Locally, there has been a recent attempt to ban the book So Far from the Bamboo Grove. One of the reasons is because the "book is one-sided, representing Koreans as the wrongdoers when it was the Japanese who occupied Korea."
Now, I find this argument ridiculous. First of all, fiction books in general show one story and viewpoint--the narrator's. To fault the book for this is completely unjust. And even more so since this book blurs that line of fact and fiction (like I do in Year of the Dog, which is probably why this struck such a chord), as it is based on the author's personal experiences. Is one asking her to change her memories?
So, because the book only portrays one side of the story the book might be banned--therefore erasing that part of history for the students, as if it never existed. Doesn't it make much more sense to have the students read another book as well, one that tells the other side of the story? Or at least have a parent or an adult familiar with that time period to explain the intricacies of the other side?
This is similiar to how I feel about Little House on the Prairie where Ma "hates Indians." Of course that prejudice is repugnant, but to edit those lines out erases the tension that was really there. To ignore or pretend it didn't exist is worse. It's important to let kids read it, and then discuss with them why Ma felt the way she did and how ignorant it was.
In my opinion, instead spending our time banning books, we should use it to encourage responsible reading. What do you think?