Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Bring Christmas to a child in need!
An 'urgency': Sensing threats to institutions of society, church leaders make declaration 
Click to Print
Include Comments
Banned Books Week: Asking the right questions
In a commentary posted yesterday, Los Angeles Times books editor David Ulin asks an interesting question: What is the conversation we should be having during Banned Books Week, which ends this Saturday. Are we to grouse about people who would axe access to great literature like Huckleberry Finn, or are we to explore broader questions, such as how we can defend one book and not defend all books?
I was thinking about this recently while reading Irvine Welsh’s new novel, “Crime,” which deals with a ring of pedophiles. It’s a squeamish, tricky read, and yet, like other writers who deal with transgressive or repugnant material, Welsh has a larger moral vision: His story is not about sex but sensibility, an investigation into the twisted landscape of the soul. There are those who’d argue that the subject he explores in “Crime” is not just provocative but detrimental, something we’d be better off without.
I couldn’t agree less; the more troublesome a piece of writing, the more we need to take it into account.
Read the rest of Ulin’s piece here. What do you think? Should any books be banned? If so where and from whom? What should be the standard and who would govern it?
back to top32 Comments to “Banned Books Week: Asking the right questions”
If we’re talking about dangerous books, can anyone dispute that the Koran is the most dangerous book on earth at the moment, far more destructive than Mein Kampf?
Should it be banned? Of course not! Every man woman and child should own a copy and read it so they will know about the challenges that lie ahead in the 21st century.
One can’t say that book banning is a left or right issue, since both fascists and communists ban books. The political spectrum is a circle anyway and oppression of both kinds is very similar.
Report comment to moderator
Nope! None! Never!
I might be able to conceive of a national security exception, but that’s it. The authors are responsible for their content and the readers or their parents are responsible for access to the books.
It’s a responsibility thing.
And, in this day of electronic communication, censorship of any kind is darn right silly. The government has better things to do.
Report comment to moderator
Xion; You knew this was coming. Historically, which one, the Bible or the Koran, do you suppose was responsible for more slaughter?
Report comment to moderator
Thank the Lord for a national campaign that requires Sarah Palin disavow her book-banning ways:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/11/politics/animal/main4439414.shtml
Report comment to moderator
#3 That argument has been vetted perhaps hundreds of times here. We could go down that rabbit trail again, but let me ask you this instead.
What is the most dangerous book for the 21st century?
Report comment to moderator
I liked David Kulin’s article, but felt he left out a very important matter:
Teaching people how to read. And by that, I don’t mean the recognition of words and their meaning. I mean the ability to pick up a book and recognize it’s context, it’s structure, it’s use of particular terms and forms of language, it’s biases, it’s author, it’s purpose, it’s ideas, and even who published the book.
I’m a firm believer that if you teach people how to read, then no book is in need of “banning”.
Report comment to moderator
“Ulin” not “Kulin”. Must learn to read more carefully!
Report comment to moderator
NPR had a great story about how California produce moguls sought to ban Steinbeck’s “The Grapes of Wrath”
And no, not the Veggie Tales version
Report comment to moderator
Dont know if I’d advocate banning it, but WMB should get someone to do a review of “Asset Building and Low-Income Families” by Signe-Mary McKernan and Michael Sherraden.
Report comment to moderator
Ideas can never realy be suppressed, so banning them realy only makes them more popular.
Better to make sure that all ideas are in the open AND encourage an active dialog on all ideas.
Peculiarly, despite the efforts by some, this blog is actually a reasonably good example of what happens when pretty much all ideas are basically allowed to be expressed.
It infuriates almost everyone some of the time!
Report comment to moderator
First we have to define what book banning means. Is my local library “banning” my book if they refuse to buy a copy (which they have–and it obtains no objectionable material)? Am I “banning” a book if I refuse to buy it for my child or let him get it from the library? Am I “banning” it if I refuse to read it (as was the case with The Color Purple, when I got to the lesbian undertones)?
Honestly, everybody but the Library of Congress makes decisions about what books they will or will not buy, sell, read, and endorse. And making that decision based on the moral content (or pure stupidity) of the book makes more sense than making it because we don’t like the color of the cover, or even because it was written in a time when “Negro” was an accepted word.
This idea that discernment (esp. discernment for the good of children) equals censorship, and that such discernment is therefore bad, is not only a stupid idea, but a wicked one.
Report comment to moderator
#8 yeah i heard that – it was good!
http://m.npr.org/news.jsp?key=437684&rc=em
for anybody else interested…
#11 – Yes that’s a point – in Palin’s case, she brought up specific books already in the library and then fired the librarian; I’d call that “banning,” not “selecting”.
I think “banning” means legal action of some kind that cuts off public access – sale, purchase, or possession. If a city government tells a library they may NOT use their discretion to purchase a certain book in particular, that’s BANNING! If a librarian on a budget prioritizes their purchase list and doesn’t include every volume known to man, that’s selecting.
