoted sexist and discriminatory values.
Karla Sofía Gascón
The truth is that I am very sorry that a children’s book about a girl with too many freckles, firm Julianne Moore or Karla Sofía Gascón, is reviewed by any of the values you can transmit is uncomfortable for those who send at this time. But I feel nothing but I felt it when it happened with the works of Hergé, Spiegelman, Dhal or Twain. No more, nor less, than every time this has happened, regardless of the ideology of those who ruled then.
“I can’t stop asking what is so controversial,” said the actress, disgusted. Maybe that is not the question. Perhaps the question that should be asked, that we should all ask ourselves, is why the controversial should be censored. Is not precisely the contrast of ideas and the debate raised the best way to advance knowledge? And, in any case, that each one is freely selects their readings.
#Rebeca #Argudo #forbidden #book
