Banned Book Made Visible!

[3113]

From the L.A. Times:

ASHEBORO, N.C. — If a county could blush, Randolph County just might. The school board in this largely rural county, to the embarrassment of many residents, voted last week to ban Ralph Ellison's iconic novel of African American angst, "Invisible Man." In a 5-2 vote, the board barred the book from all school libraries in the county after the mother of an 11th-grader complained that the novel was "too much for teenagers."

But confronted by an angry backlash and concerns that the ban had shamed the county, the board backed down and scheduled a special meeting Wednesday.... The ban made national news, and the local newspaper was inundated with 168 reader comments, virtually all ridiculing the board's decision....Ray Criscoe, the paper's editor, says he hasn't published a letter in favor of the ban because he hasn't "received anything that remotely resembles an endorsement." He said he could not recall another issue that prompted as much reader response.

The board's timing was impeccable. This week is the American Library Assn.'s annual Banned Books Week...The book, published in 1952 and ranked number 19 on Modern Library's list of the 100 greatest novels of the 20th century, explores the effects of racism on both its perpetrators and its victims. The unnamed narrator notes, "I am invisible, understand, simply because people refuse to see me."

At the main county library here, where 23 people were on a waiting list to check out "Invisible Man," the ban was a prime topic....

School board Chairman Tommy McDonald, in a Sept. 16 meeting, pronounced the book "a hard read" before voting to ban it. Board member Gary Mason said of the novel, "I didn't find any literary value." ..."This novel is not so innocent; instead, this book is filthier, too much for teenagers," she [the complaining mother wrote] wrote. The book includes passages describing incest and rape. But several Courier-Tribune readers pointed out that the Bible contains vivid references to murder, rape, adultery and incest.

Incensed by the ban, Evan Smith Rakoff, a Randolph County native and associate Web editor for Poets & Writers magazine, and journalist Laura Miller persuaded the book's publisher to offer free copies to county high school students. Vintage Books, a division of Random House, is providing 100 copies of the book through the Books-A-Million store in Asheboro....

The Books-A-Million outlet here quickly sold its 10 copies of "Invisible Man" after the ban, and has a long waiting list for the book, said Cory Saxe, a store employee. The Randolph County Public Library has ordered four more copies, along with two e-book copies and an audio version, said Ross A. Holt, the library director. Holt said no one had complained about "Invisible Man" in his 30 years at the library.

 

[Cruel2BKind]

That was required reading for honors English in my school.

Too bad I wasn't in honors english.

I still want to read it someday, I've heard great things.

 

[PennLady]

This is a book I haven't, but will. One thing about Banned Books Week (BBW, hahaha) is that the various articles and lists of books put them back on a person's radar.

I just got back from the library, which had a small display of banned books in the YA section. There's something odd about the fact that both "To Kill a Mockingbird" and "Twilight" have been banned...

I was disgusted to read about that board's decision, btw. And you can't tell me that most 11th graders in this country haven't encountered stuff in their non-school reading that is worse than whatever may be in "The Invisible Man."

 

[PennLady]

Here's an article by Laura Miller at Salon.com, about making the free copies available.

http://www.salon.com/2013/09/25/americans_hate_book_banning/singleton/

 

[Handley_Page]

Quote:-
In a 5-2 vote, the board barred the book from all school libraries in the county after the mother of an 11th-grader complained that the novel was "too much for teenagers."
. . .

Ray Criscoe, the paper's editor, says he hasn't published a letter in favor of the ban because he hasn't "received anything that remotely resembles an endorsement."
He said he could not recall another issue that prompted as much reader response.

I have to express surprise that letter by the "compaining mother" did not get published, if only in abstract.

But there's nothing like a ban to increase sales and general awareness, is there?.
Over here, back in the day, it was 'the trial of Lady Chatterly'. That did wonders for sales of the book, even if it was badly printed in France and smuggled in.

 

[PennLady]

I have to express surprise that letter by the "compaining mother" did not get published, if only in abstract.

But there's nothing like a ban to increase sales and general awareness, is there?.
Over here, back in the day, it was 'the trial of Lady Chatterly'. That did wonders for sales of the book, even if it was badly printed in France and smuggled in.

