Counter Culture Comedy: Drugs

This was my final paper for my literature and psychology class, and was actually the best part of the class, which dealt very little with either topic in its title.

The use of drugs in our society has always been a controversial issue, and as such was bound to manifest in comedy as a way of relieving the tension. Drug comedy, while fairly late to enter the forum of comedy due to the controversy surrounding the issue, has evolved from its basic roots as drug use becomes more accepted in American society. Furthermore, the elements found within a drug comedy are not often found outside the genre, making them uniquely designed to affect the audience's opinion of drugs and the people who use them.
Most drug comedies portray the deviant drug user as the hero of the movie. These unlikely heroes often achieve their goals accidentally or without realizing it. The villains are almost always police or other law enforcement officials, or drug dealing criminals. When drug comedies first became popular, all the characters involved were very basic and stereotypical. Now that the use of drugs has become more socially accepted, these characters are better developed to be more representative of the whole drug culture rather than a few chosen stereotypes.
Perhaps the first, and certainly the most famous, drug comedies were the Cheech and Chong movies. These movies followed the two characters in their quest to smoke marijuana, avoid the police, pick up women, and play music, the goals of the majority of the drug culture in the late 70s and early 80s. Much of the comedy of the Cheech and Chong movies comes from the many stupid things they do while they are high. Even though they act foolish and are often completely unaware of their surroundings, Cheech and Chong end up being the heroes of their movies usually accidentally. Often times they do not understand or notice the events which allow them to become the heroes, but take it as good luck or coincidence.
One of the keys to the popularity of the Cheech and Chong characters is their representation of members of society who would be considered deviant and the heroes. Cheech, a Mexican, and Chong, a hippie, represented a large amount of American society who felt that they were unappreciated or undervalued simply because of their lifestyles. Many people who were not involved in the drug culture of the 70s can also relate to Cheech and Chong, as they are just two guys who are trying to live their lives who become heroes without trying to seek glory or fame. Similar types of drug-using characters have appeared throughout the comedy world with slight alterations, but the classic Cheech and Chong models still exist.
One notable alteration of the Cheech and Chong drug-using heroes are the characters in Dave Chappelle's Half Baked. In this movie three typical stoners quit their jobs to sell weed in order to raise money to bail their friend out of jail. This movie is a much more relaxed comedy and abandons most of the extreme stereotypes of marijuana smokers to show the many ways in which the drug is used. This is one of the first movies which depicts drug users as a large variety of people who are functional within society, rather than a minority group of outcasts.
The character of “The Dude,” in The Big Lebowski completely alters the stereotypical deviant hero of the drug user. The Dude character is one of the few characters in the movie who is rational and trying to live a normal life. In his attempts to live comfortably, which involves drinking a good many white Russians and smoking joints, he finds that all the sober people keep involving him in their crazy plans, ruining his life and doing massive damage to his car. As he says to Maude “Fortunately, I'm adhering to a pretty strict drug regiment to keep my mind limber.” (Big Big Lebowski) This takes the typical screw-up drug user and makes him the hero not because his screw-ups happen to go the right way, but because he maintains his reason in situations in which everyone else seems to go crazy.
As the use of drugs, especially marijuana, becomes more and more popular among American citizens, so does comedy which revolves around this drug usage. One of the benefits of this is the portrayal of drug users in many ways, as opposed to the following the stereotypes which group all drug users together. This can be seen in Half Baked and The Big Lebowski, but can also be seen in many other comedic forums, including the internet. In 2009, COED Magazine published a humorous article entitled “The 24 Types of Pot Smokers,” which groups marijuana smokers based on various personality traits, giving a brief description of the advantages and disadvantages of each type. The list includes such types as number 10 The True Stoner:
“This easy-going, goofy bastard always starts his days off with a wake-and-bake courtesy of his bedside bowl, followed by as much additional weed smoking as possible. He’ll always have just enough weed on him to keep him going through the day. That is, unless he just re-upped his stash, in which case he’ll smoke most of his bag the first night.” (COED Magazine)

This article and similar comedy regarding the wide variety of marijuana smokers in the United States shows the drastic rise of popularity in drug culture and comedy since the 70s. When the Cheech and Chong movies came out there were very few stereotypes about drug users, most of which revolved around the idea that they were lazy and stupid. Now that marijuana is used by a large percentage of Americans it covers a wider demographic of people, and the availability of material for use in drug comedy has grown.