Report comment to moderator
I think Cheryl presents the right question regarding the crux of a discussion on book banning. Does this banning apply to both private and public sectors or just public sectors? I would assume that book banning could only apply to institutions sponsored by taxpayer dollars. At least that is where the discussion should lie, outside of the private sector unless something about the book makes it illegal (classified information, illegal pornography, etc.)
What should we censor from our public libraries, universities, and public schools? That might be a better way to present the question. There may be several viewpoints on this but I think the two most powerful and polarizing groups would be those that have opposite definitions of what is good and what is evil.
The establishment clause folks might desire to rid the public shelves of anything that smells of favoritism towards any one religion whereas those with more of a puritan view of the world might want to rid the same shelves of anything blatantly promoting promiscuity or homosexuality or witchcraft. I am not saying both these sides actively seek to ban these books, I am only suggesting that there are some that would lean these two ways.
Personally, I say ban Harry Potter books so your kids won’t grow up to delve in witchcraft although I think it’s too late for that given all the growing popularity of wiccans et al.
Report comment to moderator
Who in thei country is wanting t0 ban books? Who ever it is, ban them and what wever organization they represent. At least the lefty lawyers will get some work defending them and cause them to spend huge amounts of money to derfend theirmposition 9n court. Regardless of the outcoome – then sue them again and again and again until they are broke and give up. They can be thankful they are just broke. If they messed with the left they would end up dead too
Report comment to moderator
Arcadia – Given that communism slaughtered more people through the years than any other source of strife – it looks like Das Kapital is the most dangerous book ever. I don’t have a full sense of Islam vs. Christianity as far as warfare goes, but early Christianity was fighting during eras of general bloodshed and settled down as the rest of the world did – while Islam has maintained a steady, if not increasing, pace of mayhem and bllodshed even as the rest of the world settled down. So the Koran has to get the nod over the Bible.
Report comment to moderator
My beef with this week is two-fold, both relatively minor issues.
1. Books aren’t banned in our country. When the government makes it illegal to own or be found in possession of a particular book, then that book will be banned. Or if the Feds force a publisher to kill a book, then we’ll have book banning. Today, we have reasonable and unreasonable complaining about books.
2. The American Library Asso. uses this week apparently to snark at decent parents who complain about their children having open access to books they think are a bit mature for them. How is it banning to complain that a book on sexual matters or any difficult issue be moved to the young adult section? That’s the type of thing the ALA seems to harp on, and like Ulin says it trivializes the focus of Banned Books Week.
And the larger point of this week: shouldn’t a community have a place in saying what is held in its library? Are librarians protected from reasonable feedback from library patrons?
Report comment to moderator
Cheryl’s right that we first must define “ban.”
If by “ban” we make make illegal to print, sell, or buy, no level of government should ban any book.
But if by “ban” we mean choose not to make freely available (in a public library or school), then local (and only local) governments should “ban” media that does not reflect the values of their community. Using the word “ban” for that is politically volatile, but in reality it is already done. I’m aware of no public libraries, for example, that stock Hustler magazine. And though “banning” books in schools often takes lots of heat, I think it’s necessary and prudent. There is plenty of very worthy literature that is inappropriate for middle schoolers because of its adult subject matter.
Report comment to moderator
It would be nice if we could be confident our children were picking up appropriate books at the library, both school and public. But we can’t. We need to be aware of what our children are reading. Not everybody has the same tastes or interests in books, but not every book should be in every child’s hands either. Parental responsibility but if the community wants well developed children, they need to see that their libraries are providing good food, not junk or garbage. We just went through this with our fifth grader and the books she was bringing home.
Report comment to moderator
Should any books be banned?
If by banned we mean prohibited by law, then I’d say no.
If so where and from whom? What should be the standard and who would govern it?
That books aren’t banned doesn’t mean there shouldn’t still be restrictions on their sale to minors. Much like cigarettes and alcohol. At least in the case of cigarettes, harmful even in moderation, addictive, and yet still legal. But restricted.
To the extent that public libraries are funded by the government, I don’t have a problem with the government (possibly local) limiting a library’s collection to those books they think will benefit the populace served by that library. The simplest example is a decision to stock National Geographic but not, say, Playboy.
Report comment to moderator
There are books that ought not be published or purchased, but those are the decisions of sellers and would-be buyers. But let nothing be banned. For instance I’ve always wanted to read the infamous “Turner Diaries”. That racist screed was the book which inspired Timothy McVeigh and his cohorts.
Report comment to moderator
“#11 – Yes that’s a point – in Palin’s case, she brought up specific books already in the library and then fired the librarian; I’d call that “banning,” not “selecting.”
You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own “facts.”
