another list of banned books

[PennLady]

I know these come up from time to time, but a friend sent me this video list of ten books. None of it really surprises me, nor the reasons why. I do have to resist a *headdesk* when reading some of the reasons people wanted to ban kids' books, but even that doesn't surprise me.

10 banned books

 

[Handley_Page]

Head hangs in shame that some buffoon thinks He (oh, go on then, She) knows better than the rest of us.

In 1455 (give or take; I forget the exact date), Johannes Gensfleish zum Gutenberg showed 'moveable type' and printed several bibles. Sadly, he went bust, but the idea, thankfully caught on and in 30 or so years, the art of printing had made it most of the way into Italy and France.
Then the Church got to hear about it.
Then the subject to be printed got known about.
Then the church decided IT was the arbiter of what could be read and compiled the list of books to be Banned.

If some of that list wasn't so pathetic, it would be really funny.
[shakes head in amazement]

 

[lovecraft68]

I know these come up from time to time, but a friend sent me this video list of ten books. None of it really surprises me, nor the reasons why. I do have to resist a *headdesk* when reading some of the reasons people wanted to ban kids' books, but even that doesn't surprise me.

10 banned books

Read them all except The Bear Book and Grapes of Wrath.

As to Brave New World, seriously? This country is worried about negativity?

yeesh.

 

[R. Richard]

The only one that I can agree with is the dictionary. The author has an incredible vocabulary, but no sense of plot at all. The lack of plot could lead young authors in the wrong direction.

 

[ILmonamour]

It's very frustrating to see children's books banned, especially knowing how much work goes into writing and illustrating them. God forbid there be an imagination...and if there's a naked woman, blame it on learning anatomy. Isn't there another book called 'Where did I come from'? That was used to teach the understanding of sex for the young? That isn't banned.

 

[Stella_Omega]

nevermind, I have to watch the vid.

 

[nicecthulhu]

Fun list!
I had to read Animal Farm and Brave New World in high school. I could see keeping them away from people under the age of 16. However, I found Hamlet and Macbeth more troubling for my teenage mind.
And people worried about the dictionary?? The only people who actually really read the dictionary are kooks. Well...and writers. ...although, since I started writing I've come to realize the differences between the two are smaller than I once thought...or maybe that's just me.

If a school (school superintendent, school board, whatever) 'bans' a book, doesn't that just mean it's not available in those schools? Isn't it a little different from some wingnut demanding a book be banned by a society (or by a government banning a book)?
I don't have a problem with my daughter's school board banning Animal Farm or the Satanic Verses (from what I was told a lousy read) in the primary schools (i.e. KG to grade 6 or 8). I think banning them from bookstores, public libraries and high school libraries is wrong, though.
Were the school boards that banned books for high schools or primary grades?
It might seem like a stupid question, but...

 

[LettersFromTatyana]

Fun list!
I had to read Animal Farm and Brave New World in high school. I could see keeping them away from people under the age of 16.

I read Animal Farm in middle school at 12, and then again in high school at 17. I thought it was fun when I read it in middle school--I didn't quite "get it" the same way I did at 17. I think I turned out OK.

Had I picked it up at 8 or so, either (a) I wouldn't have been able to get through it because of reading comprehension issues, or (b) it would have bored me and I would have put it right back on the shelf.

You have to have a damn good reason for keeping books away from kids, imo.

 

[sun_sea_sky]

I had to smile at the Dictionary being banned. Well, who knows what radical concepts you might arrive at, if you got words from it, and put them in some sort of seditious order?

BTW I had a dictionary a while back, that, whilst it had "fuck" listed (so it was reasonably modern) it was treated slightly strangely.

The word "fuck" just happened to start a page, and with dictionaries the first and last word on the page are listed in bold type up at the top, to help you find the right page. But "fuck" wasn't listed at the top of the page, the next word along ("fucoid" or something) was.

Anyway, I don't know what this achieves. You don't pick up a dictionary and just read it for your amusement. If you already know the word "fuck" then the dictionary isn't telling you something you don't know (except the meaning, maybe). And if you don't know it, you won't look for it.

 

[PennLady]

Don't forget that in this list, not all of the bannings were by school systems. At least two were by Lebanon.

I don't approve of banning books. As a parent, I'm sure that I will exercise a little control over what my kids read. I figure if my kids want to try reading something that's "beyond" them for whatever reason, then they will either get bored or they'll ask questions.

