s/o Have you challenged a book?

[Violet Crown]

Despite being a big fan of the First Amendment, I have in fact "challenged" books at public libraries. Reading the "Banned Books" thread, I'm feeling a little like Snidely Whiplash, twirling his moustachios as he demands satisfaction from the stout librarian defender of the right to read.

 

Here's the situations:

 

1. A book in the children's "religions" section purported to be an overview of world religions. It was, in fact, completely sectarian in viewpoint, describing the LDS and other minority faiths as "cults," and clearly pushing the reader toward the "right" faith. It seemed to me that my tax money could be going for a non-propaganda work on world religions for children. I brought it to the librarian, mentioned what I saw was the difficulty with it, and got an incredibly frosty reception. I think she was mentally adding it to that year's "Banned Books" display.

 

2. In a complaint obviously rich with irony, I objected to the same library's Banned Books Week display. It was set up in the children's section, had the usual culprits (s*x, drug use, etc.) displayed, and a sign saying "READ A BANNED BOOK TODAY!" I objected to the active promotion of these books to children, which seems to me far different from the library's simply refusing to take them off the shelves. Again, frosty reception.

 

Anyone else? Or am I the only one working to make sure we have a selection of "challenged books" each year?

[Crissy]

Anyone else?

 

No. I believe it is the child's own parent who is responsible for deciding which books the child will check out.

I wouldn't presume to know which books on religion are best for another family.

[kchara]

We honestly make a point not to go to the library during Banned Book Week, for the very reason you listed. I think the books in the children's section being promoted to the children... there's a reason they were challenged. I'm not for censorship, just common sense.

 

ETA: The one on religion I wouldn't have had a problem with. I'm sure the church I grew up in was probably listed as a cult in that book. It usually is in books like that, but I know it's not. Stuff like that is an exercise in teaching my children about different viewpoints. But the s*xual abuse and drug use books in the children's sections I do have a huge problem with.

Edited May 31, 2011 by kchara
to clarify

[Violet Crown]

No. I believe it is the child's own parent who is responsible for deciding which books the child will check out.

I wouldn't presume to know which books on religion are best for another family.

I agree in principle; but there is only so much room on library shelves, and taxpayer money is paying for the book. Surely, given that (a) I'm helping pay for it, and (b) choosing one book on world religions means not choosing another, it's reasonable for me to give customer/taxpayer feedback on the choice the library makes?

 

Maybe this gets near the crux of the question: What, if any, is the difference between a patron challenging a book, and a patron giving negative feedback on a book?

[Mrs Mungo]

No. I believe it is the child's own parent who is responsible for deciding which books the child will check out.

I wouldn't presume to know which books on religion are best for another family.

 

:iagree:

 

We honestly make a point not to go to the library during Banned Book Week, for the very reason you listed. I think the books in the children's section being promoted to the children... there's a reason they were challenged. I'm not for censorship, just common sense.

 

Some of the reasons books have been challenged are crazy. Again, I submit the example of Eloise in Paris being challenged/banned because of line drawings of famous art works. I would never assume a book was bad for my family just because someone challenged it.

[Mrs Mungo]

I agree in principle; but there is only so much room on library shelves, and taxpayer money is paying for the book. Surely, given that (a) I'm helping pay for it, and (b) choosing one book on world religions means not choosing another, it's reasonable for me to give customer/taxpayer feedback on the choice the library makes?

 

Was it the only book on religion in the library?

[kiana]

I would be unlikely to challenge a work of fiction but would quite probably challenge a nonfiction book, especially one which purported to be informational, if it misrepresented the truth significantly.

[Crissy]

Surely, given that (a) I'm helping pay for it, and (b) choosing one book on world religions means not choosing another, it's reasonable for me to give customer/taxpayer feedback on the choice the library makes?

 

 

 

What was your expectation, given that one book had already been chosen over another and purchased for the library shelf?

