Banning YA and younger books

[j. d. worthington]

Frankly, I see such debates as created by a) someone completely ignorant on the subject, b)someone who feels that everything has to meet their own standards on all levels, c) someone who simply feels like stirring the pot, d)a way to keep our children uninformed of history.... and a few other things, ending in "it's a non-debate in the sense of a created debate, without any validity, no matter how heated it may become"; any or all of the above may be the case. Let's face it -- and this ties in with the debate on LotR being "racist" -- until after the liberation of the camps, what we would call racist elements entered into all writing dealing with more than a single culture, sometimes quite heavily, and often derogatorily, from at least Homer on. Human beings are ethnocentric; it's a fact. To deny that's had its impact on literature, to deny its historical place in literature, is to deny reality. We may not like such things, we may find them offensive; but if we go cutting out everything that different groups find offensive, I'm not sure there'd be anything left! Little Black Sambo, for instance, wasn't about African-Americans, or even Africans; it was an Indian tale in origin (and I, for one, always thought that was one smart little kid to outwit the tigers) as opposed to, say, "George Washington Rabbit", which was an "American Negro Tale" (as they were then classified) which had a particularly dense little protagonist; this was not a racial stereotype, it's a part of folktale to have such broad characterizations in order to make their points -- in this case, about people who take things too literally. Look at some of the early Norse tales about Thor -- which is where we get the term "dunderhead", incidentally.

And in Twain's case, especially, this is ridiculous. It shows how even a basically good person can be corrupted by the ignorant beliefs of their culture. (And, frankly, I find this sort of literary revisionism to be placed rather highly among our own.)

[Alia]

Originally Posted by ZoeRat

Lol, that's a good point. In one of my English classes, we watched a video about a school that tried to ban "Tom Sawyer," because a lot of black parents didn't like the use of the "N" word in the book, claiming the book encouraged racism. The debate was that the book was written in the time period when that word was used often, and besides that, Tom was good friends with his aunt's slave, Jim, which was a step forward. What do you think about this debate?

It is ashame that narrow minded people still walk this earth and inflict their pain onto their children. One of the things I like about Tom Sawyer was not only was it a masterpiece but it also brought to life how the world really was. It wasn't necessarily all fictional. Any parent who would keep their child from reading and discovering is... {sensored} I do believe that books like Tom Sawyer could be used as a learning lesson. Why blacks were called 'nigger' once. Why there was discrimnation. What we can do to do our part not to repeat history and so forth. Teaching them values and strengths from past mistakes.

[Patrick Mahon]

It's an interesting debate isn't it? And yet I presume that most of the people who would like certain books banned from schools would not want the Bible (I'm talking from the perspective of largely Christian countries here) banned, would they? But the Old Testament has some pretty inflammatory and bigoted things to say about everyone who doesn't believe in the God put forward there. If Tom Sawyer should be banned, perhaps the Bible should be too?!

Personally, I'd like to trust our young people to be able to learn from whatever they read, particularly if it is read at school, where there are sensible people (on the whole!) to ask about the issues. Or am I too much of an idealist?

[Eareniel]

Is simply banning the book from our public schools enough? Perhaps a good old-fashioned book burning is just the thing we need to turn this generation back on to reading. What better way to encourage a teen, or pre-teen, to find out what all the fuss is about than by saying they can't have something. It seems to be working for those musicians with the "Warning: Contains Explicit Lyrics" stickers on their cds.

We have a different rating system in Canada than the US. I can't comment on the EU, as my evidence comes from the back of Region One DVDs, but it would appear that we are a tad more lenient than our neighbours to the south. My favourite is the US "R" rating equates to a "14 AA" here.

[CarlottaVonUberwald]

Originally Posted by kyektulu

It seems abit OTT to me, lets face it kids hear worse in the playground and many pearents swear infront of thier kids anyway... which I persoanlly feel is wrong.

i wouldnt find this opinion so odd if i hadnt read some of your other opinons on different subjects.. ( i mean no offence by this it just seems to stick out)

[Alia]

It's an interesting debate isn't it? And yet I presume that most of the people who would like certain books banned from schools would not want the Bible (I'm talking from the perspective of largely Christian countries here) banned, would they? But the Old Testament has some pretty inflammatory and bigoted things to say about everyone who doesn't believe in the God put forward there. If Tom Sawyer should be banned, perhaps the Bible should be too?!

