Can A Book Be Bad For You?

Great topic for debate at the NYT Book Review. This is a concept that is pretty alive politically on the right, with people like David Horowitz and others listing the most dangerous books (and professors!) of all time. On that list is always Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States," a book that had a huge influence on me. Would I subscribe to every notion put forth in it? Maybe I did for a while at the time I first read it more than two decades ago. But certainly not for many, many years. But one thing I'll never forget is his message that no work of history is ever objective, with the author's values being strongly expressed through what is omitted. That's a notion I would think conservatives could endorse. And the thing is, Zinn was totally upfront that his book was biased--on the side of "the people" in his view, a dubious idea, sure, but one he broadcast loudly. It wasn't a stealth message. For liberals, the books of Ayn Rand probably hold a similar place (though she's usually pegged as immature rather than dangerous), with the idea being that her message is horrible for the social fabric. Maybe, but like Zinn's work, she represented her point of view clearly and without apology. I definitely enjoyed reading her even if I'm not a libertarian believer, and I remember debates among friends about her work. Dangerous? That's the essence of healthy discourse.