It would seem that making oneself part of the process of choosing the books in the first place would be the way to have an impact on how ones tax money is spent.

[Melinda in VT]

I've challenged the placement of books at least three times.

 

Twice the placement was the result of misshelving by volunteers. (I returned Girl with a Pearl Earring along with a stack of children's books and found it shelved in the children's section on my next visit. Another time, I found Arthur C. Clarke's Childhood's End in the children's section, presumably because it had Childhood in the title.)

 

And my librarian and I disagree on the categorization of Suzanne Collins's books. I think the Gregor the Overlander books belong in the children's section and the Hunger Games books belong in the YA section, and she has them shelved the other way.

[Mrs Mungo]

I would be unlikely to challenge a work of fiction but would quite probably challenge a nonfiction book, especially one which purported to be informational, if it misrepresented the truth significantly.

 

Really? There are just so many of these, I don't know where you would start?

[thescrappyhomeschooler]

I would not challenge a book at a public library, unless they had put pornographic materials in reach of children or something that incensed me in that manner.

[Haiku]

We honestly make a point not to go to the library during Banned Book Week

 

Last year my kids sat in the "jail cell" our library constructs and read banned books.

 

But the s*xual abuse and drug use books in the children's sections I do have a huge problem with.

 

I'm glad those books are there for children who need them.

 

Tara

[kchara]

 

Some of the reasons books have been challenged are crazy. Again, I submit the example of Eloise in Paris being challenged/banned because of line drawings of famous art works. I would never assume a book was bad for my family just because someone challenged it.

 

I agree that there are asinine reasons for some books being challenged, and I don't assume a book is "bad" just because someone challenged it at all. But, the challenged book displays that I've seen during Banned Book Week have more to do with shock value, IMO, than truly experiencing a wide range of books. I've never seen Eloise in Paris on a Banned Book Week display in the children's section of the library. I have seen books on r*pe, s*xual abuse, drug use, violence, and a whole host of other things of that nature in the children's section displays. That's just unnecessary, IMO.

[Violet Crown]

Was it the only book on religion in the library?

It was; at least in the children's section. It's a small branch library.

 

I've been pondering the various factors here. We have a gigantic university library from which the public, with a city library card, may check out books, and which has a massive juvenile section. I would not at all support removing the book in question from that library.

 

On the other hand, given the restraints of space at a small public library like our local one, I expect the purchasing librarian to choose wisely. If I think a choice has been unwise, should there be a mechanism by which I can say as much, without running afoul of the general cultural distaste for challenging books?

[Sebastian (a lady)]

I have reported a book as mis categorized. The library branch we used to visit in HI had a pull out science fiction/fantasy section. The book Here Be Dragons by Sharon Kaye Penman was shelved there (cute little Saturn sticky and everything), despite the fact that this book is about medieval Britain, with no fantasy elements except the mention of dragons in the title. It's historical fiction, with an emphasis on the historical. I had to bring the book to a couple different librarians over a few weeks before I found one who was willing to make the effort to get it recategorized into the general fiction section (where Penman's other books were).

 

And I think I did take a stack of real estate advice/mortgage advice books to the librarian after we'd had a conversation about how they were trying to cull out of date non-fiction. These were books written before the real estate bubble burst with outdated advice on house flipping and mortgage instruments. I didn't challenge them, but I did suggest that they be reviewed with an eye towards replacing them with more current titles.

[Mrs Mungo]

I agree that there are asinine reasons for some books being challenged, and I don't assume a book is "bad" just because someone challenged it at all. But, the challenged book displays that I've seen during Banned Book Week have more to do with shock value, IMO, than truly experiencing a wide range of books. I've never seen Eloise in Paris on a Banned Book Week display in the children's section of the library. I have seen books on r*pe, s*xual abuse, drug use, violence, and a whole host of other things of that nature in the children's section displays. That's just unnecessary, IMO.