One of the most original depictions of drug users comes from Grandma's Boy, in which the main character smokes marijuana with the video game testers he works with. This group, which is generally stereotyped as “nerds,” rarely makes appearances in drug comedies due to the conflicting characteristics between them and stereotypical drug users. This unique twist on the drug using hero shows once again the rapidly increasing demographics of drug users in America. This movie alters both the stereotypes of “nerds” and “stoners” to create interesting and well-balanced characters.
The opposite of Grandma's Boy's well-balanced characters can be seen in Kevin Smith's classic drug comedy, Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back. This comedy follows Jay, the most stereotypical “stoner,” and his “'hetero-life-mate, Silent Bob,'” (Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back) a character who is silent save for a few brilliant lines in which he exposes his intelligence. Like many of Kevin Smith's other movies, this one is filled with non-stop humor from various genres including slapstick, childish jokes, dirty jokes, puns, celebrity jokes, and of course comedic drug references. In one scene Jay and Silent Bob arrive in Hollywood after hitch-hiking from New Jersey and discuss their jobs as marijuana dealers with local crack dealers. At one point Jay mentions that the drug dealers in New Jersey may soon have to go on strike if they do not start receiving medical benefits as part of the job. This scene is important because it shows drug dealers in the same light as other workers who are just trying to provide for themselves or their families.
One of the most recent popular drug movies produced in America, Pineapple Express takes a different approach than normal to drug comedy. This film, while seemingly an outrageous adventure of two unlucky marijuana smokers, can be interpreted as a satire of the entire question of the prohibition of marijuana. The movie opens with a scene in black and white in which the government is testing the effects of marijuana on the military. When the testee responds negatively to a question about his superior officer, the plant is deemed illegal. The rest of the movie is a ridiculous chain misfortune events in which the main characters must attempt to avoid criminals who get their money from selling large quantities of marijuana. As the main character, Dale Denton, says in one of the opening lines of the actual movie: “All this current system is doing is putting money in the hands of criminals, and it's making ordinary people like you and me deal with these criminals.” (Pineapple Express) When examined closely, the movie asks the audience why this process is considered sensible.
The satirical drug comedies are fewer and usually less popular than the typical drug comedy. One excellent recent satire was found in the animated TV show Sit Down Shut Up, in which high school teachers hire a pharmaceutical company to teach kids the dangers of drugs. This show compares pharmaceutical representatives to drug dealers in rival gangs because of the way they compete with one another for territory. It also show how these large companies use their massive resources to try to keep their consumers “brand loyal,” or buying solely from one distributor, so they can maximize their profits. The episode is meant to show the irony of keeping harmless drugs like marijuana illegal while we all use and depend on pharmaceutical drugs. Part of the satire thrown around in this episode questions the broadcast television rules made by the FCC that say that if drug use is discussed on television, negative consequences must be shown. This is a very direct way of comically questioning authority as a means of gaining psychological power over them.
The underlying principle of almost every comedic drug using character is his harmlessness. This allows the audience to sympathize with the main characters even though they are technically criminals, and automatically makes them wonder what is so wrong with recreational drug use. This particular brand of comedy gains its strength directly from defiance to authority, and authority figures represented in drug humor are often depicted as clueless or lazy. Drug related comedy allows tension to be released in a non-violent manner between those in power and the sub-cultures which disagree with them.
