Any bookish person currently paying attention to the news knows that book bans have been on the rise in the United States. Public schools and public libraries tend to bear the brunt of these challenges, where “culture warriors” take their anxieties out on unsuspecting bibliophiles. While many of the most challenged books of the 90s were targeted due to scary or graphic content, when reading recent lists it’s clear that marginalized identities are most at risk. Through all of the discussion around this topic, I’ve noticed a specific piece of perspective that’s lacking in the overall puzzle. It’s not the only problem with banning books in schools, but overlook this angle at your peril.
“Degenerate” Art
In 1937, Hitler had been in power for 4 years, and was growing closer by the day to his goal of German cultural and political supremacy. As a former artist himself, and ruling at the helm of one of the superpowers of 19th century art, Hitler wanted to raise Germany’s cultural profile once again.
This is how “Entartete Kunst” or “Degenerate Art” was born. As a mediocre painter, Hitler thought he knew what was “good” art and what was “bad,” and to his mind, just about all modern art, and art by “lesser” races was bad. Hitler’s artistic sensibilities can be summed up as boring German artists and anything overly influenced by Greek and Roman classicism.
His government seized thousands of these so-called deviant works, and put together two parallel traveling exhibitions, starting in Munich. One, with the Nazi-approved art, and one with the “degenerate” art. I’ll give you three guesses which exhibit was more popular. Hint: it wasn’t the Aryan one.
Not only was the Degenerate Art exhibit massively popular, it also raised the profile of many of the artists featured in the exhibit. In the US in particular, the social currency of artists featured in the Degenerate Art exhibit skyrocketed. Though the Nazis did their best, hanging the artwork askew, labelling the rooms dismissively with names like, “the insanity room” (abstract works), all their effort only served to make the exhibits more enticing.
Even now, the art recovered from the exhibits holds more value because of its inclusion in the exhibit. In 2013, a black market art dealer died, revealing that his Munich apartment held more than 1,280 works featured in the exhibit worth over $1 billion. Yeah, that’s “billion” with a “B.”
History’s Never-ending Loop
We have always been this way. Even in countries where other media is banned wholesale, the people who live there know they’re missing something. You can ban materials, but you can’t ban curiosity. Admit it, reader, even the most boring among us want to know what’s behind doors number one, two, and three.
The truth about art is, as humans with different personalities, backgrounds, interests, and motivations, we will never ever be able to agree about what is good art and what is bad. Think of the executive who thought “Back to the Future” should be called, “Space Man from Pluto.” What about the art teacher who gave Charles Schulz an F? Or the fact that Van Gogh sold only 2 works in his lifetime? In September 2021, the New York Times wrote a piece on books they’d originally panned, but are now considered classics.
If you’re ever embarrassed by a first attempt, know that this was Virginia Woolf’s first review in the Times.
Many people much much smarter than I make very impassioned arguments about why Maus or The Bluest Eye or any number of books recently under fire deserve inclusion in schools. And you should listen to those people, because as I’ve said, they are much smarter than me. But Maus sold out on bookshop.org (not an affiliate link) as of this writing. By publicly and loudly banning these books, adults are only make kids in their districts want to read them more.
Conclusion
Look, there are books and works of art out there that actively hurt people. That actively promote oppression or violence, or view oppression and violence through rose-colored glasses. But many of the banned books come from the other side of that spectrum. Many banned works are told by the victims of violence and oppression, and recount their history in a vulnerable way. By censoring these works, we’re telling those authors and their fellow trauma-bearers that their experiences don’t matter. We’re also telling those who could read their works that they don’t matter. We’re mistaking empathy and human connection in the midst of pain for shame and blame.
Personally, I’d like to stay on the side of empathy and human connection. Even when it hurts.