 

Is your library really small? Does it have a separate teen area? Our last 2 or 3 libraries have had teen areas that were away from the children's section. The one before that was way too small for that. If your library doesn't have a separate teen area and it is big enough for one, it might be worth bringing up to different people/groups. They might be receptive to the idea.

[Mrs Mungo]

It was; at least in the children's section. It's a small branch library.

 

I've been pondering the various factors here. We have a gigantic university library from which the public, with a city library card, may check out books, and which has a massive juvenile section. I would not at all support removing the book in question from that library.

 

On the other hand, given the restraints of space at a small public library like our local one, I expect the purchasing librarian to choose wisely. If I think a choice has been unwise, should there be a mechanism by which I can say as much, without running afoul of the general cultural distaste for challenging books?

 

Since it is a small library, I would be curious about their mechanisms for obtaining books. Do they shelve a lot of donated books? Most libraries do not, they sell them at library sales, but a small library with a small budget might. It might be time to get more involved with the process.

[Violet Crown]

What was your expectation, given that one book had already been chosen over another and purchased for the library shelf?

It would seem that making oneself part of the process of choosing the books in the first place would be the way to have an impact on how ones tax money is spent.

Well, I don't know. I don't know if there's some process by which the librarians can file a request for a book on the same topic. There's a large central public library (not the university library I referred to above) which has many more books on each topic; possibly the branches can ask for another book on the same topic from there?

 

I don't think it's incumbent on me to have to know how they deal with bad choices that they've made. All I did was give information to the librarian that I believe the library didn't have: that is, that the one childen's book they had on world religions was written from a non-neutral viewpoint, and denigrated a religion likely to be shared by many of the children who would be checking it out.

 

Again, does it matter how one looks at the event? Is it challenging a book? Is it giving feedback on the wisdom of the library's purchase? Is it supplying information to the library which they might not have (maybe nobody checked the book closely enough when it was purchased or donated)?

[AngieW in Texas]

I have asked about recategorizing books several times. Sometimes I've asked for a book to go from YA to JF and others from JF to YA.

 

I still disagree with the library's placement of So Far from the Bamboo Groves in the JF section while When My Name Was Keoko is in the YA section. I can see either of them being placed in either section, but if I was going to place only one of them in YA, it would be So Far from the Bamboo Groves because it is more detailed. I would either put both of them in JF (my preferred placement for the books) or both of them in YA (really doesn't make sense for Keoko) or put Keoko in JF and Bamboo Groves in YA.

 

There were a couple of books where the first book of a series was placed in JF and the rest was in YA. While I agree with the placement for individual books, I think a series ought to be shelved all in one area. They moved the 1st book to the YA section to go with the other books in the series.

[Crissy]

Again, does it matter how one looks at the event? Is it challenging a book? Is it giving feedback on the wisdom of the library's purchase? Is it supplying information to the library which they might not have (maybe nobody checked the book closely enough when it was purchased or donated)?

 

I think you simply gave feedback on an item. I would assume there is a very specific process to officially challenge a book.

[*Lulu*]

Is asking for a book to be recategorized really challenging a book?

 

At a smaller branch a friend uses there has been at least one instance where a picture book for older youth/adults was put into the stacks in the chidren's picture books. She didn't want them to remove it from the library, just over to YA.

[WishboneDawn]

I'm glad those books are there for children who need them.

 

Tara

 

:iagree:

It's easy for us to get offended by them but there honestly are some kids out there who need this kind of literature because it's simply what they're living. It sounds silly to say they need books about s*x and drugs but the books often aren't about those things but about how characters navigate worlds filled with them.

[Denise in Florida]

No, I have never challenged a book.

 

Occasionaly I have wanted to challenge books on the grounds of sheer stupidity but that is only because my local library is pitiful.

