Banned books

[Miss GOP]

The ALA just released the top ten challenged books from 2010--very interesting (and sad): http://ala.org/ala/newspresscenter/news/pr.cfm?id=6874

 

In honor of our personal freedom to choose books, I wrote a blog post with my Top Ten Favorite books that have been challenged in the past.

 

What are your favorite banned books? What do you think of the current list from the ALA (link above)?

 

Thanks!

Miss GOP

http://missgoodonpaper.blogspot.com/2011/04/top-ten-favorite-banned...

[Robin Jones]

Banned books hinder children from gaining knowledge and exploring the unknown to form their own opinions.  One can teach a child to think but not how to think, according to my Daddy.  I read The Absolutely True Diary..., The Hunger Games and Twilight and was surprised to find these books on the list.  Though the books meet the criteria of banned materials it still seems a bit harsh.  All of these books were really good.  My husband and I allowed our children to read some of these books and we have had some intense and eye opening conversations.  A child should be well informed and given access to correct information so they can grow up to be well informed and intelligent individuals.  I have to admit The Absolutely True Diary...book really disturbed me.  It seemed stereotyped, rude and full of unfounded information.  I did research on the author and found it was loosely based on his life.  Some of the images disturbed me and some of the conversation was a bit much but teenagers are talking about sex, drugs and alcohol.  Parents need to have a dialog with their children not a monologue.  This way the children know they are getting correct information and given access to those things that may leave them a bit puzzled.

[Kari Boardman]

I'm against banning books because I think it is up to the parents to decide what their kids are exposed to.  What I do have a problem with is how some books are being marketed as YA, when they clearly contain some material that is not appropriate for tweens and I think that is where the trouble begins.  Parents just see YA and think it's OK for their 12YO.    But then that is my opinion.  I don't think I can tell someone else's child not to read Twilight at age 12, but I CAN tell my own child not to read it. Parents need to use their discretion.  It is sad that because some parents don't pay attention, others feel the need to step in and do it for them. "To Kill A Mockingbird" by Harper Lee is one of my favorite books and it was banned at one time. 

[Sherri Hayes]

I am completely against 'banning books'. Our library has three sections: childrens, young adult, and adult. When you set up your library card, they code it in their system differently for children than they do for adults so that children can not check out adult material. Children need to be protected from certain materials that are not meant for them and for the most part that is up to the parents although I think what our library has set up is a good supliment. My curiousity comes in what libraries these books were banned from. Are these mainly at school libraries where young children below the age recommendations for the books have access to them, or are these public libraries for all ages? I know that I spoke to my local library director about complaints like this a few years ago and she told me that on their form they have for complaints such as these they ask at the bottom if the person has read the book in its entirety. According to her, most of the time that answer is no.

[Allison]

I am also curious about what does it even mean today to say certain books are banned. Books can be bought at local stores, from online vendors, or even simply borrowed from friends. What purpose do bans serve? Why do libraries make these decisions? How effective are the bans?

[Scott Parker]

Not so much banned as revised - "Huck Finn." Outrageous.

[Keith B. Darrell]

Your post has several components. First there is the issue of censorship. Of course, I am against banning books. Freedom of expression is both a moral right and a Constitutionally protected right (in the US). 

But then, there is the issues of age-appropriate reading matter. Should certain books be kept out of reach of children if they contain adult language, adult situations, sexual situations, or graphic violence? If so, how does society keep these books from children? Banning their publication is one option, but not, in my opinion, an acceptable one. But while I would find banning such content from a public library unacceptable, it might be appropriate to keep it out of, say, a grade school library or a church library.

There are differences between preventing publication of a book (prior restraint); refusal (by wholesalers and distributors) to distribute a book; refusal (by bookstores and chains) to stock a book; and banning a book from a library (especially since there are so many types of libraries, from grade school libraries to public libraries). 

In the past, publishers acted as gatekeepers and much "offensive" material was simply never published, and what slipped out (e.g., Lady Chatterley's  Lover, Tropic of Cancer) often remained in pallets in distributors' warehouses or in sealed wrapper on the top shelves of dimly-lit bookstores. With the self-publishing boom and the rise of Amazon and e-books, the gatekeepers have fallen by the wayside, which raises yet another issue: do we need a rating system for books? If so, who would issue the ratings? A review board or the publishers themselves? 

Another issue: what if Amazon decides to decline books based on content? As a near monopoly in online and ebook sales, should one company have the right to ban books?

 

http://keithbdarrell.blogspot.com/

[andone]

that's really sad... i just read 2 of them though...

5. "The Hunger Games" by Suzanne Collins

10. "Twilight" by  Stephenie Meyer

 

booksaremydrugs