And the dictionary is also lacking in character development.

 

[TxRad]

I had to smile at the Dictionary being banned. Well, who knows what radical concepts you might arrive at, if you got words from it, and put them in some sort of seditious order?

BTW I had a dictionary a while back, that, whilst it had "fuck" listed (so it was reasonably modern) it was treated slightly strangely.

The word "fuck" just happened to start a page, and with dictionaries the first and last word on the page are listed in bold type up at the top, to help you find the right page. But "fuck" wasn't listed at the top of the page, the next word along ("fucoid" or something) was.

Anyway, I don't know what this achieves. You don't pick up a dictionary and just read it for your amusement. If you already know the word "fuck" then the dictionary isn't telling you something you don't know (except the meaning, maybe). And if you don't know it, you won't look for it.

But every work of smut and filth is in the dictionary.

You just have to have the dirty mind to arrange everything in the right order.

 

[JustaSCOUNDREL]

If memory serves Boston was infamous for banning both books and films a bunch of years ago. As I remember being "Banned in Boston" was a sure fire way to have a best seller.

I always thought it was interesting one of the places we consider to be one of the cradles of freedom and democracy was banning books and films. I wonder what Thomas Paine would think of that.

Mike

 

[sun_sea_sky]

Think of the word "conscription".

You are going to be forced to fight for your freedom.

 

[Boxlicker101]

This was a small fraction of the books that have been banned by somebody or other. Some of the reasons are silly, like Alice. Some I can understand, although I disagree with banning them. Some have been banned by people with an agenda, such as Grapes of Wrath, Little Black Sambo (original title) or The Rabbits' Wedding. And, of course, some were considered pornography, such as Lady Chatterly's Lover and works by Henry Miller.


ETA: In case you're interested: http://childrensbookalmanac.com/2011/09/the-rabbits-wedding/

 

[annanova]

I had to smile at the Dictionary being banned. Well, who knows what radical concepts you might arrive at, if you got words from it, and put them in some sort of seditious order?
...

Anyway, I don't know what this achieves. You don't pick up a dictionary and just read it for your amusement. If you already know the word "fuck" then the dictionary isn't telling you something you don't know (except the meaning, maybe). And if you don't know it, you won't look for it.

*raises hand* Actually, I have. Of course, I was about three at the time, but my cousins and I were bored, so we sprawled out on the floor and the older of the two boys and I read the dictionary to the younger one.

Penn, my mother had a similar approach to the one you describe taking with your children. There was one book ever that she sat me down and suggested that it might be "inappropriate" for me. She didn't know that I'd already read it while on a school field trip.

 

[Saucyminx]

I was suprised there was no Judy Blume on the list--when she published, Are you There God, It's Me, Margaret she became a massive target to have her books banned by a lot of school systems in the US.

Back when I was a librarian, we used to celebrate Banned Books week with a big display in the front window of my branch. We would cover the whole front window with brown paper with peep holes cut out of it, and display a big selection of books that had been banned.

Banned books week 2012 starts Sept. 30th this year.

 

[R. Richard]

Think of the word "conscription".

You are going to be forced to fight for your freedom.

No, you are going to be forced to fight for what someone else sees as freedom.

 

[4glory6]

Ah so, more books for my reading list.

 

[Cruel2BKind]

I remember being confused as to why 'The giver' was at one point a banned book.

Then I realized that it had things like euthanasia of imperfect babies, criminals, and old people. Drugs that suppressed sexual urges, and other things.

Granted, the story was about a young boy singled out to hold all of the horrible and vibrant memories of a free world so that nobody else would remember them in a gray totalitarian state. But I just thought that it was a great book, and I wasn't disturbed by it when I read it. I was intrigued.

I have to read that again. Lois Lowry is a genius.

 

[TinyBeth]

I was lucky. The school system where I was tended to assign the books that were banned elsewhere. Even still there was a huge fight over "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings." It got bumped from the Freshmen to the Sophomore reading list over the rape scene, but didn't get banned outright once it came out that the people behind trying to get it banned were open and avowed racists who based their argument not on the violence but its "relevance to white culture." And no, I'm not in the Deep South. Ugh. Bigots will always be threatened by the written word and its power.

 

[nicecthulhu]

I read Animal Farm in middle school at 12, and then again in high school at 17. I thought it was fun when I read it in middle school--I didn't quite "get it" the same way I did at 17. I think I turned out OK.