 

One day I took 10 minutes trying to explain that the should have ALL of the Narnia series in stock, not just one (Silver Chair). The others were not checked out, they weren't even in the system. I stopped talking when I realized that they could not have possibly cared less. :glare:

 

I have reshelved books at the local Goodwill. They keep putting adult rated manga on the kids' shelf. I guess comics are comics to them. But yipe!

[NicAnn]

No. I believe it is the child's own parent who is responsible for deciding which books the child will check out.

I wouldn't presume to know which books on religion are best for another family.

 

:iagree:

 

Now if a book cover had a naked lady on it or giant curse word, then I would request it to be moved.

[Mrs Mungo]

:iagree:

 

Now if a book cover had a naked lady on it or giant curse word, then I would request it to be moved.

 

On the old board there were lots of moms who censored the Sister Wendy art book with a sharpie. Would you challenge that book? What about a children's book on an artist that contained a photo of a naked lady painting? I own books like this, I don't censor them. I take my kids to museums. I'm not saying someone else is wrong for not allowing their kids to read it, but I do think it would be wrong to decide what my kids should see. Just trying to see where people draw lines.

[Pax]

No. I believe it is the child's own parent who is responsible for deciding which books the child will check out.

I wouldn't presume to know which books on religion are best for another family.

 

Absolutely. It wouldn't cross my mind to challenge a book at a public library, even if I found the subject matter extremely offensive to me. I actually use banned books as a great lesson for my children in free speech and censorship. My little ones aren't quite there yet but I've had discussions about banned books with my oldest (15) and he has read some banned books that I've obtained for him.

 

I might request reshelving if I thought something was truly too graphic for my little ones to deal with but it would have to be pretty extreme.

[Violet Crown]

A few more thoughts, fairly random:

 

1. Do we really believe that it's the parents' responsibility to pre-read each library book before our child checks it out? Maybe we do; but didn't we used to have a cultural message that you could go to the library by yourself to find out something? That you could ask the librarian, and she'd find you a good and useful book? If we really want controversial books to be there for children who need them, doesn't that imply that we leave some level of responsibility to the library to choose books that children may need, without parents vetting them in advance?

 

2. Is there a distinction between objecting to a book based on its content, and on its quality? In the case of non-fiction, the two are harder to separate; but I wouldn't have raised the matter of a book identifying minority religions as "cults" if it had been a character's view in a fiction book, or a book openly arguing for a particular religion against others. But as a book ostensibly giving useful information about other religions, the content in this case made the book of poor quality, as it didn't do what presumably the person checking it out was expecting it to do.

 

I don't expect public librarians, or patrons, to censor based on content or viewpoint; I do expect them to censor based on quality. Again, these are our tax dollars.

 

Thus at the risk of being very controversial: I do presume to know which book on religions is better than another, in the sense that I presume to know a good book on a subject from a poor book on a subject, and this book was a poor book on the subject, by virtue of its utter failure of neutrality. I am willing to use that knowledge to object to a poor book being purchased/maintained with public funds and proffered to children who want information on a subject.

 

3. Both of my objections from the opening post were mooted by our branch having acquired a children's librarian. She knows the collection, knows the regulars (parents and children), and would have been much easier to speak to, citizen to citizen (as it were), about the two issues, without worrying that I was coming across as a potential book-burning zealot. Her community outreach (to use an overused term) and hands-on interest in getting appropriate books into juvenile hands has been phenomenal.

[brightside]

A few more thoughts, fairly random:

 

1. Do we really believe that it's the parents' responsibility to pre-read each library book before our child checks it out?

 

Yes, whose responsibility should it be? :confused:

[twoforjoy]

1. A book in the children's "religions" section purported to be an overview of world religions. It was, in fact, completely sectarian in viewpoint, describing the LDS and other minority faiths as "cults," and clearly pushing the reader toward the "right" faith. It seemed to me that my tax money could be going for a non-propaganda work on world religions for children. I brought it to the librarian, mentioned what I saw was the difficulty with it, and got an incredibly frosty reception. I think she was mentally adding it to that year's "Banned Books" display.

