|
Grex > Books > #76: Have You Read Any Banned Books Lately? | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 21 new of 25 responses total. |
jazz
|
|
response 5 of 25:
| 
Oct 9 15:39 UTC 1998 |
No, losing the Great War is what allowed Hitler to get started. :P
The best way to prevent something from being seen in this economy
is to create a slicker, more advertised, but noticeably different version
of it.
|
mcnally
|
|
response 6 of 25:
|
Oct 10 06:04 UTC 1998 |
re #3: As far as I can tell the Bible is the last thing most of the
pro-banning folks would like to restrict. There are two main camps of
would-be censors, one which is very conservative and religious and its
opposite which is interested in restricting books which are not politically
correct. As far as I can tell the former camp still substantially
outnumbers the latter, not that I find either one acceptable..
|
orinoco
|
|
response 7 of 25:
|
Oct 11 16:54 UTC 1998 |
I think the most recent banned book or ex-banned book or whatever that I read
was "I know why the caged bird sings". Which was quite a while ago. Then
again, I'm not really up on what's been banned and what hasn't.
|
lilmo
|
|
response 8 of 25:
|
Jun 4 00:15 UTC 1999 |
Re resp:4 - Ah, but the 14th Amendment applies the Bill-of-Rights
restrictions to the states, too. If a community wants to express its standards
by not stocking a particular book in its public or school libraries, I think
that that is within their rights. If a group of private citizens wishes to try
to convince their fellow citizens to do so, then that is within their rights,
too. Now, if they want to tell private booksellers that they may not stock a
particular book, that's a different story.
|
bookworm
|
|
response 9 of 25:
|
Jun 4 17:08 UTC 1999 |
If I had time, I would read all banned books.
|
jazz
|
|
response 10 of 25:
|
Jun 4 21:36 UTC 1999 |
The restriction is on states and the Federal government, but isn't
against the spirit, if not the letter, of the law, for a community to refuse
to stock a book that others wish to read or wish to donate?
|
bookworm
|
|
response 11 of 25:
|
Jun 11 22:40 UTC 1999 |
If they restrict the stocking of a book, the customer may still request the
book. If the seller wishes to keep the customer's business, it will offer to
order the book for the customer. Still, the customer must know exactly which
book to ask for.
|
lilmo
|
|
response 12 of 25:
|
Jun 12 19:30 UTC 1999 |
Re resp:10 - I think that a stronger case could be made for that in
reference to public libraries than to school libraries. Again, they would not
be prohibiting the (presumably) protected speech, but expressing their local
community standards by not condoning it in the publicly controlled forum. If
they tried to prevent a speech by a disapproved person, or prohibit sale or
distribution of the writings thereof, again, that would clearly be a violation
of free-speech rights.
I think that a state would be too big to be considered a "local community"
in this sense, but a town or city would not be. Am I making any sense?
|
bookworm
|
|
response 13 of 25:
|
Jun 14 02:38 UTC 1999 |
I!tel losttoy
if we
|
mcnally
|
|
response 14 of 25:
|
Jun 15 22:13 UTC 1999 |
I keep reading "losttoy" as "tolstoy".. guess I'm in the right place,
anyway..
|
bookworm
|
|
response 15 of 25:
|
Jun 19 02:11 UTC 1999 |
Sorry, I got interrupted and forgot I was shelled to respond.
|
orinoco
|
|
response 16 of 25:
|
Jun 22 16:37 UTC 1999 |
Wait - lilmo, are you saying that public libraries should have more freedom
in refusing to stock books than school libraries should? That seems kind of
illogical. There are plenty of books that belong in any public library that
I wouldn't dream of putting in an elementary school library...or am I
mis-reading #12?
|
bookworm
|
|
response 17 of 25:
|
Jun 24 18:05 UTC 1999 |
I worked in a public library for two years.
Our policy was that everything was available based on the requests of the
patrons. If people didn't want their children to read them, they would,
presumably, take charge of their children and prevent them from reading
the book.
Do you know how many complaints a library usually gets from irked patrons
who think their public library is "compromising the standards of the
community"?
