It's "Banned Books week" - American Library Association

[AmISearching]

Shiann:

So that’s a great point. I guess when I read the article/information, I had images of irate citizens, and defensive library boards- debating over a particular title.

ROTFLOL - no unfortunately that is still the case… which ever direction it goes (sometimes its that people think that a book does need to be in the library, sometimes they think not)

I think I confused everyone with discussing “censorship” in the same topic as banned books…

ALA’s list is indeed books that have been actively banned in some places… (I just get sick and tired of hearing in library school that “all Christians are for censorship and want to ban books” whatever!) I also just don’t like the idea that they don’t talk about the more serious banning of books that goes on around the world…

and yes - no library can have everything - so collection development is very important - but Banned books does normally refer to those that were available and then were pulled by principals or superintendants or public library boards after someone got mad…

 

[Morning_Glory]

I think the American Library Association’s “Banned Books Week” is a great way to see what some people find offensive and are calling to be banned in their schools and libraries.

However, I think most of the banning goes on in the school libraries rather than the public libraries. And most of the banning called for comes from book reports that school children have to do for homework. Most times though, teachers give a list of books that kids can choose from to write the report on. If a parent object they can have their kids choose another book, more appropriate for their family’s values, to read and report on.

I like to look over the “Banned Books” list to see if I’ve read them and if I had found them offensive. More than likey, it will encourage me to read these books to find what is offensive about them.

 

[Debunkerman]

Morning Glory:

I think the American Library Association’s “Banned Books Week” is a great way to see what some people find offensive and are calling to be banned in their schools and libraries.

“Officially banned” books are readily available for us to read. Books that are effectively banned are scarce, hard to find, and unavailable. For example, Failure of the Public trust is a title that reveals corruption at the highest levels of the U.S. government and media. This truth is very offensive to most Americans. It would also be offensive to journalists and our leaders.

It was once availabe online at the University of Pennsylvania that now only provides a dead link.
onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/lookupname?key=Clarke%2c%20John

• Failure of the Public Trust* is not a familiar book to most people and it would never be featured on a banned book list because then people might actually read it for the reason you stated, to find out what offends.

Failure of the Public Trust by John Clarke, Patrick Knowlton, and Hugh Turley is a court document and therefore a public document. But you can’t buy it in any bookstore in the USA. Stores will not sell it. It is not in any public library, no library would put it on their shelf. It can only be found online in pdf file format at one website.
fbicover-up.com/proof/index.php

A shortcut or short version of this 511-page book can be found in transcripts of phone conversations of assistant U.S. attorney, Miquel Rodriguez. Rodriguez resigned from Kenneth Starr’s staff rather than participate in the criminal cover-up of a murder. See transcripts here
aim.org/special_report/1474_0_8_0_C/
and here
aim.org/special_report/1878_0_8_0_C/
and here
aim.org/special_report/1879_0_8_0_C/

Banned books that are avaible are not nearly as interesting as the banned books that are kept from the public view. Knowledge of popular banned books will make you popular.

Knowledge of the truth will not make you popular with men, but it will move you closer to the source of all truth, God.

 

[kmktexas]

AmISearching?:

and yes - no library can have everything - so collection development is very important - but Banned books does normally refer to those that were available and then were pulled by principals or superintendants or public library boards after someone got mad…

Including principals and/or superintendants in the list just points out how misleading it is. If a parent objects to a book being in a school library, which by its nature is encouraging students of a particular age to read the books within, it is usually an objection to the age-appropriateness of the book. In public libraries, there are also objections to the placement of some books with adult themes in the “Junior Literature” section.

If parents get mad that an adult book is being misrepresented and offered as appropriate for children, then this is just holding our libraries and school administration officials properly accountable.

 

[TheBlackGhost]

Jabronie:

You know, I’m not in favor of “banning books” or anything like that, but you’ll note that every year when this list comes out, the number one banned book of all time is always left off of the list. That book: The Bible.