 

Unless it was the only book on world religions available at the library, I don't think I'd mind. If it was the only book on world religions available, I'd probably be more likely to bring up my concerns and suggest additional titles be ordered, but I don't think I'd ask that the specific book be removed.

 

2. In a complaint obviously rich with irony, I objected to the same library's Banned Books Week display. It was set up in the children's section, had the usual culprits (s*x, drug use, etc.) displayed, and a sign saying "READ A BANNED BOOK TODAY!" I objected to the active promotion of these books to children, which seems to me far different from the library's simply refusing to take them off the shelves. Again, frosty reception.

 

Was there actually pictures of sex or drug use, or descriptions of them, depicted in the display? Or was it that books that featured those things were displayed?

 

I assume the display was aimed at teens. Not children. Most children I know go to the library with their parents, and their selections are guided by their parents. Teens are more likely to go alone and choose their own books--and, IME at my library, are more likely to be at the library than littler kids, which could explain why displays often seem geared towards teens, rather than children.

 

I do think it's wise for libraries to have separate sections for children and for teens/young adults. If they don't, I'd actually prefer to see YA literature shelved with the adult fiction, because I'd say much YA lit today is closer in theme, content, and even reading level to adult fiction than to juvenile literature. Plus, I imagine many teens would rather browse in the same section as the adults than next to a shelf with picture books, if those were the choices.

 

My branch library is very small and shelves the YA books near the children's lit (it doesn't carry any adult fiction at all), but the main library has a new, very large teen wing. My main complaint is that you can't get in unless you are between the ages of 13 and 18. As an adult fan of YA literature, I find that a bit frustrating, and perhaps the result of an overabundance of caution. You can get a librarian to go in for you and get a book, or place an interlibrary loan order, but it would be nice to be able to browse there. But, having the teen wing definitely solves a lot of the problems that come along with shelving children's and YA literature together.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

Is asking for a book to be recategorized really challenging a book?

 

At a smaller branch a friend uses there has been at least one instance where a picture book for older youth/adults was put into the stacks in the chidren's picture books. She didn't want them to remove it from the library, just over to YA.

 

Well it depends on your perspective. On one hand it's still in the same branch and probably can still be checked out by kids of any age. (My kids routinely flip between the juvenile and YA section and I've often scratched my head over what was where. I think it is by subject matter, not reading level. But it seems like older books of advanced level are rarely moved to the YA section.)

 

On the other hand, many of the challenges to books that ALA and others cite are objections to a book being at a certain school library because they deem it more mature than that audience. So a book might be challenged at an elementary or middle school but not at the next higher level.

 

I think if you consider it a challenge would depend on why you are counting. Are you wanting to bolster the number of book challenges? Are you wanting to bolster the number of "unacceptable" books noted?

 

FWIW, I think there should be a higher standard at a school library than at a public library. My presumption at a public library is that there is a wider variety of readers using the same collection. Also that there is more of a presumption that books at a school library are being recommended, not just being made available. And kids would seldom have a parent along when they check out books at a school library.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

Yes, whose responsibility should it be? :confused:

 

But I do think it is my responsibility to set general standards (this author but not that, this series but not that, even this genre but not that). And I have no issue with telling my kids that a book or series isn't what I thought it was and that I don't want them to read it any more.

 

But pre-read EVERY book. Good grief, no. I'd have to read 5-10 science fiction novels a week to keep up.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

My branch library is very small and shelves the YA books near the children's lit (it doesn't carry any adult fiction at all), but the main library has a new, very large teen wing. My main complaint is that you can't get in unless you are between the ages of 13 and 18. As an adult fan of YA literature, I find that a bit frustrating, and perhaps the result of an overabundance of caution. You can get a librarian to go in for you and get a book, or place an interlibrary loan order, but it would be nice to be able to browse there. But, having the teen wing definitely solves a lot of the problems that come along with shelving children's and YA literature together.

