From: Christina McTighe <christina.mctighe_at_gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 15:33:11 -0400

This is a really interesting discussion.

I used to work as a bookseller, and one of my favorite books to sell was TH E HUNGER GAMES. Very rarely did someone come in and, no matter what they thought they were looking for, I'd manage to put this book into their hands (“Looking for a baby shower gift? Here, read this during the silly games portion of things.”).

Conversations often came about with a parent looking for a book for a 3rd-5th grader, who likes adventure, and who always reads above grade level (they always, always do, you know). I’d mention HUNGER GAMES in some case s, depending on the age of the child in question, but also mention that it’s fairly violent and involves children killing other children, etc. “It’s something you might want to read with them,” I’d say. But the first and only thing that these parents would ask is, “Is there any sex in it? No? Oh, okay. Sally and Tommy are just fine with violence. That doesn’t bother th em at all.” (Though what I think parents really mean is that the violence doesn’t bother THEM, but that the sex does. I doubt their children would mind reading about sex and romance very much.)

Which is just the exact opposite of what you would want, isn’t it? You wo uld think that a natural, and beautiful (under the right circumstances) act would be not only celebrated within a healthy, safe environment like a book , but encouraged when compared with the awful, inhumane, and unnatural acts o f violence that so many parents are comfortable with their children facing in a very visceral way in the pages of a book.

I wonder if this sort of strange, twisted set of values exists in places without Puritanical roots and the Second Amendment.

I don’t agree that certain books/play acts/etc don’t glamorize violence . What, I think, this sort of environment (guns good, sex bad) encourages is a normalization of violence against our fellow creatures, and a prohibition o f something natural, something that everyone experiences (meaning puberty, sex, or even their own nakedness).

As a writer, I often find myself wondering about violence, conflict, climax , and characterization. The only character that I can think of who “defeats ” her enemy through love, rather than violence, is Meg Murray, when she loves Charles Wallace our of IT’s clutches. And, I think Harry Potter counts in this, as his “final battle” with Voldemort is resolved through a disarm ing, rather than death or maiming.

And, as a person and a reader, I often wonder why it is that certain acts o f violence—Narnian wars, Lord of the Rings battles, the triumphs of Alanna over her enemies—make me swell with inspiration, pride, and positive feeling. Granted, sometimes I think fantasy violence is different than “real” violence—people very rarely die from magical offensive spells, but they do die from guns and wars and genocide.

I don’t think there’s a real answer to any of the questions that I ask myself, and if there is, then it’s far too complex for me to understand here. But I do think that if we want to promote and involve kids and YAs vi a their interests, then that’s great. But we should also be looking at what those interests are, and how they got that way.

I also think there’s an interesting discussion to be had on the nuances o f these hypothetical reading groups. Does a Books on Battles group have to be about warfare? Can it be about peaceful resistance, civil disobedience, and alternatives to killing and death? Does a Playboy discussion have to be about porn, or can it be about healthy sexuality, dismantling rape culture, and seeing our fellow humans and prospective partners as equals deserving o f respect and dignity?

Wow. I am such a hippie. Christina

Christina McTighe christina.mctighe_at_gmail.com 440-328-5194
Received on Thu 14 Oct 2010 03:33:11 PM CDT