Palin didn’t fire any librarian. She did not ban any books. Most of the “banned books” listed in the rumors you apparently are relying on, not only weren’t already in the library as you claim, they had yet to be written and published.
Report comment to moderator
Ken: Palin did fire a librarian, and she did inquire (possibly rhetorically) about removing books from the library.
http://news.bostonherald.com/news/2008/view.bg?articleid=1117009&srvc=2008campaign&position=15
Unless you have some reason to dispute that article?
Report comment to moderator
17: If by “ban” we make make illegal to print, sell, or buy, no level of government should ban any book.
Aren’t there a few things that could actually make a book illegal, as Chalzz mentioned in #12? For instance, it seems that a book or magazine containing child pornography would be illegal to print, sell, or buy.
Report comment to moderator
The ALA has lost credibility with me over the last several years over this very issue. They are like the boy who cried wolf, only they cry, “Banned!”
Cheryl framed the argument well. Banned has been redefined to mean anything short of complete access to anything by anyone, including children.
BTW, I believe the UN promotes this nonsense of preventing parents from filtering their childrens’ access to various types of media in the Rights of the Child treaty they are trying to get passed.
Another reason to support legislation protecting parental rights.
Report comment to moderator
Why of course parents have to control their children’s access to media. Otherwise, they might think on their own and develop differing world views than we have.
I shudder to think that my daughter might grow up to become a conservative.
Report comment to moderator
Thomas, I know you’re kind of kidding, but here’s the reality–parents are held responsible for their children’s actions, but are increasingly prevented from controlling their children’s actions.
For instance, the parents of the Columbine killers were rightly faulted for not knowing what their sons were up to, and yet the ALA wants kids to have access to anything, without parental permission, or even knowledge. Those boys had some pretty sinister influences, and shouldn’t have had access to all that.
An extreme example, but it makes my point. Parents need the freedom to rear their children without threat of bureaucratic interference. My concern is that this type of hysteria (about “banned” books) contributes to other redefinitions, such as “abuse”. Abuse could come to mean not letting my child read Harry Potter, or not letting my child get a tattoo, or some other small limiting of his “freedom”.
In Germany, homeschooling is considered child abuse today, and parents are fined and/or jailed for not sending their children to the government’s schools.
Just pointing out the slippery slope.
Report comment to moderator
Momof5,
Yes, I’m kind of kidding.
We do very much police what our daughter is allowed to read and watch. In that respect, despiter our liberal bent, my wife and I tend to err much more on the conservative side, certainly much more so than we find our friends and neighbors doing.
I think there is much less problem today, with students being isolated from the world of ideas by their parents. Certainly, it’s comfortable to think they will never read things that challenge our ideas as parents, but ultimately, I think we would all, conservative or liberal, hope that as they get into their high school years and beyond, our children read widely, from a variety of ideas, learn to think for themselves, and form their own opinions. Even, or maybe especially, if they differ from our own.
I believe this it the right that the UN seeks to promote, rather than unfettered access to any and all of the garbage and filth that is out there.
Liberals and conservatives – at least the ones I know – are probably less dissimilar in how we raise our children, and what we permit them access to, than we would think.
Report comment to moderator
Thomas, I hope that you’re right, and that I’m just cynical.
BTW, yes, we also want our kids to grow up to be able to discern propaganda from reasoned arguments/opinions. We started to teach them about this initially using ads. “What are they selling? What are they trying to get you to believe? Is it true that you NEED x?”, etc…
As Bible scholar, too, my husband points out underlying assumptions or presuppositions to the kids, and we discuss why different denominations share some beliefs, and where they differ. We don’t swallow the “party line” when it comes to religion, or politics, either.
We just want to travel this road with our children for a while longer, and make sure they’re not gullible readers/listeners, before they spread their wings.
Report comment to moderator
Xion: What is the most dangerous book for the 21st century?
Not the Koran. Nor the Bible. The dangers stemming from those books come not from what they say but how people interpret and act on those ideas.
You compared the Koran to Mein Kampf, but Hitler’s book was actually a contemporary manifesto, laying out his motivations and plans. Ancient texts don’t rise to that level. Osama bin Laden’s writings, if published in book form, would be more of an equivalent.
Report comment to moderator
We were a bit startled when my daughter and her partner told Grandma and Grandpa that they didn’t want us to read “The Cat in the Hat” to our four-year-old granddaugher, though aparently it will be all right when she gets a little older.
Report comment to moderator
Buddy Glass:
I have no need to dispute the article. It says no books were ever banned and that the librarian resigned two months after Sarah Palin began her second term. That confirms the accuracy of my post, no matter how you try to spin it.
Report comment to moderator
Ken:
You originally said: “Palin didn’t fire any librarian.”
The article says: “A few months later, the librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, got a letter from Palin telling her she was going to be fired.”
How does the latter not contradict the former?
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!