I learned of a library that had lots of requests for Madonna's book
"Sex". That particular library had a policy that, if they had a certain
number of requests, they would purchase a copy of the book. When the
library's board of directors decided to buy a copy of the book, a large
percentage of the community got up in arms and complained a lot and
picketted the library. The library still bought the book. They bought
only one copy and kept it in the reference department on a chain so that
no one could steal it. They said that, although the pictures were fairly
explicit, they weren't very good (really grainy). Eventually, all the
furor died down and life got back to normal. After a month, the book had
been worked over to the point where it was past redemption (torn pages,
pages ripped out, dog eared, doodled, etc). So the book was discarded
and the board of directors decided not to get another copy.
Now--
That was a very big deal, but the point of it all is, public libraries
are usually subsidized by the government, which means that they are
subject to the Bill of Rights: specifically the right to freedom of the
press. In other words, if you don't want your kids to read it, fine.
Just don't try to stop the rest of us from reading it.
<rant=off>
Sorry, I get verbose when I'm passionate about something. <blush>
|
orinoco
|
|
response 18 of 25:
|
Jun 26 18:10 UTC 1999 |
I can remember, when I was around 10 and just getting into sci-fi, checking
out a copy of A Clockwork Orange from the library and being told, very calmly,
that I probably wouldn't like it anyway and why don't I find something else
to read. I don't remember my parents monitoring what I read too closely,
although they probably did and I just didn't notice. So now I'm trying to
think what would have happened had I been able to read whatever I got my hands
on... Part of the problem is, I can't imagine growing up any differently
than I have been growing up, so it's hard to picture any sort of "what if"
about my own life.
I guess what it amounts to is, on the one hand I can't imagine being hugely
altered by a book or two: being a non-violent person, I most likely would have
put down A Clockwork Orange after 10 pages or so even if I could understand
it, and if I had been a more violently inclined person, the book wouldn't be
bringing out anything that wasn't already there. On the other hand, Everyone
seems to agree that there are things that a 10-year-old shouldn't read, and
I find it hard to believe that Everyone is wrong on this one.
|
bookworm
|
|
response 19 of 25:
|
Jun 28 04:44 UTC 1999 |
Depends on the emotional maturity of the ten year old.
Jon was reading the Newspaper at ten and that has lots more violence in
it than the average novel.
In any case, I still think that if parents want their child not to read
certain books they should monitor their child's library visits, not try
to pass laws that restrict books from entering the library.
|
lilmo
|
|
response 20 of 25:
|
Jun 29 00:06 UTC 1999 |
Re resp:16 - You are misreading resp:12 but I'm not surprised. It took
me almost a whole minute, staring at it and resp:10 to figure out what was
said, and I'm the one that wrote it!! :-) There seem to be too many canceling
negatives for it to be obvious what was meant.
What I was trying to say was that it seems to be much more likely to be
against the spirit of the law for public libraries to refuse to stock items
than for school libraries to do so. That is, I think it would be easier to
use the courts to force a public library to carry something than a school
library. I think that it is clear that children need protection.
Does that make more sense?
|
bookworm
|
|
response 21 of 25:
|
Jun 30 18:01 UTC 1999 |
My point exactly, lilmo. Very well put.
|
orinoco
|
|
response 22 of 25:
|
Jun 30 22:23 UTC 1999 |
Ah. I see. I must've missed one o' them negatives....
|
lilmo
|
|
response 23 of 25:
|
Jul 8 20:35 UTC 1999 |
Like I said, I'm not surprised, DV.
Thank you, bookworm.
So, have you read any banned books lately? :-)
|
swa
|
|
response 24 of 25:
|
Sep 24 03:50 UTC 1999 |
It occurs to me that most of the books I've read that I know have been
banned and frequently censored, I read in my public high school.
Interesting, that.
The only banned book I'm especially planning to read is _The Satanic
Verses_. I read another Rushdie book that I much enjoyed, and am curious
as to what the fuss is all about with this one. Not sure if I'll get
around to it anytime soon, though...
|
lilmo
|
|
response 25 of 25:
|
Sep 25 01:59 UTC 1999 |
Well, let us know how it goes, when it does, OK?
|