This is about as much as I've found about the mother's letter, and it's from a Reuters article:

The widely publicized vote by the Randolph County Board of Education in central North Carolina came after a high school junior's mother complained that the sexual content in the book chosen for a summer reading program was "not so innocent" and "too much for teenagers."

This doesn't say how the complaint was made; if it was paper letter or phone call, there may not be anything to publish electronically.

And it was only *one person* that complained. Sheesh.

And I agree that there are few things that boost sales of just about any item more than any kind of ban.

 

[emap]

Sometimes it makes you wonder though, do people actually call for a ban of something because they truly think it is wrong, or because they want people to look at it and know about it.

I mean all through history whenever there is a book or phamplet that people talk about as being bad or whatever that means the whatever complained about and urged to ban is suddenly the hottest thing on the market. I mean why not ban the bible, it's the earliest known book of sex and violence.

Bram Stoker's Dracula was banned for a period in England over blatent overwhelming sexuality, and a couple other countries, it didn't sell that well before the bans and then after they couldn't make enough of the book. Anymore see someone reading that book and they will think well that person better get some counseling before they get an assault rifle and shoot at people.

Perhaps there should be a law, every book made is sold for six months, then banned for a year and then sold again. Banning will lose all appeal fast and maybe then people will stop minding what other people do in their own homes with closed doors.

 

[PennLady]

Sometimes it makes you wonder though, do people actually call for a ban of something because they truly think it is wrong, or because they want people to look at it and know about it.

I can't imagine most people calling for bans are that cunning, honestly. Seems when I read about these bans or requests for bans, they are coming from people who freak out at the very mention of the idea that people might have sex, or be of different races, etc.

I mean all through history whenever there is a book or phamplet that people talk about as being bad or whatever that means the whatever complained about and urged to ban is suddenly the hottest thing on the market. I mean why not ban the bible, it's the earliest known book of sex and violence.

Years ago during a Banned Books Week, I saw a list or two, and different versions of the Bible were on them. So, some Bibles have in fact been banned (I've been looking for a list or source, but can't find one. Sorry.)

Bram Stoker's Dracula was banned for a period in England over blatent overwhelming sexuality, and a couple other countries, it didn't sell that well before the bans and then after they couldn't make enough of the book. Anymore see someone reading that book and they will think well that person better get some counseling before they get an assault rifle and shoot at people.

I think most people would see someone reading that book and wonder what book it was and who is that Stoker guy.

Perhaps there should be a law, every book made is sold for six months, then banned for a year and then sold again. Banning will lose all appeal fast and maybe then people will stop minding what other people do in their own homes with closed doors.

I think this could have interesting marketing implications. Also, it's what Disney does already with many of its movies on DVD.

 

[TxRad]

Can't we just ban North Carolina and solve the whole problem and a lot more?

 

[3113]

I have to express surprise that letter by the "compaining mother" did not get published, if only in abstract.

Likely because it was written to the school board and not the newspaper--so only relevant parts of it would be quoted in articles. I.e. As it was not a letter to the newspaper they might not be allowed to publish it in its entirety and with mom's name like other letters. Her objections are, however mentioned in the article.

Sometimes it makes you wonder though, do people actually call for a ban of something because they truly think it is wrong, or because they want people to look at it and know about it.

Most school boards who ban books, from what I have seen, (1) haven't read them--they often just take the word of an outraged parent that it is "filthy" or "too much" and (2) when they do read it, don't get it.

In fact, when such boards make such headlines, it becomes pretty clear that they are either stupid, bigoted or have some religious/philosophical agenda (or a combo of those).

Which to me argues that no one should be allowed on a school board unless they have not only been a teacher themselves (and thus know what teachers deal with on a daily basis), but can pass tests showing that they understand current science, are up on history, and have not only read all literature being assigned, but can write at least a B+ essay on the most complex ones. Thus proving they can intelligently argue the literary merit of a novel should a question like this come up at a meeting

Otherwise, no serving on a school board.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

You may be giving teachers too much credit. I can and could converse learnedly on science, history, social sciences, good sentence structure and mathematics but despised the assigned literature so my I palmed that crap off on the teacher next door and taught her kids math. She didn't understand it anyway so the kids gained.