Had I picked it up at 8 or so, either (a) I wouldn't have been able to get through it because of reading comprehension issues, or (b) it would have bored me and I would have put it right back on the shelf.

You have to have a damn good reason for keeping books away from kids, imo.

I'm not going to dispute you turned out OK, and despite reading Animal Farm and Brave New World (etc.) I think I turned out OK, as well. However, as a parent, I will keep some things from my kids until I decide they're old enough to handle it. It's censorship, but it's different than censorship against adults.
Different kids can handle different things at different ages. There are some limits, though. Whether it's violence or drug use or sex or swearing or whatever, there are inappropriate ages. I don't want H.P. Lovecraft in my daughter's school, but she's in primary school. If she interested in reading his stuff in several years and I (well, my wife and I) think she's old enough then I'll hand her my well-read copies and discuss the content with her (oh, lucky her...).
As for her school, if her board banned a book that I thought was okay for kids her age then I would contact the school board. Say they banned Harry Potter (witchcraft, Dumbledore is gay, etc.), I'd try to meet the local superintendent, or at least the principal, to discuss the matter. If they banned one of my stories I wouldn't argue.
There is always some degree of censorship in society, it's up to the people in a democracy to make sure it's done sanely.

 

[lovecraft68]

I'm not going to dispute you turned out OK, and despite reading Animal Farm and Brave New World (etc.) I think I turned out OK, as well. However, as a parent, I will keep some things from my kids until I decide they're old enough to handle it. It's censorship, but it's different than censorship against adults.
Different kids can handle different things at different ages. There are some limits, though. Whether it's violence or drug use or sex or swearing or whatever, there are inappropriate ages. I don't want H.P. Lovecraft in my daughter's school, but she's in primary school. If she interested in reading his stuff in several years and I (well, my wife and I) think she's old enough then I'll hand her my well-read copies and discuss the content with her (oh, lucky her...).
As for her school, if her board banned a book that I thought was okay for kids her age then I would contact the school board. Say they banned Harry Potter (witchcraft, Dumbledore is gay, etc.), I'd try to meet the local superintendent, or at least the principal, to discuss the matter. If they banned one of my stories I wouldn't argue.
There is always some degree of censorship in society, it's up to the people in a democracy to make sure it's done sanely.

You know what The problem with this list is? What are they saving people, especially kids from?

Okay, so they don't want them to read brave new world, then they go home, get on the pc and watch porn.

They go to the movies and watch Saw and Hostel. Video games have r- ratings now and someone is worried about what a book is going to make them do or think? At least when they're reading they're thinking.

Of course you realize its any form of thinking that is what they really want to ban in the first place.

And just what, mind you, is wrong with Lovecraft?

 

[Bramblethorn]

And just what, mind you, is wrong with Lovecraft?

This is what's wrong with Lovecraft:

http://www.hplovecraft.com/writings/texts/fiction/mc.asp

Don't get me wrong: I own most of his work, I've read it several times, and I am not bothered by children reading supernatural horror - if they're old enough to get past the prose style, they're old enough to go scaring themselves.

But the pervasive racism is really problematic. With a lot of old authors, I can tune out the racist/sexist/homophobic attitudes of their times and focus on the story they're telling; with HPL, I can't do that because the racism is an integral part of the story, the idea that some breeds of humans are innately corrupt and degenerate.

If I was lending my HPL to a kid, I would want to have a serious chat with them about Lovecraft's views on race.

 

[oggbashan]

Banning books, particularly if the ban is publicised, only increases the demand for the book.

If a librarian or a school think that a book is unsuitable, it would be better to remove it from the shelves or not stock it.

"Sorry, we haven't got ****" is better than "That book is banned".

I work as a book pricer in a local charity shop that raises money for a Children's Hospice. They are uncomfortable with some books that are adult erotica and some that sexualise children such as Lolita, but the only book they won't accept as a donation is the Koran.

Why? Because some people are very sensitive about how a copy of the Koran should be handled and stored. It is easier not to accept a copy which wouldn't sell anyway.

 

[Bramblethorn]

Banning books, particularly if the ban is publicised, only increases the demand for the book.

If a librarian or a school think that a book is unsuitable, it would be better to remove it from the shelves or not stock it.

AFAIK it's almost never the librarians or English teachers who want a book banned.