Anther important psychological element of drug comedies is the music played. Music is traditionally used in movies as a way of adding to the mood of the scene for the audience. In drug comedies music is always significant to the drug using characters and can be used to express a wide variety of their emotions, or simply to express the high regard for music which most drug users have. The Big Lebowski contains two scenes in which music and bizarre set designs are used to show The Dude's confusion and conflicting emotions. In Pineapple Express, music is used to add an uplifting feeling to scene in which the main characters temporarily forget their dilemma and have a good time smoking marijuana in the woods. In many movies such as Grandma's Boy, How High, and Half Baked, rap music is used during party scenes to convey the idea that everyone is enjoying themselves. The Cheech and Chong movies often included loud rock music during party scenes because rap was not yet as popular with the drug community.
The many elements which compose a drug related comedy are unique to this genre and each has its own psychological function. The overall psychological goal of a drug comedy is to make the audience sympathize with and better understand the drug community as a mostly harmless collection of individuals who are just trying to live their lives differently from mainstream society. Therefore comedians involved in the genre of drug comedy represent hope for all those involved in the drug community that one day they will not be persecuted for the ways they live their lives, but will instead be respected as productive members of society.

Works Cited
Grandma's Boy. Dir. Nicholaus Goossen. Perfs. Linda Cardellini, Allen Covert. Willshire 1, 2006.
Half Baked. Dir. Tamra Davis. Perfs. Dave Chappelle, Guillermo Díaz. Robert Simmons Productions, 1998.
How High. Dir. Jesse Dylan. Perfs. Method Man, Redman. Jersey Films, 2001.
Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back. Dir Kevin Smith. Perfs. Jason Mewes, Kevin Smith. Dimension Films, 2001.
“Math Lab.” Sit Down Shut Up. Cre. Mitchell Hurwitz. Perfs. Will Arnett, Jason Bateman, Kristin Chenoweth. Adelaide Productions, 2009.
Pineapple Express. Dir. David Gordon Green. Perfs. Seth Rogan, James Franco. Columbia Pictures, 2008.
COED Magazine. “The 24 Types of Pot Smokers.” Found at: http://coedmagazine.com/2009/05/18/the-24-types-of-pot-smokers/
The Big Lebowski. Dir. Joel Coen. Perfs. Jeff Bridges, John Goodman. Polygram Filmed Entertainment, 1998.

Hero of the Dull

My final British Literature essay which compares John Dryden's and Alexander Pope's use of mock epic and satire in "Mac Flecknoe" and "Dunciad."

John Dryden and Alexander Pope both use mock epic in their satires “Mac Flecknoe” and “Dunciad” to show the folly of the society in which they lived. Both writers satire the same elements of their society: it's “dullness” and lack of lack of regard for anything outside the immediate physical realm. Their contempt for the society in which they live manifests itself in these mock epics which portray characters striving to achieve dullness and destroy meaning.
The mock epic genre uses the literary devices of epics to praise characters who are unworthy of such devices, making them appear ridiculous by contrast. Both “Mac Flecknoe” and “Dunciad” describe the efforts of their characters to continue spreading their values of dullness and meaninglessness throughout the world. The efforts of these characters in achieving these ludicrous goals are described solemnly using very grandiose comparisons and language that is satirical because it is so out of place in such characters.
“Mac Flecknoe” tells the story of the Irish poet Flecknoe, who realizes his death is near and decrees Shadwell to be his successor as the King of Dullness. Rhymed couplets and triplets are used to describe, at length, why Shadwell is perfectly fit for the this position. In typical epics when a ruler dies he seeks a successor who bears the same qualities and will carry on his rule in the same way. Dryden mimics this in Flecknoe's appointing of Shadwell, “[Shadwell] alone my perfect image bears.” (line 15) Unlike typical epics, however, the traits that Flecknoe admires in Shadwell are anti-heroic traits including dullness, stupidity, witlessness, thoughtlessness, and corpulence. In doing this, Dryden makes Flecknoe's every praise of Shadwell ridicule.