 

Given the behavior of many teens I've seen at libraries, I'm not sure a teen only wing is something I'd want to have my kids in.

 

One of the things that disappoints me about YA pull out sections is that so many great, but older books end up staying in the children's section. So teens, who are at a reading level where they could comprehend these books, end up missing them because they won't be caught dead in the children's section.

 

I'm thinking of books like Rosemary Sutcliff, Robert Louis Stevenson, Arthur Ransome, or of books like The Phantom Tollbooth, Understood Betsy, Homer Price or The Mad Scientists' Club. Books didn't just become witty or satirical in the last decade.

[Haiku]

1. Do we really believe that it's the parents' responsibility to pre-read each library book before our child checks it out?

 

Parents are responsible for their children's reading material. I don't pre-read every book my kids check out, but I do have a general idea of what each book is. My dd9 reads about 15 chapter books a week. I don't read them all, but I make sure that I know the gist of each book. It's not hard to do. Read the inside front cover blurb or read the synopsis on Amazon.

 

If an undesirable book slips through, so be it. My child will not be ruined by one book.

 

Tara

[twoforjoy]

Given the behavior of many teens I've seen at libraries, I'm not sure a teen only wing is something I'd want to have my kids in.

 

Really? Again, I must either be very fortunate or very oblivious, because the teens I've encountered at the library have either been too busy on the computer or looking at books or doing homework to be doing anything problematic, or have come over to talk to my DS and been really nice and polite. I don't think I've ever encountered poorly-behaved teens at the library.

[Mom-ninja.]

There are books I'd love to see disappear. Those are books that bring harm to children such as that ped@phile book that was on Amazon, or Pearl's "parenting" book, Ezzo, etc.

[Mrs Mungo]

But I do think it is my responsibility to set general standards (this author but not that, this series but not that, even this genre but not that). And I have no issue with telling my kids that a book or series isn't what I thought it was and that I don't want them to read it any more.

 

I agree. A lot of people use lists from curricula producers. There are lists from TWTM, Sonlight, find someone with whom you mostly agree and you can glean a list from there. You'll also see lists here with this or that caveat about particular books.

 

But pre-read EVERY book. Good grief, no. I'd have to read 5-10 science fiction novels a week to keep up.

 

There are some great sci-fi/fantasy lists with comments that have been produced on this thread.

[brightside]

Parents are responsible for their children's reading material. I don't pre-read every book my kids check out, but I do have a general idea of what each book is. My dd9 reads about 15 chapter books a week. I don't read them all, but I make sure that I know the gist of each book. It's not hard to do. Read the inside front cover blurb or read the synopsis on Amazon.

 

If an undesirable book slips through, so be it. My child will not be ruined by one book.

 

Tara

 

:iagree: My son was a very early/fast reader. I searched the internet looking at reviews, asked friends/relatives/etc. for suggestions. Did I pre-read every book? No. But ultimately if he had read something I had a problem with it would have been my fault and my responsiblity to catch.

 

There are plenty of resources out there, if you are willing to step up and take responsiblity you can be aware of what your child is reading no matter how fast they go through books. I do not think someone else should be making the decision on what my child should *not* be allowed read/view, anymore than they should be telling him what he should read.

[6packofun]

I don't like censorship, but the whole banned book week thing seems silly to me. Some books were banned for reasons that might still apply for age appropriateness reasons and the library's attitude usually seems to be, "Hey, here are a bunch of possibly inappropriate materials all in one spot! Go ahead, be a rebel, read one!! Come on, you know you want to." LOL!!

 

I guess because we homeschool and look at books as a whole for their merit and decide on a book by book basis on our own, that we just don't have experience with someone else telling us what we can or cannot do. :D But I also don't like the idea of someone else judging that the reasons a book might not be appropriate for all readers or age groups are always wrong and are the evil called censorship. Libraries should make books available, period.

