Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure (Fanny Hill)

Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure, by John Cleland, better known as Fanny Hill, was published in two parts, in 1748 and 1749, respectively. And it hasn't been out of controversy since.

Now this is a book deserving of controversy. But not for the reasons that its detractors cry of.

I'm not denying that this is some steamy stuff. It contains many explicitly detailed tales of sexual intercourse. But not anything worse than you'd find in your average romance novel.

The real controversy contained in this book is far more insidious. Fanny, our protagonist, is a prostitute. A well-paid prostitute that only has sex with men she finds acceptable. But the really shocking item? The one that gets a lot of people riled up without them even realizing it? She enjoys it. Gasp! Fanny enjoys having sex. She even seeks it out for her own gratification. Burn her at the stake posthaste.

I don't particularly care for the other controversial aspect of this book; the era's misconception that women, once tempted, cannot stop themselves from corrupting otherwise pious, G-d fearing men. The idea that women are morally weaker than men was a position held by the Church for centuries by that time. That's why it's in the book. Condemning the book on that aspect is a waste of time; like being angry at Parisians for speaking French.

Yes, Fanny Hill does contain some fairly graphic scenes detailing Sado-Masochism, lesbian and gay sex, prostitution, and more gleefully enjoyed (by the characters) coitus than you can shake the Washington monument at; but you've got to read a lot of Chaucer, Bronte, and Dickens before it makes sense. The dirtiest word in the whole book is "erection" and no one's telling the Amish they can't write books about barn-raising.

Snow Falling On Cedars

The first book I ever specifically read because it was banned was Snow Falling on Cedars by David Guterson. In my senior year of high school, I read an article on the book being banned in high schools across the United States. The reason cited by the article was the usage of derogatory terms towards the Japanese people. I bought and read the book the following week.

This book is set in the atmosphere of World War II, on the Washington coast. The context of the era made the use of such language a necessity. The words were not placed for incitement, but rather the opposite. It shows the hardships of the Japanese people of this book. By their suffering, they are shown in a sympathetic light, as humans trying to live and work as Americans, which they believe themselves to be.

The purpose of banning this book is to renounce the use of derogatory terms towards the Japanese. Derogatory terms are used because people either fear or don't understand that which they abuse. Perhaps if more people read this book, that wouldn't be an issue.

Banned Books Week

In the last week of September, we celebrate Banned Books week. There are lists upon lists of books that have been banned from libraries or public schools by fearful, narrow-minded people who are afraid of being exposed to ideas that don't agree with their own.

Banned Books week is about censorship. Banned Books week is about choice. Banned Books week is about opening your mind.

The primary modes of celebration are fundraising for Banned Books, and of course, reading banned books. Have I said banned books enough in this post?

Read a banned book. Even if you don't like the book, you have a right to read it. A right no man can take away.

Banned Book week links:

American library Association

American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression

Amnesty International

The Forbidden Library