Dryden mercilessly mocks Shadwell's use of language as tautology, saying that his works are essentially lengthy displays of vocabulary and word-play with no meaning at all behind them. Flecknoe takes note of this in the lines “The rest to some faint meaning make pretense, / But [Shadwell] never deviates into sense.” (lines 19-20) He then goes on to list various other out-of-style writers, himself included, as “types,” or prefigurings of Shadwell, “Thou last great prophet of tautology,” (line 30) in the same way that Moses was considered a prefiguring of Christ. Dryden makes Shadwell's inheritance to the throne of dullness seem like a long awaited plan that is finally coming to fruition, much like God's divine plan to send his son to redeem mankind.
Shadwell's coronation scene is described as drawing crowds of bad writers and poets from within a mile and a half of The Nursery that is to be his throne, rather than attracting kings and heroes from vast distances as is typical of true epics. The ceremony of his coronation requires him to swear an oath to his “father,” Flecknoe, “That he till death true dullness would maintain,” (line 115) unlike traditional kingly oaths of protecting one's subjects and upholding justice. Upon the completion of the coronation Flecknoe give a long speech in epic style, praising the new reign of dullness that Shadwell will bring to the world. This is concluded with a lengthy description of Shadwell's qualities which Flecknoe bears but Ben Johnson does not, arriving at the conclusion that Johnson's work, unlike Shadwell's, had minor merit and wit. This adds additional personal insult to Shadwell, who was the self-proclaimed successor of Johnson.
Pope, while disgusted with many of the same characteristics in his contemporaries as Dryden, makes his satirical point in a far less personal manner. “Dunciad,”much like “Mac Flecknoe,” uses mock epic to describe characters who act in the interest of dullness to destroy meaning and bring about an age of Chaos and darkness. The characters involved in this satire are many, but all strive to appease the Goddess of Dullness through repetition and lack of original thought.
Dullness, according to Pope, is born of Chaos and Night and is rightly depicted as having her head concealed by a cloud. In the fourth book, Pope describes the many enemies that she has defeated including Science, Wit, Logic, and Rhetoric. At the same time her allies, Sophistry, Billingsgate, false Morality, and Causistry assist her in carrying out the execution of these enemies so that none may challenge her reign. Unlike the endings of typical epics in which order is restored after evil is vanquished, “Dunciad” ends with the triumph of Dullness, ushering in the reign of Chaos.
In the section of “Dulcinea” entitled “The Carnation and the Butterfly,” Pope mocks even the science of his time, saying that it has no real meaning or connection to humanity but simply studies and collects that which is aesthetically pleasing. This scene depicts two amateur scientists who seek the judgment of Dullness to settle their feud, much like the biblical story of King Solomon. A gardener petitions Dullness to punish a butterfly collector for ruining his perfectly grown carnation. The butterfly collector's defense is that he paid no attention to the carnation when he destroyed it to capture the butterfly, “I meddle, Goddess! only in my sphere.” (line 432) Pope scorns this type of behavior as selfish and irresponsible, though Dullness, of course, praises both the “scientists,” for both have wasted their time in admiring the physical trivialities of the world rather than trying to discern any higher purpose. She further condemns those who would wonder about metaphysical or heavenly concepts, wishing man was made with better eyesight allowing him to study physical objects in better detail and therefore “See Nature in some partial narrow shape, / And let the Author of the whole escape.” (lines 455-456)
In the final section of “Dulcinea,” Dullness sends forth everyone who had come to witness her rising to power so that they may continue entertaining themselves rather than performing the duties of their positions. As she is about to decree more, she yawns and all of creation starts to fall asleep from overbearing dullness. As everything falls asleep, so too do the sciences disappear until only Night and Chaos are left with Dullness. Before the sciences vanish entirely however, they are greatly corrupted by Dullness, to the point where the most spiritual experiences are defined in terms of mathematics, and morality dies from this lack of higher purpose. With this final loss there is nothing left that can be said to be a part of humanity and Chaos is restored, extinguishing the light that was God's original creation so that all lies in “Universal Darkness.” (line 656)
Both Dryden and Pope are highly critical of their targets in their satires and both use the techniques of mock epic to ridicule their characters, who are clearly unbefitting of the high praise and lofty comparisons of the epic style. While they both disagreed with the same qualities in their contemporaries, and their satires are highly personal attacks on many of their colleagues, Dryden's is by far more personal. “Mac Flecknoe” expresses outright contempt for Dryden's former colleague, Thomas Shadwell while “Dunciad” expresses Pope's general disagreement with the society, education, politics, and religion of his time. Their criticism of their own society is abundantly clear in both cases, and their points are made while maintaining the wit which they mock their colleagues for not having.