Being raised with strong christian standards I love this arguement. It's classic. I use it often!

Perhaps a good old-fashioned book burning is just the thing we need to turn this generation back on to reading.

*shudders* That's blasphemy!!!!

[j. d. worthington]

On the subject of book burnings: the summer following my graduation, they actually had a purge of the high-school's library and a book burning in the lot. It don't work. Couldn't get these people to read by dragging, tying 'em down and drugging 'em and installing one of those Clockwork Orange helmets on their head. *sigh* Yep, I love my hometown.....

[carrie221]

I am against book banning because even when there seems to be a valid reason it always seems to go too far. If all the children books or even classics that people wanted banned from schools were banned there would be very few books in schools.

Books I have heard banned at either my schools or by particular teachers that I had:
-Bible
-Harry Potter Books
-Little House on the Prairie Books
-Tom Sawyer
-Dr.Suess books
-Any book dealing w/ magic
-Any book dealing with teen pregnancy
-Any book that has foul language
-Any book that talks about drugs
-Wizard of Oz
-Star wars books

I think that parents need to be responsible for what their children are reading (I started reading YA books when I was 8 and mostly adult books when I was 12; trust me my mother and father checked the books that I read to make sure that they were ok) and that people need to realize that books are books. They are to spark the imagination and if we get rid of them all then the world will be a very sad place.

Besides children see a lot more inappropriate things on TV especially the news which school let children watch as TVs are in almost all classrooms or just walking down the street.

[the smiling weirwood]

Dr, Seuss? Wizard of Oz? Who banns stuff like that? Why?

Anyway, back to Bookstop's question, everything written by Katherine Patterson is wonderful and should be made mandatory for school children. Same for the Giver and it's sequels.

[Alia]

Dr, Seuss? Wizard of Oz? Who banns stuff like that? Why?

Dr. Seuss... is perfect.

[j. d. worthington]

Dr. Seuss, I don't know much about the bans on that, just that they've happened. The Wizard of Oz has had several periods of being banned; one of them was by librarians who felt that it was "sub-literary" because of the frequent use of punning throughout the book, and they felt it was unsuitable as an introduction to literature for children. It has also been banned in some places (I kid you not) for being "communist propaganda" on the rather laughable context of the Wicked Witch of the West being green, representing rampang capitalism, while some of the more friendly denizens of Oz (or, rather, their territories on maps) were depicted as red or pink... *shakes head* And they banned Cat's Cradle at my school, too..... Oh, and Frankenstein has been banned in lots and lots of places; last I heard, it was still banned in some, but I don't know whether that's accurate or not (I doubt it, but one never knows)....

[the smiling weirwood]

People are insane!

[j. d. worthington]

Originally Posted by the smiling weirwood

People are insane!

*sigh* Yes, I know. Believe me, I know....

[Teresa Edgerton]

Speaking for myself, I think anyone who mistakes Twain for a racist is totally misreading his work.

However, I am willing to allow that black parents might know better than I do what is likely to upset their children or make them feel demeaned or degraded if read out loud in school.

And there is, after all, a big difference between banning a book so that no one can read it, and saying, "No, I don't want that book to be recommended or required reading at our school." The one is telling other people's children what they can or can't read at home, the other is taking responsibility (however misguided) for what the schools are teaching their own children. Interesting that when kids go bad, everyone says, "Where were their parents?" but when parents try to gain some control over the values that are being taught to their children they are horrible bigots who are inflicting their beliefs on other people. I don't have to agree with everything another parent thinks and believes to support their right to speak up on behalf of their children if they think there is something going wrong at their schools.

For every dyed-in-the-wool fundamentalist Christian parent who doesn't want Harry Potter or The Wizard of Oz read to their children in school, there is a liberal parent like myself who would certainly protest if the Bible were assigned reading at my children's school. If I expect them to be tolerant of my right to choose for my children, then shouldn't I extend the same right to them?

And there is also a big difference between allowing children to pick something up on their own for casual reading or out of curiosity, and the stamp of approval (and the perception that what they are reading is good and true) that comes of getting that book at school. Such a big difference, that I am always astonished that other people can't see it.

[the smiling weirwood]

Perhaps there should be disclaimers...