[nmoira]

Parents are responsible for their children's reading material. I don't pre-read every book my kids check out, but I do have a general idea of what each book is. My dd9 reads about 15 chapter books a week. I don't read them all, but I make sure that I know the gist of each book. It's not hard to do. Read the inside front cover blurb or read the synopsis on Amazon.

 

If an undesirable book slips through, so be it. My child will not be ruined by one book.

 

Tara

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

 

Delightfully non-alarmist.

[Crissy]

I don't like censorship, but the whole banned book week thing seems silly to me. Some books were banned for reasons that might still apply for age appropriateness reasons and the library's attitude usually seems to be, "Hey, here are a bunch of possibly inappropriate materials all in one spot! Go ahead, be a rebel, read one!! Come on, you know you want to." LOL!!

 

 

 

I don't see it that way. I see it as a call to make an informed decision for myself.

What is a dangerous book to one family constitutes great literature for another. Our libraries are encouraging us to, as their campaign stated this past year, think for ourselves, and allow others to do the same.

[Rivka]

I've definitely run across books in our library's children's section that I thought weren't right for our family, but I assume that they're right for other people's families. For example, our library has some very gritty, sad picture books for older children about topics like a parent going to prison or abuse in the family. I don't want to read those books to my kids. But there are kids who need those books, and they need them where they can stumble across them on the general-access shelves because it's not likely that a sensitive adult is guiding their reading.

 

I have to say, though, that books against groups would sit differently with me than books for groups. For example, our children's library has plenty of devotional-style books which promote Christianity. Those books aren't for us, but I think it's appropriate for the library to carry them. I would be less comfortable with a children's book in the Christianity section promoting the idea that it's all a pack of lies believed by fools. Similarly, I support the presence of books like King and King and And Tango Makes Three, but a children's picture book with the message that gay people are bad wouldn't sit well with me. I don't think I'd support censorship either way, though - I'm just talking about my own comfort level.

 

In YA and adult sections, I think a full range of material should be available, full stop, including repellent things like white supremacist books. I don't think libraries should be presumed to agree with all the books they carry, and there are legitimate reasons (e.g., research) why someone might need to access even the most disgusting of books. As long as there is a range of opinions represented!

[jujsky]

No. I believe it is the child's own parent who is responsible for deciding which books the child will check out.

I wouldn't presume to know which books on religion are best for another family.

 

:iagree: I also feel that the banned books display was just fine where it was. Again, it's up to the parents to decide which books his/her child checks out.

[DarlaS]

Parents are responsible for their children's reading material. I don't pre-read every book my kids check out, but I do have a general idea of what each book is. My dd9 reads about 15 chapter books a week. I don't read them all, but I make sure that I know the gist of each book. It's not hard to do. Read the inside front cover blurb or read the synopsis on Amazon.

 

If an undesirable book slips through, so be it. My child will not be ruined by one book.

 

Tara

 

:iagree:

 

 

They have a right to stock any book published. Any censorship of what my kids read is up to me (whether I choose to do it or not... but either way, it's not their problem).

[Annie G]

Never thought I'd challenge a book, but I did challenge Troy by Adele Geras. Our library had it in with the children's books, and a librarian recommended it to my then 9 year old daughter. Dd brought it to me a day later, showing me passages of premarital sex and do it yourself abortion, among other things. I took it back and asked that they label and shelve it with the young adult books, just to be met with a snide 'it's your problem, lady'.

I didn't ask for the book's removal, but it is appropriate to label it as young adult when the content could be questionable for a kid who is a precocious reader. And it wasn't simply the content- it was the fact that the acts were so graphic.

Years later, the book has finally been labeled as young adult, and it sits on the young adult shelf. Problem solved.