Censorship: The Adversary of Integrity

Censorship has been an element of almost every society that has existed since the idea of free thought was first conceptualized. The language used by a community is a major factor in that community's social structure, and therefore the censorship of any form of media affects the ways in which the society develops. For as long as censorship has been involved in the development of cultures and communities, it has been a controversial issue.
In ancient times, censorship was used by those in power to control their societies by only allowing the general public access to certain information. Some of the most notable examples of this include the Catholic Church's repression of the astronomical discoveries of Copernicus and Galileo, which defied the Bible's representation of the the Universe. Not all censorship was intended to maliciously repress knowledge, however. In The Republic, Socrates encourages heavy censorship of art, music, and poetry in his theoretical Ideal State. The reason he gives for this is that these depictions of reality are inaccurate, and therefore inherently flawed. When an audience is subjected to these, they interpret them differently than they would the real objects they depict, and this can lead to a false view of reality (Plato, Book X). In this way, Socrates makes the greatest philosophical argument for censorship.
The problem with Socrates's view of censorship is that he bases it upon a society which has been very precisely structured to be a perfectly just aristocracy, and such a society has never existed. Rather, in democracies, like ancient Athens or modern America, each individual has the right to interpret reality in whatever way they choose, and is usually entitled to act in self-interest rather than the goals of the community (Plato, Book VIII). This is why one of the founding principles of the United States is that every citizen has the rights of freedom of speech, press, and peaceful assembly. Similar basic freedoms can be found in many of nations that proudly claim to uphold the values of individual rights and intellectual freedom. These simple rights have, and will forever continue to generate meaningful discourse and rational thought, which ultimately leads to the adaptation of social structures to better fulfill the needs of the population. Without them, societies resist natural change by replacing the value of individuality with that of conformity.
When those who have power in a society hold certain values, they fear a social change that could lead to the loss of their influence and the development of contrary ideals. In the communist country of China, all forms of media are heavily regulated and censored in order to “make sure content promotes and remains consistent with party doctrine,” (Zissis). According to the Chinese constitution, all citizens are granted the freedoms of speech and press, however they “must defend 'the security, honor, and interests of the motherland,'” (Zissis). These media controls are designed to uphold the values of those in power within China, giving them the power to quell any dissent that may be offered to their regime.
Similarly, though far less drastically, in America, different special-interest groups seek to impose media controls over the population to promote their own doctrines. Many extreme liberals and conservatives believe that some form of censorship is necessary in order to avoid offending people, but few can agree on what should be censored. While this censorship is certainly well-intentioned, it is not in the interest of the individuals in a society, but of certain groups with a particular set of values.