If someone had assigned me an essay on the core sixth grade literature, they'd have gotten a jeremiad in response.

 

[R. Richard]

Sometime back, there was a complaint by a Negro, about the book, "Little Black Sambo." A BOE meeting was called and people began shouting at each other. I finally got up and made myself heard, "Listen, you ignorant ass holes, 'Little Black Sambo' is about a Caucasian. There are Caucasian people in the South of India that are as black as any African, although the same people, in the North of India have light olive complexions."
Then, the same people were very unhappy, because I called them names. I asked, "Is it ignorant or ass holes that you object to?" I never got an answer, and I nearly got into a 'street fight.' (I still think that all the other people at the meeting were ignorant, ass holes.)

 

[JustaSCOUNDREL]

Sometimes bad reviews can boost sales just as banning the book can. Several months ago Naoko Smith posted one of her E books received a comment something like. This is the worst piece of pornographic trash I have ever read. Naoco said her sales went through the roof after that review was published.

Mike

 

[3113]

You may be giving teachers too much credit.

Well, no, not really. I'm not saying teachers should be able to do it all. I'm just saying that I think anyone on a school board SHOULD have had some time in an actual classroom if they're going to be making decisions about teachers and teaching. It seems that all sorts of decisions are made with no regard for the realities of teaching. So I'd want members of a school board to have some familiarity with that reality. They need not have been teachers for years on end, but they should have had some classroom time so it's not an abstract to them.

As for the rest--fine, so you wouldn't pass the essay test. Does this mean you would want to be on a school board deciding what literature should/should not be in the school library? Or could be assigned by a teacher to her high school students? I assume you'd be wise enough to either not be on such a committee or would abstain from voting on such questions.

None of these yahoos did that however. Once again, I say, they should be able to write a passable essay on a work of literature before they're allowed to decide if it's "too much" or hasn't any value for high school students. If they can't, and still want to be on the school board, then they should get advice from the English teacher in question before banning the book.

 

[PennLady]

Then again, there are teachers like this one:

http://www.salon.com/2013/09/25/uni...is_not_interested_in_teaching_books_by_women/

http://www.salon.com/2013/09/25/canadian_novelist_backpedals_on_sexism_charge_is_still_sexist/

To be fair, he isn't looking to ban anyone, but apparently if he doesn't really like something, he can't teach it. Like stories by women, or Chinese authors.

 

[TE999]

What annoys me about crap like this book banning incident is how lily-livered these school boards and administrators can be when confronted by one person complaining about something or another. Someone says BOO! and they run like scared rabbits. A kid wears the wrong t-shirt to school and they're sent home because it upset someone. A kid bites a Pop-Tart in shape of a gun and they're sent home because of 'Zero Tolerance'. Kids playing with Nerf guns in their own yard get ratted off and they get suspended from school because someone complained.

No wonder kids don't have respect for authority when said authority acts like they have no common sense and knee-jerk react to everything no matter how trivial.

 

[Handley_Page]

Likely because it was written to the school board and not the newspaper--so only relevant parts of it would be quoted in articles. I.e. As it was not a letter to the newspaper they might not be allowed to publish it in its entirety and with mom's name like other letters. Her objections are, however mentioned in the article.

And they didn't /couldn't ask the complainant Mother for a quote ?
[unless, of course, her name was withheld, I guess]

 

[desertslave]

We read Invisible Man in 8th or 9th grade. At the time I was vaguely amused since this was in a nearly all-white, private school class. It opened many eyes, which was a good thing. (Our school was predominantly white, but most other classes were a bit more diverse. Our single "non-white" student was Pakistani, and the daughter of the upper division algebra teacher.)

What always puzzles me about these attempts at thought-policing is that people are so afraid of having new ideas introduced and risking the undermining of their own principles. They never seem willing to consider that, if their own principles are strong enough, what could be the harm of entertaining different ideas. It's a decision dictated by the fear that they might actually be wrong.

 

[PennLady]

We read Invisible Man in 8th or 9th grade. At the time I was vaguely amused since this was in a nearly all-white, private school class. It opened many eyes, which was a good thing. (Our school was predominantly white, but most other classes were a bit more diverse. Our single "non-white" student was Pakistani, and the daughter of the upper division algebra teacher.)