Pretty offensive book right there, I tried reading it once, after reading like 4 pages of the same thing over and over agian I quit. A few months later I found my sisters children’s Bible, she goes to a Catholic school so I guess they pass these out or something like that, it was a condensed version with pictures to keep you interested, and even that thing made me feel pretty sick, am I alone in hoping this god forsaken book is taken off the shelves?

 

[marcadam]

The Chocolate War? That’s one of the best novels I’ve ever read. It’s classified as “young adult fiction” – i.e., targeted for 12-year-olds, and it is set in a Catholic boys’ school, where the “war” is over which team will sell the most chocolate bars for the annual fundraiser. It’s a small-town high school edition of The Lord of the Flies. Brilliant. OK, maybe it was challenged because it is set in a Catholic school?

I would think it is particularly offensive to fans or administrators of Jesuit education. Such is depicted as directly responsible for the increased delinquency or utter dissolution of its products. In it, no one escapes. All the boys either cooperate with evil and succeed or attempt to confront it and are destroyed. Meanwhile, every adult (the priests and brothers teaching) is depicted as either an inept fool or a Machievellian manipulator of the students.

Consider that the events of Lord of the Flies occur primarily because of the extreme separation from adult guidance. In *The Chocolate War]/i], the dissolution is the product of the twisted guidance of inept or manifestly evil adults. This isn’t literature, this isn’t even a somewhat honest look at the culture of all-boys schools guided by celibate men. This was a ham-fisted morality play that only succeeded in convincing me that the author has some serious issues with his childhood and probably the Catholic church.

Perhaps a person could glean some enjoyment from this book, but that someone responsible for the formation of children would want to limit their exposure to it is entirely understandable.*

 

[stellina]

Della:

Oh but the Bible has been banned from many a public school library already, sad to say.

Huckleberry Finn is on the list because there are some people who don’t like the way Twain portrayed blacks in it and because some of the white people in the book refer to blacks as the “n” word.

I too think it narrow-minded PCism gone amok, but that’s kind of society we’ve come to with the recent court decisions giving everyone rights except the majority.

I did my student teaching in a public school & during my term one of the classes was reading “Huckleberry Finn”. My co-operating teacher refused to use a certain racial slur which occurs repeatedly in the book when anyone was reading excerpts aloud (I also recall him not allowing them to quote the word in their reports either), and let me tell you, it was a very awkward and difficult way to teach it. Also ineffective from an instructional standpoint, since everyone paid more attention to tip-toeing around the bad words than figuring out what Twain was really saying. I still don’t know why he didn’t just teach another book if it bothered him that much.

 

[kahenns]

Della:

Oh but the Bible has been banned from many a public school library already, sad to say.

Huckleberry Finn is on the list because there are some people who don’t like the way Twain portrayed blacks in it and because some of the white people in the book refer to blacks as the “n” word.

Mark Twain is being satirical toward a racists society… hmm they want to ban a book for making fun of racism… they need to do a better job understanding the books… cynics. plus you said that the bible was banned, but there arent court cases saying that a class cannot read it for literary value… just no teacher has the gumption… plus there are better literary works out there

one more note… have you ever noticed that people are more inclined to read a book once it is banned… curious human nature… like how during the prohibition in the US there were more alcoholics something to think about

 

[Debunkerman]

The Jungle and *The Brass Check *by Upton Sinclair are not a banned books.

The Jungle is available in almost any library or bookstore but * The Brass Check* is hard to find. This book is not in bookstores or libraries. Old, used copies can be found online but only by those few people who know it exists.

In my opinion books that are kept from public view are effectively banned. While the officially banned books are available. The truth about American journalism revealed in The Brass Check is kept from the public view.

 

[Urf]

Harry Potter? Give me a break.

 

[Debunkerman]

Urf:

Harry Potter? Give me a break.

If a popular, well publicized, officially banned, book is available is the book effectively banned?

OTOH, are some unpublicized, unknown, books that are not officially banned, effectively banned since they are not in stores or libraries and no one reads them?