Religious groups tend to be very zealous regarding which values should be taught because theirs remain constant while the wants and needs of every society constantly change. Like the repression of the scientific discoveries of Galileo, certain Christian groups in America believe that evolution should not be taught in public schools despite the fact that there is no evidence which disproves this theory. Some “progressive” Christian groups feel that Intelligent Design, a theory who’s only support comes from a 2,000 year old work of fiction, should be taught alongside evolution in schools in the interest of “equality.” To add further insult to this repression of scientific knowledge, some Christian groups would like to control the availability of works of fiction which contain themes contrary to those found in their own fictional literature. Some of these themes include what Christians believe to be the Pagan influence of witchcraft, magic, and talking animals.
In America, the opposing side of this argument is equally vehement about the censorship of literature, though for different reasons. Rather than trying to protect our youth from “Pagan influence and immorality,” they are attempting to keep them from exposure to what they consider to be racist, sexist, or otherwise intolerant language and behavior. The irony of this, of course, lies in the fact that in censoring this material, they are sending the message that intolerance of certain material is acceptable so long as the material in question disagrees with the common beliefs held by society. This method very closely resembles the forced unity that is the goal of Communist China’s media controls. Some of the material that these groups consider offensive includes classic works of literature such as Mark Twain’s Huckleberry Finn and Maya Angelou’s I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings for racism, and Laura Ingals Wilder’s Little House on the Prairie for sexism. Anyone who is familiar with any of these works can immediately recognize the irony of censoring them for containing these themes. Both Twain and Angelou use the themes of racism to disprove the commonly accepted stereotypes of race that were held at the time, while the Little House series is designed to abolish sexist thought. Easily the worst among the examples of literature censorship is that of Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, which portrays censorship as the catalyst which leads to a dystopian society in which free thought no longer exists.
Many other classic literary works are under attack or already banned from schools for containing material that is considered racist or sexist, even though these themes are historically accurate representations of commonly held beliefs. Among these are Harper's To Kill A Mockingbird, J.D. Salinger's Catcher in the Rye, and even The Diary of Anne Frank. Some parents do not want these books being used in schools because they feel that exposure to these themes will teach their children bad habits such as intolerance for other ethnicites or religions. When these books are properly taught, the students should understand the injustice of prejudice, and the values of acceptance and rational thought.
Racism and sexism are not the only topics that many parents consider too controversial for their children to read. Edward B. Jenkinson's list of the 25 most common reasons for the banning of books includes many themes that do not relate to prejudice, but rather to free thought and non-conformity. The list includes:
“Children questioning authority of parents and other authority figures,... Works that do not champion the work ethic, Books that do not promote patriotism, Negative statements about parents, authority, US traditions, … Books promoting self-awareness, self-understanding, Books promoting critical thinking,” (Winkler 49).

Parents are growing increasingly more concerned about the ability of their children to make their own competent decisions, and so tell them not to question the authority figures. Questioning authority is a theme that appears in one form or another in the majority of literary works. The removal of these works from schools would leave children with very little ability to reason on their own, and would be significantly detrimental to their overall education.
In addition to questioning authority, racism, and sexism, some parents seek to ban books from middle and high schools for examples of situations that teenagers may face and should be knowledgeable about. The biggest “threats” these books contain are scenes dealing with sexual issues. This may include anything from safe-sex and homosexuality, to more complex issues such as teen-pregnancy and abortion. One such book that is highly unpopular among parents is Robert Cormier's The Chocolate War, which ranked number four on the American Library Association's ten most frequently challenged books of 2005 due to its sexual content and use of profanity. While parents tend to disprove of this kind of literature in schools, it is exactly the type of writing in which today's adolescents are interested. By banning books like these which actually capture the attention of adolescents, parents are slowly destroying the literature experience for future generations. Since this age group tends to find many classic works of literature boring, “There is more to be gained by gently luring them to these [Cormier's] books rather than trying to cram a lifetime's experience with reading into six years because 'it may be the only opportunity they have,'” (Redmond 92).
