Book/series: In Cold Blood
Author: Truman Capote
Banned for: Sex, violence, profanity. Also, bloody murder. And, upon researching themes from the book (and, uh, reading the book), "Homoerotic desire is just below the surface of the relationship between Dick and Perry, between Perry and Willie-Jay, and, more implicitly, in the meta-textual relationship of Truman Capote to his two subjects."
Lessons Taught: People aren't what they seem, hard work pays off (usually) and screw it, this is a murder mystery, who needs lessons?
Rating: Eight out of ten stars.
I took Advanced Journalism this year at school, and in our second semester, this was required reading. Why? Because this isn't an average murder mystery by the beloved creator of Breakfast at Tiffany's. This is what Capote called "the nonfiction novel," this is truth, and it's written- that makes it a form of journalism. While we read it, we discussed the differences between nonfiction writing and journalism, and also the journalistic thoughts put into the piece- interviews, research, etc. My mom was shocked I was reading such a book, as she herself hand't read it until long past my age, and was a little bit shocked at how well I handled it. I guess kids these days are more grown up. Anyways, it is a somewhat bloody novel- at some points. Looking at Capote's masterpiece, the banning is somewhat understandable, but personally, I think it's just disrespectful to the people in this book (they're not even characters, they're people) to ban this. More on that in an Anne Frank defense.

In Cold Blood by Truman Capote tells the story of Alvin Dewey, a detective, and Perry Smith and Dick Hickhock, two murderers with "homoerotic desire" below the surface of their relationship. Perry and Dick murdered the Clutters, a well-respected family in a small Kansas town. Obviously, the scene where the daughter's best friend discovers the bodies is pretty gruesome, but for the most part, the novel isn't actually that bloody, not until the end. I would say the real horror lies in the psyches of the murderers, especially Perry, and other criminals that come into play. At one point, Dick runs over a dog, just because he can. At another point, Perry and Dick give two people a ride and plan on killing them and taking any money they have, but eventually decide against it. This isn't like most mysteries, as it doesn't build up to the who/how revelation. Rather, it leads up to how/why/what. Why did Dick and Perry kill these people? How, other than a gun, did they accomplish this? What happened in the Clutter house? And, most of all, what could provoke two people to murder a family they didn't even know in cold blood?

This is a hard one to argue with, as the reasons for it being banned aren't necessarily false, they're just stupid reasons. I can't really remember much sex from the book but hey, book sex. It's usually vaguely worded. According to a review of (one of) the movie adaption(s), there is a scene with a prostitute. Well, I can't really argue with that, but banning sex is honestly kind of a random move. Are you scared your children will learn what sex is at an early age when they wander into the adult section and say "hey, I just read the back of this book about murder, and since all children love nonfiction, I'll read it!" Or are you afraid by reading about sex, they're want to have sex? Then I guess your schools won't have sex ed, huh? And forget about giving them "the talk," better that they don't know. Ever.

Violence. Um. Yes, there's violence. Most of it doesn't fully come in till the end of the book, when Dick and Perry stand trial, and when they're (spoilers) sent to death row. There, the bloody pasts of all the other inmates are described, and every single one of them is hung even (spoilers) Dick and Perry. But this is what the real world is like. Death row and murder are, unfortunately, a thing. And, after doing some research, the state that banned In Cold Blood actually has the death penalty. Well, okay. But as long as you're arguing against violence, please take Tom and Jerry off the air? Also, Youtube.

Profanity. People swear. I guess no one in Georgia can watch or read a bunch of things with the YA stamp.

As I mentioned previously, the real terror in this novel is the minds of the criminals. Capote did his research with this novel, finding letters from parents, really anything he could use, and the result were two frightening villains, Dick and Perry. Personally, Perry was the worst, to me. Why? Because you identified with them. But it wasn't like saying "I feel for you Darth Vader," it was like they were your friends. Capote introduced them and didn't suggest they might be the killers until after we knew them, so we already found them likable. Then, the book goes "also, these people might be murderers" and builds up to "haha, they're killers" but you already think they're cool. It's hard to believe that these people might be cold-blooded (ha!) murderers. Then, they got put on trial, and honestly, reading scenes like that make you go "shoot, I don't know you at all"  and that's actually a big deal in the real world. Just because someone is likable doesn't mean they're a good person. Lots of stories usually set up villains as  jerks. Slippery jerks, funny jerks, ice cold jerks, but jerks nonetheless. That's helpful, because you feel comfortable hating the villain. And in this novel, you don't want to hate them, not until the end. And even then, you still feel sorry for them. The reason I find Perry "the worst" is because the whole novel, he seems like a good guy. He has a sad backstory, he's fun, he protects young women from rape (okay, at one point, Dick does get hate-able), and it even seems like he might be innocent of the crime. He even tells Dick he thinks there's something wrong with them, as they've killed a family- he knows what he's doing is bad.

In his statement, he claims to he killed his father, shot Herbert and Kenyon Clutter, and after some time, amends previous statements to say he also shot Bonnie and Nancy Clutter.

Chilling. But an important lesson for the real world. Not all the villains are cloaks and spells.

Now, a lighter topic of conversation. Here's what I really want to talk about! The "homoerotic desire"!!!!!! While reading the book, there were some moments I thought "um, do Dick and Perry have a thing?" and there is, I guess, some suggestion between Perry and his friend, Willie-Jay. But the real "suggestion" with our little boy Perry isn't with another book character, oh no. It's with Capote himself.

Movies like Capote played up this "friendship", showing us that it might have run deeper not with sex and kissing, but with conversation, and the way they treated each other. And, I swear to God, at least half of the scenes with Perry are dedicated to his eyes.

While this wasn't so much a defense as a literary review, I'll wrap this up properly. In Cold Blood might not be for young kids, but it's a good read for those mature enough to handle it. The characters are very real (not just because they, you know, are) and that makes the themes and ideas in the books plausible and compelling. I don't think it deserves to be banned, maybe just put on a high shelf. If you can reach it, you can read it.

Should In Cold Blood be banned? No.