Banned Books Week

[MaxKaladin]

Why are they called "banned" books if libraries willfully stock them and flagrantly boast about their defiance of said "ban"? Doesn't this completely undermine the point of banning them, instead serving to simply call attention to them and cause people to read them who would otherwise not read them, just as the BoEF has undoubtedly attracted a great deal more attention that it otherwise would have?

Clearly, libraries still stock them, so why are they called "banned"? I think this is all some sort of giant marketing hoopla.

I was told by a librarian in my group that the list is not a list of "Banned" books, but a list of those most often challenged. In other words, those books that people try to ban the most.

 

[Krieg]

But 'tis passing strange that Where's Waldo? would end up upon such a listing.

No doubt because Waldo is clearly aligned with diabolical forces.

 

[jeffsforehead]

Most of those books have to deal with either (1) sex, (2) people who aren't white, Christian, or American, (3) "raising a fist in some sort of protest" or (4) Dealing with the fact that life is going to suck when you're a teenager.

Screw people who try and ban books. Especially TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD. And Catcher In The Rye. Wow, teenagers will discover that life sucks, but it will get better. Such a poisonous concept. This topic gets me aggravated, sorry.

 

[Barendd Nobeard]

I've read several books on this list (and should probably read several more), but I must now humiliate myself in public and admit that the one I read most recently was....

Are You There, God? It’s Me, Margaret by Judy Blume. Just typical reading material for every middle-aged male, I'm sure.....

 

[Macbeth]

Arrh, This list be like a listing of me favorite books, anybody who can find issue with To Kill a Mockingbird doesn't deserve to be let within 100 ft. of any writing implement or any written material.

 

[Camarath]

For myself, I think banning literature is wrong. In a democratic society, the free flow of ideas aids politics, the arts, and sciences. While some books are NOT appropriate for all ages, I believe adults can make their own decisions. Sadly, there are still those who believe that they alone should determine what others can read, think, or do.

Intresting you should point out that adults can make their own decisions because school childern most certainly can not. The schools choose what childern are allowed and required to read, do, and to some extent think. Who excatly should determine what material is appropriate for a certain age group of children? I don't really see how we can have any kind of standards at all with out some form of censorship. I personally did not enjoy or feel I benefit from the required school reading of To Kill a Mockingbird and would have rather it had been "banned" so I would have not had to endure the inane drivel I was subject to in association with that book.

 

[Aaron L]

School children can't make their own decisions? Wow. I hadn't realized that.

 

[Camarath]

School children can't make their own decisions? Wow. I hadn't realized that.

I agree my first statement was a bit too broad but in the context of required school reading they can't make their own decisions about what they read as adults can.

 

[William Ronald]

Intresting you should point out that adults can make their own decisions because school childern most certainly can not. The schools choose what childern are allowed and required to read, do, and to some extent think. Who excatly should determine what material is appropriate for a certain age group of children? I don't really see how we can have any kind of standards at all with out some form of censorship. I personally did not enjoy or feel I benefit from the required school reading of To Kill a Mockingbird and would have rather it had been "banned" so I would have not had to endure the inane drivel I was subject to in association with that book.

In general, most communities and cultures determine what material is appropriate and inappropriate for their children. This can change over time, and is a subject of debate. (Some people wish to go for community standards, others wish to have standards set by parents, and there is a great deal of debate over whose standards to use.) Often, parents and officials rely on the advice of others on what is age-appropriate for children. I expect many of these debates to continue for the foreseeable future. (I am trying to avoid politics on this thread, out of respect for the rules of these boards.)

My main complaint about how literature is taught in many classes is that interesting books can be made to seem as exciting as a grocery list. I actually enjoyed To Kill a Mockingbird, but I also enjoy a variety of other works. Sometimes a work is selected by a school board because it is deemed to be a classic, illustrative of a topic or historical period, or is considered influential. (Shakespeare's plays are studied in most American high schools because of the Bard of Avon's great influence on other writers.)

 

[Green Knight]

Big difference between not wanting certain books in elementary school libraries, and actual banning. Actual banning is when, by force of law, a book is made illegal (I.E. The possession and distribution of Harry Potter books is punishable by prosecution resulting in fines and/or jail time). A few of those I can see not wanting in the school library of my kids elementary school. Taking one of the most glaring examples...

Private Parts by Howard Stern

Should 8-year-olds have ready access to something like that? Now, public libraries, book stores, etc, are a whole different matter. Who cares about that? If you're old enough to walk in and sign up for a library card or go get the book on your own without needing your parents to give you a ride, then you're old enough to get it. But who argues against those kinds of outlets having whatever books they like? But frankly a couple of these shouldn't be sitting in the libraries of elementary schools, and in a few cases, in middle school.

There's a BIG difference between that and going up to the State Legislature, Congress, or whatever, and asking that the book actually be made illegal. Has ANYONE ever argued for that? I don't think I've heard it.

Now, it's ridiculous that some of these books are even on the list, as some of them are worthwhile reading to even elementary age children, or are utterly harmless, like "Where's Waldo". But a community should have a right to determine what it is that's readily available to children in public schools. And if their reasoning is stupid? Well, they have the right to raise their children as they see fit. So they should have the ability to affect what goes on in their childs school, since they can't physically be there and personally keep an eye on their children. When those children grow up, and they decide they want to read those books, then their not being in their elementary school library wouldn't stop them from reading them. Likewise, if you're a parent who wants his children to be exposed to books which aren't available at the local school library, that option's still open to you. But who wants to be the parent of the 7-year-old who comes home from school toting "The New Joy of Gay Sex" and then having to explain it to the kid? If you want to, fine. Go check it out at your local public library or buy it at a bookstore or online. Not like the book's illegal. But if a community decides that it doesn't want it sitting in the school library, then it shouldn't be there. Big difference between not wanting a specific book sitting in your elementary school aged kids school library, and not wanting the book to exist ANYWHERE, and working towards enacting laws which make the possession, sale, and distribution of said book illegal. The first is a parents right, the second is censorship.

As for a REAL case of banning books (I.E. Criminal prosecution which can be caused as a result of your owning a particular book), you'll find one if you just take a look north.