Writer Judy Blume also receives heavy criticism from parents for her books which are targeted mainly at middle school aged children. Her works often include real-world problems that children may be undergoing such as divorce or domestic abuse. These themes make her books highly popular among children because they “give the impression of being derived not from the recreation of closely observed individuals but from the fleshing out of general life processes derived from the statistics of contemporary psychology,” (Garber 56-57). In other words, her books are so popular among children because they are, as one avid 11-year-old reader describes them: “'about life the way it really is,'” (Garber 56). Most of her adolescent books contain endings in which the main characters, who had previously undergone stressful challenges, return to the course of their daily lives. Despite their optimism and uplifting morals, the books of Judy Blume, most noticeably Are You There God? It's Me, Margaret, are still being taken off school library shelves across America.
The Harry Potter series, another set of books that is incredibly popular among youth in America, is also objected to by many groups which feel that it is having a negative impact on children. The same Christian groups which protest the teaching of evolution as “only a theory,” would like to see the Harry Potter series removed from libraries because they feel it has a Pagan influence on children and promotes an interest in the occult. Author Judy Blume comments on this phenomenon in a New York Times editorial: “In my books, it's reality that's seen as corrupting. With Harry Potter, the perceived danger is fantasy.” (Blume 456) This comment illustrates the utter failure of trying to appease the population by censoring unfavorable material: everything is unfavorable to someone. Other than this the only thing any of these “controversial” books have in common is that their authors spent a great deal of time and effort in producing them so that the readers could be entertained and briefly perceive the world from a new perspective.
The overall goal of any form of censorship is to control media, and by extension control those influenced by the media by focusing their perception upon the goals of those in control. The majority of groups that seek to impose their own views on others through some form of censorship believe that this control is necessary because people are generally incapable of coexisting peacefully without it. Each time a form of media is censored, the ability of future generations to shape their own societies based on their needs is hindered. Whether the goal is to fight racism, sexism, wavering obedience to authority, smut, or religious doctrines, censorship in any form is immoral, and enemy of all intellectual freedom.

Works Cited
Blume, Judy. “Is Harry Potter Evil?” Exploring Language 11th Edition. Ed. Gary Goshgarion, Longman Press, 2007. 456-457. Print.
Garber, Stephen M. “Judy Blume: New Classicism for Kids.” The English Journal, Vol. 73, No. 4 (April 1984). Pages 56-59. Found at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/816587?seq=2&Search=yes&term=blume&term=judy&list=hide&searchUri=/action/doBasicSearch%3FQuery%3Djudy%2Bblume%26gw%3Djtx%26prq%3Djudy%2Bblumr%26Search%3DSearch%26hp%3D25%26wc%3Don&item=1&ttl=599&returnArticleService=showArticle&resultsServiceName=doBasicResultsFromArticle
Plato. The Republic. Ed. Andrea Tschemplik, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc, 2005. 420 pages. Print.
Redmond, Judith K. “Young Adult Literature: Is There Life After Judy Blume?” The English Journal, Vol. 71, No. 3 (March, 1982). Pages 92-94. Found at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/817046?seq=1&Search=yes&term=blume&term=judy&list=hide&searchUri=/action/doBasicSearch%3FQuery%3Djudy%2Bblume%26gw%3Djtx%26prq%3Djudy%2Bblumr%26Search%3DSearch%26hp%3D25%26wc%3Don&item=2&ttl=599&returnArticleService=showArticle&resultsServiceName=doBasicResultsFromArticle
Winkler, Lisa K. “Celebrate Democracy! Teach About Censorship.” The English Journal, Vol. 94, No. 5 (May, 2005). Pages 48-51. Found at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30047353? &Search=yes&term="Lisa+K.+Winkler"&list=hide&searchUri=/action/doBasicSearch %3FSearch%3DSearch%26Query%3Dau:%2522Lisa%2520K.%2520Winkler %2522&item=1&ttl=1&returnArticleService=showArticle
Zissis, Carin. “Media Censorship in China.” Council on Foreign Relations. Found at: http://www.cfr.org/publication/11515/#p2