What always puzzles me about these attempts at thought-policing is that people are so afraid of having new ideas introduced and risking the undermining of their own principles. They never seem willing to consider that, if their own principles are strong enough, what could be the harm of entertaining different ideas. It's a decision dictated by the fear that they might actually be wrong.

I had similar thoughts during the to-do over "The Last Temptation of Christ," which came out while I was in college. I kept thinking -- after churches advised their congregations not to see it -- that if they thought a movie (even one by Martin Scorsese) was going to topple my faith, then they were disrespecting my faith and intelligence, and also that maybe it meant they hadn't done their job of enhancing my faith properly. Bleah.

 

[3113]

And they didn't /couldn't ask the complainant Mother for a quote ?
[unless, of course, her name was withheld, I guess]

My guess is that once this became national news--and the school board was in a very negative spotlight--mom didn't want to be quoted. She wouldn't have been able to keep her name from appearing with the quite. So, I think the school board has kept her name out of it and the mom has happily kept quiet to avoid having the cameras trained on her and her kid as they are on the school board.

I mean, you're blaming the media for not giving mom a fair shake, but my guess was that mom isn't brave enough to spout her objections now that this has become a national brouhaha and an embarrassment to the town. It one thing to complain, in private, to a local school board, it's another to have to stand up for your views in the face of all this.

 

[Handley_Page]

My guess is that once this became national news--and the school board was in a very negative spotlight--mom didn't want to be quoted. She wouldn't have been able to keep her name from appearing with the quite. So, I think the school board has kept her name out of it and the mom has happily kept quiet to avoid having the cameras trained on her and her kid as they are on the school board.

I mean, you're blaming the media for not giving mom a fair shake, but my guess was that mom isn't brave enough to spout her objections now that this has become a national brouhaha and an embarrassment to the town. It one thing to complain, in private, to a local school board, it's another to have to stand up for your views in the face of all this.

Very true, I fear.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Tends to indicate that waxing all self-righteous can lead to trouble. People need to have the courage of their convictions . . . no matter how wacked out they may be.

 

[3113]

Tends to indicate that waxing all self-righteous can lead to trouble. People need to have the courage of their convictions . . . no matter how wacked out they may be.

Very true, but people don't ever think, in that moment, that anything's going to go further. And in times past, they'd be right. But news doesn't only get out fast now (instantaneously) but also globally. These days you have to be careful what you say and do in regards to your convictions. Like pushing the "post" button you need to decide if it's worth it and important and all that, because anything can come back at you in this world of tweets and internet news.

Unfortunately, people still fail to realize this as they go marching indignantly to shout at school boards, etc. They still think they can be stupid with impunity.

 

[slyc_willie]

What annoys me about crap like this book banning incident is how lily-livered these school boards and administrators can be when confronted by one person complaining about something or another. Someone says BOO! and they run like scared rabbits. A kid wears the wrong t-shirt to school and they're sent home because it upset someone. A kid bites a Pop-Tart in shape of a gun and they're sent home because of 'Zero Tolerance'. Kids playing with Nerf guns in their own yard get ratted off and they get suspended from school because someone complained.

No wonder kids don't have respect for authority when said authority acts like they have no common sense and knee-jerk react to everything no matter how trivial.

I have to agree with you. A single complaint -- think about that: a SINGLE damned complaint -- from one person, and suddenly, there's action. It's not fear of subjugation, it's fear of litigation. And that's pretty damned sad. We would rather compromise our intellectual history than stand against selfish and spurious legal gain.

Shakespeare had it right: First, we kill all the lawyers.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

THE INVISIBLE MAN's controversy keeps it on life support, but any Harlem noir by Chester Himes kicks its ass, and Himes aint on anyone's nice or naughty or shit list.

Negroes cant write literature, I cant dance. Neither will ever happen. I aint got it in me to dance, and no real Negro can resist being a scold.

Himes maudlin tear jerky Negro Lamentations are boring. His Harlem Noir are Revelations and the Ten Commandments. Walter Mosley falls into the same mire of shit when he strays from the Gospels of Ghetto Reality to his tirades against Whitey.