[Violet Crown]

If I thought public libraries should take no responsibility for the books they carry, I would vote to abolish them. Because the other option is either they purchase books completely at random or purchase every book published, and they should shelve them with no regard whatever for age. There should be no displays, ever, suggesting a book because it was banned, or is suitable for the holidays, or is new. There should be no children's book librarians to help guide youngsters. And then what's the point? We should just grant every citizen of the town a certain amount of Amazon credit and let them get whatever they want. Every man an island.

 

But nobody agrees with that. We (I think) generally want the public libraries to take certain criteria into account in selecting books for purchase and distribution: limited money and shelf space requires this, or else the random purchase option. The questions that follow from that--what criteria? can members of the community have input? in what form? before or after purchase?--I think are legitimate.

[happi duck]

On the old board there were lots of moms who censored the Sister Wendy art book with a sharpie. Would you challenge that book? What about a children's book on an artist that contained a photo of a naked lady painting? I own books like this, I don't censor them. I take my kids to museums. I'm not saying someone else is wrong for not allowing their kids to read it, but I do think it would be wrong to decide what my kids should see. Just trying to see where people draw lines.

 

Sharpie + book = :svengo:

[Crissy]

We (I think) generally want the public libraries to take certain criteria into account in selecting books for purchase and distribution: limited money and shelf space requires this, or else the random purchase option.

 

Of course we do. But along with that particular desire comes acknowledgement that Someone will be offended regardless of the choices made. That one person or group does not care for the quality or content of any particular book does not make it less valuable to someone else.

 

The questions that follow from that--what criteria? can members of the community have input? in what form? before or after purchase?--I think are legitimate.

 

 

Have you checked with your library system about their practice of acquiring books?

Our county library system has an entire page on their website about their book selection process. It includes input from patrons.

We base much of our selection on a wide variety of review sources because we believe that reviews provide the best way to evaluate the quality of an item. However, we broaden the collection by seeking out additional titles in areas that are not well covered by review media (such as computer, travel, and technical titles), and by responding to requests from patrons and staff.

 

They have a process by which patrons may request purchases. Of course, they cannot purchase every book suggested, but there have been a number of books over the years that my boys and I have requested and our library has purchased.

[Violet Crown]

They have a right to stock any book published.

 

But I don't think you actually believe this. If "they" (and maybe who "they" is is a significant question here) chose to purchase and stock only books published by (let's pick a scapegoat) the Church of Scientology for your town's public library, would you shrug and say they had a right to do that, and your only role is to examine what your child was checking out?

 

Maybe I'm just an inveterate lefty, but I think I'm as much a part of the community as "they," and I want the community as a whole to have input into what we as a community put in our community libraries. Not just the loudest individuals, not organized outsider campaigns, not the biggest private donors, but (somehow) all of us.

[Violet Crown]

Of course we do. But along with that particular desire comes acknowledgement that Someone will be offended regardless of the choices made. That one person or group does not care for the quality or content of any particular book does not make it less valuable to someone else.

I disagree that quality of a book is a purely subjective thing. Again, if I did, the only thing that would make sense is to purchase books at random.

 

 

 

 

Have you checked with your library system about their practice of acquiring books?

Our county library system has an entire page on their website about their book selection process. It includes input from patrons.

 

 

They have a process by which patrons may request purchases. Of course, they cannot purchase every book suggested, but there have been a number of books over the years that my boys and I have requested and our library has purchased.

No, I haven't, if only because this morning is the first time I've given this subject much serious thought. I think I need to go do these things! But I think I will never agree that the selection of books for our public libraries is none of my affair. (Not that you're saying that; but it's the vibe I'm getting from some of the comments. Possibly unjustly.)

[Heather in WI]

I have never challenged a book. I honestly can't imagine doing it unless they were putting pornographic magazines in the picture books section.

 

As a funny: My poor mother in law thought the "Graphic Novel" bookshelf referred to pornographic books. She was really upset that they had these in the Middle School section. :lol: