It is officially Banned Books Week!

[vonfirmath]

Just started The Hot Zone - loving it and I find it so amusing that that and so many other titles are on the Banned Books List, never mind the fact that I find it funny that there is a Banned Books List to begin with. Apparently, The Hot Zone has been challenged because it portrays the Ebola virus in a negative way or whatever. Is there a positive way to describe it? 

 

You might check out _Spillover_

 

 

The Hot Zone... played fast and loose with the details of the Ebola virus evidently.

[Orthodox6]

Rather than ban books from school libraries, grant students and parents the unassailable right not to read something if a teacher assigns it, and the right not to be present for discussion of same.  This is something that I believe in very, very strongly.  Such a policy ought to satisfy everyone because each individual can remain true to his or her personal values.  Banning books from a library then would be unnecessary.   

 

I am not promoting laziness or a way to avoid doing work.  When my son, as a high school junior, needed to select a book from a list for literature study, we really appreciated that the teacher accepted our suggestions of books in the same genre, covering comparable issues, and of comparable literary worth, but which did not force [our son] to soak himself in material that was strongly at variance with our values.  He submitted work that met the same requirements expected from the other students.      

[Slartibartfast]

I saw that "The Hunger Games" had been challenged for explicit sex, language, Satanism, and anti-religion. Did these people read the same book as me?

 

 

Satanism?

 

Is that the same nutjob that was saying that Frozen is gay propaganda?

[Stacia]

Do you really think every book is appropriate for every school library?

 

My son goes to a K-2 school. There are certainly books I'm okay with him reading eventually I do not think are appropriate for his school's library at this point. Etc.

 

Well, no, if you mean every book ever written. But, I think school libraries tend to stock books that cater to the age ranges & grade levels of the students that attend there, so they don't stock every book in the first place.

 

If you don't want your child to read it, fine. But, don't restrict other people's access to materials/information/books. What is right for one family may or may not be right for another. And vice versa.

 

We've had an ongoing discussion of this in the BaW thread this week too (esp. in re: to school libraries), if you'd like to see all the comments/discussion about it.

http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/529053-book-a-week-in-2014-bw39/

[vonfirmath]

Well, no, if you mean every book ever written. But, I think school libraries tend to stock books that cater to the age ranges & grade levels of the students that attend there, so they don't stock every book in the first place.

 

But not everyone has the same idea of what books "cater to the age ranges & grade levels" and that is where challenges are useful.  Treating every challenge as a infringement on free speech when those SAME books are still available in other venues. (Ie they aren't banned. The parent is challenging the book as appropriate for this library at this time. They aren't saying the book should NEVER be available anywhere). When it is your library in your home, you get to decide for yourself what books are there.  When it is a community's library, it seems to me the community should decide. And any person within that community should feel free to express themselves about the content -- even if it is to disagree with the judgement of another member. And a conversation should happen. It may turn out that the benefits of the book are such that it should remain. But when you just shut the disagreeing members up with cries of "CENSORSHIP" should they even DARE to challenge a book's appropriateness, those conversations DON'T happen and it takes conversation to change hearts and minds.

 

[Mom-ninja.]

But not everyone has the same idea of what books "cater to the age ranges & grade levels" and that is where challenges are useful.  Treating every challenge as a infringement on free speech when those SAME books are still available in other venues. (Ie they aren't banned. The parent is challenging the book as appropriate for this library at this time. They aren't saying the book should NEVER be available anywhere). When it is your library in your home, you get to decide for yourself what books are there.  When it is a community's library, it seems to me the community should decide. And any person within that community should feel free to express themselves about the content -- even if it is to disagree with the judgement of another member. And a conversation should happen. It may turn out that the benefits of the book are such that it should remain. But when you just shut the disagreeing members up with cries of "CENSORSHIP" should they even DARE to challenge a book's appropriateness, those conversations DON'T happen and it takes conversation to change hearts and minds.

 

Sorry, I do not agree at all. What gives one parent/person precedence over another? If a parent does not like a book, why do they think they have the right to prevent it from being in the school library? I may love the book, and in fact, want it in the school library. Any particular book at a school that a parent does not want their child to read can be simply denied that particular child. That parent does not have any right, in any shape or form, of preventing other children access to that book. If you trust the school to educate your child, you should trust the school and librarian to provide books that "cater to the age ranges and grade levels" for that school. You can always deny books for YOUR child....not for others. 

 

Many, many children only have access to books from their school library. To not realize/admit this is to view the world from one's own priviledged lenses.

 

Community libraries should not in any way have books banned. Those are public funds used for the books. One person or a group of people have no right to try and ban a book from a public library. Yes, I can cry censorship when someone tries to ban a book from a public library. Cause it is. Plain and simple. No gray area. Banning a book from a public library is censorship. There is no conversation to "change hearts and minds."

 

A person who does not like the content of a book simply leaves the book on the shelf and is free to read something else. How dare anyone think they can tell me that I can't have access to a book because it offends them. Yes, it is restricting and possibly denying access to a book if a person can't get it from a library because it was banned from that library. More people than we care to think about cannot afford to buy even a single book. 

 

I, personally, hate the book series 50 Shades of Gray. I have pretty strong opinions about the books. I would never ever have the audacity to believe that I have a right or duty to try and get the books removed from my community libraries. No one has that right. (This, of course, is void if the book(s) are against our laws such as child pornogr@phy.)

[Stacia]

But not everyone has the same idea of what books "cater to the age ranges & grade levels" and that is where challenges are useful.  Treating every challenge as a infringement on free speech when those SAME books are still available in other venues. (Ie they aren't banned. The parent is challenging the book as appropriate for this library at this time. They aren't saying the book should NEVER be available anywhere). When it is your library in your home, you get to decide for yourself what books are there.  When it is a community's library, it seems to me the community should decide. And any person within that community should feel free to express themselves about the content -- even if it is to disagree with the judgement of another member. And a conversation should happen. It may turn out that the benefits of the book are such that it should remain. But when you just shut the disagreeing members up with cries of "CENSORSHIP" should they even DARE to challenge a book's appropriateness, those conversations DON'T happen and it takes conversation to change hearts and minds.

 

Maybe we are defining things differently. 'Challenges' are formal requests for a library to remove a book or books from their shelves. So, a 'challenge' is not really a conversation or discussion about why a book is or is not appropriate for one's family, but rather a formal process & attempt to remove the material from the venue (making it inaccessible to all). True, the book may still be available other places (such as a county or city library or through purchasing it), but not every student has access to other places; perhaps the only library the student has access to is the school library. (I'm using a school library as the example since that's what we've been doing up to this point.)

 

Certainly, I agree with you that discussions need to take place. That's totally ok -- it can & should happen, especially in a society that values free speech as outlined in our First Amendment. Discussions can happen within families, between parents, between parents & school administrators/teachers/librarians, within communities, etc.... I think it's perfectly fine for a parent or family to decide that a book is not for them. An easy answer is, of course, just to not read the book. If it happens to be an assigned book, I think it's great to have a discussion with a teacher, state reasons, ask for &/or suggest alternative assignments or books to read, & so on. Discuss it with the school administrators & librarians too. Perhaps even request that your child not be allowed to check out a particular book. Talk to other parents about how you feel about the assigned book/reading & alternatives you have. That said, I think it's important for discussions to take place *before* a challenge is made. Because once a challenge is made (request to remove an item), the censorship ball is rolling (because someone is actively working to remove the book from all access rather than just choosing to avoid it themselves) & infringing on the rights of others (those who may not agree with removing the book &/or who do want their children to read the book).

 

Page 3 and page 9 of this document define book banning (or attempts to get books banned) & why that is not a good idea in a society that values free speech.... The next two excerpts are from the 2013-2014 Books Challenged or Banned by Robert P. Doyle. The bolding is mine. (It is not bolded in the original text.)

 

Sex, profanity, and racism remain the primary categories of objections, and most occur in schools and school libraries. Frequently, challenges are motivated by the desire to protect children. While the intent is commendable, this method of protection contains hazards far greater than exposure to the “evil†against which it is leveled. U.S. Supreme Court Justice William Brennan, in Texas v. Johnson , said, “If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the Government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable.†Individuals may restrict what they themselves or their children read, but they must not call on governmental or public agencies to prevent others from reading or viewing that material.

 

and

 

The First Amendment guarantees that each of us has the right to express our views, including opinions about particular books. At the same time, the First Amendment also ensures that none of us has the right to control or limit another person’s ability to read or access information. Yet when individuals or groups file formal written requests demanding that libraries and schools remove specific books from the shelves, they are doing just that—attempting to restrict the rights of other individuals to access those books.

 

The rights and protections of the First Amendment extend to children and teens as well as adults. While parents have the right—and the responsibility—to guide their own children’s reading, that right does not extend to other people’s children. Similarly each adult has the right to choose his or her own reading materials, along with the responsibility to acknowledge and respect the right of others to do the same.

 

When we speak up to protect the right to read, we not only defend our individual right to free expression, we demonstrate tolerance and respect for opposing points of view. And when we take action to preserve our precious freedoms, we become participants in the ongoing evolution of our democratic society.

 

Also (sourced from wikipedia's article on Freedom of Speech):

 

The right to freedom of expression is recognized as a human right under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and recognized in international human rights law in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Article 19 of the ICCPR states that "[e]veryone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference" and "everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice".

[Negin]

The Hot Zone is on the banned list? 

On some lists, yes. Here's why. Made me laugh  :lol:.

[Word Nerd]

One of the libraries we use has a cool, eye-catching display featuring banned/challenged books this week. The books are all covered in brown paper; on the front is the reason someone tried to ban it, and the title and author are along the bottom on the back. They're shelved in a separate bookshelf and there is police tape across the front and a warning sign. We browsed through the books and had a good discussion. I guessed a few titles based on the reason listed on the front, but several were shocking because I didn't associate the reason with the book at all and had no idea what the banner was referring to. It makes me wonder how many times a would-be banner actually reads the book.