Cupid Bow Mouth

Young Adult Fiction’s Online Commissars

An interesting look at the impact of social media and the ever shrinking bridge between author and audience. I’m curious as to why publications are pulled or retracted in the face of online censure (it seems very much part of the current cultural zeitgeist in which public apologies are de rigeur no matter the severity of the offense, intention of the offender, or the distance between the offense and the current day) especially considering that all books are not written for all people. I am very much reminded of the Goodreads ratings and reviews and how for as many positive reviews there are negative ones. I find it always disturbing when people opt not to read a book based on a negative, subjective review. Such divisiveness in literary trend really is par for the course and shouldn’t resolve itself into censorship. Per the article, the book wasn’t actually read in its entirety and that, also, is deeply problematic.

To the articles failing, the insistence that this is a “left-leaning” habit assigns blame of a wider behavior to a particular political movement. The underlying issue of censorship overall predicated on determining what is deemed appropriate to the masses is the larger concern that impacts a multitude of perspectives and authors writing about a multitude of subjects. I wish the article had moved beyond the specifics of this particular novel and touched more on the general habit because that is the location of alot of impetus that lands books on the Banned Books List.

Take a look, there are points for consideration. As always, I recommend staying out of the comments.

I was asked what felt like a combo question: 1 - why did Emma Watson need to make this speech, and 2 - what was the purpose of her making the speech? In answer: it's not about redefining the word feminism or reclaiming the word from negative stereotypes. In fact, she admits to having no real solution to the growing disdain (and it's kind of news to me) for the word feminist. Instead, Watson's speech is about incorporating the idea of gender equality (perhaps simplistically focused on integrating social/emotional equality for men) into a discussion that has been primarily about the social, political, and economic equality of women. I still disagree that the speech is a recalibration of the meaning or image of what feminism is. Rather, she seeks to offer an alternate, explicitly inclusive entry point for men into the discussion of women's rights by encouraging them to consider and eradicate biases that exist for BOTH genders. The idea is that improve one situation and the other will, by natural extension, also improve. Shifting the focus from feminism, which is just about women, to gender equality, which is about BOTH genders, is an act meant to reduce the us versus them stereotype that some people have about feminism. The 'it's not my problem' syndrome. It also sidesteps what she initially presents as the PR image that feminists are facing. Which, again, surprises me to some degree. But then again, at more then 10 years younger than me, she was also surprised so I'm wondering what that demographic of naysayers looks like.


Emma Watson HeForShe Speech at the United Nations | UN Women 2014