Submitted by Elaine Magliaro, Guest Blogger
Banned Books Weeks 2011 will be observed September 24-October 1.
Jonah Goldberg claims that Banned Books Week (BBW) is nothing but hype. In a column he penned for USA Today in early September, Goldberg wrote that BBW “is an exercise in propaganda.” He continued, “For starters, as a legal matter no book in America is banned, period, full stop (not counting, I suppose, some hard-core illegal child porn or some such out there). Any citizen can go to a bookstore or Amazon.com and buy any book legally in print — or out of print for that matter.”
Evidently, Goldberg thinks that books which have been removed from the shelves of public and school libraries “due to pressure from someone who isn’t a librarian or a teacher” don’t count as “banned books.” He appears to believe they can only be considered banned books if they have been banned on a national level. So what if books are removed from school and public libraries? One can always get a copy at a book store or from Amazon.com. Right?
Goldberg got into the numbers of challenged books to demonstrate how “overhyped” stories about banned books are. He wrote that reported challenges had dropped from 513 in 2008 to 348 in 2010—and that the “historic norm is a mere 400 to 500 bans or challenges” a year. He said there are almost 100,00 public schools in this country educating approximately 50 million students—as well as 33,000 private schools and 10,000 public libraries. According to Goldberg’s math—if there were “500 parent-driven ‘bans or challenges’ in a given year in public schools, that would mean for every 200 public schools, or every 100,000 students, at least one parent even complained about an age-inappropriate book. What an epidemic!”
Reported challenges…a mere 400 to 500 bans or challenges…only one book challenge per 100,000 students. What’s the fuss all about? Why should people be concerned? Maybe the American Library Association, public libraries, and schools in this country should only begin to worry when the censorship, challenging, and banning of books becomes an epidemic. Why address the problem when the numbers are so small?
Well, one could conclude that many book challenges aren’t reported. As noted on the ALA website: “We do not claim comprehensiveness in recording challenges as research suggests that for each challenge reported there are as many as four or five that go unreported.” And I have little doubt that there are many librarians, teachers, readers, and defenders of the First Amendment who feel that an historic norm of 400 to 500 challenges a year are a few hundred too many.
I have to wonder at Goldberg’s motives for writing his column. Was it so he could get in a dig at teachers’ unions? Here’s what he wrote about them:
“These days, teachers unions are fond of claiming that apathetic parents deserve more of the blame for the woeful state of education today. Maybe so. But a national policy of bullying parents interested in what their kids are reading hardly seems like the best way to encourage them. Indeed, from these numbers, the real scandal might be that so few books are “banned or challenged.’”
I’m not sure how Goldberg drew the conclusion that there is a “national policy” of bullying parents who are interested in what their children read. He didn’t provide any proof that there was. And why would Goldberg suggest that the real scandal is that so few books are being banned or challenged? Does he think that more books should be banned and challenged every year?
Molly Raphael, President of the American Library Association, responded to Goldberg’s column. She wrote:
“When a library removes a book from its shelves because someone disapproves of the ideas or opinions contained in the book, that is censorship. When it is done by publicly funded schools and libraries — government agencies — it is a violation of the First Amendment.”
Raphael said we should remember that when a book is removed from a library it is an act of censorship that affects an entire community—not just one individual or one family. She also said that public libraries “serve everyone, including those who are too young or too poor to buy their own books or own a computer.” She added that the reason librarians and library users celebrate BBW is as “a testament to the strength of our freedom in the United States. We celebrate the freedom to read because we all know that we are so fortunate to live in a country that protects our freedom to choose what we want to read. If you doubt this, just ask anyone from a totalitarian society. That is why we draw attention to acts of censorship that chill the freedom to read.”
Do not feel safe. The poet remembers.
You may kill him — another will be born.
Deeds and words shall be recorded.
~ Czeslaw Milosz, Poland
The lives of artists are more fragile than their creations. The poet Ovid was exiled by Augustus to a little hell-hole on the Black Sea called Tomis, but his poetry has outlasted the Roman Empire. Osip Mandelstam died in a Stalinist work camp, but his poetry has outlived the Soviet Union. Federico García Lorca was killed by the thugs of Spain’s Generalissimo Francisco Franco, but his poetry has survived that tyrannical regime.
We can perhaps bet on art to win over tyrants. It is the world’s artists, particularly those courageous enough to stand up against authoritarianism, for whom we need to be concerned, and for whose safety we must fight.
~ Salman Rushdie, 19 April 2011
Top Ten Most Frequently Challenged Books of 2010 (Out of 348 challenges as reported by the Office for Intellectual Freedom)
- And Tango Makes Three*, by Peter Parnell and Justin Richardson
Reasons: homosexuality, religious viewpoint, and unsuited to age group - The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian, by Sherman Alexie
Reasons: offensive language, racism, sex education, sexually explicit, unsuited to age group, and violence - Brave New World, by Aldous Huxley
Reasons: insensitivity, offensive language, racism, and sexually explicit - Crank, by Ellen Hopkins
Reasons: drugs, offensive language, and sexually explicit - The Hunger Games, by Suzanne Collins
Reasons: sexually explicit, unsuited to age group, and violence - Lush, by Natasha Friend
Reasons: drugs, offensive language, sexually explicit, and unsuited to age group - What My Mother Doesn’t Know, by Sonya Sones
Reasons: sexism, sexually explicit, and unsuited to age group - Nickel and Dimed, by Barbara Ehrenreich
Reasons: drugs, inaccurate, offensive language, political viewpoint, and religious viewpoint - Revolutionary Voices, edited by Amy Sonnie
Reasons: homosexuality and sexually explicit - Twilight, by Stephenie Meyer
Reasons: religious viewpoint and violence
(*And Tango Makes Three is a picture book.)
Sources and Further Reading
Column: Banned Books Week is just hype (USA Today)
Banned Books Week celebrates freedom to read (USA Today)
Banned Books Week: Celebrating the Freedom to Read (ALA)
Frequently Challenged Books (ALA)
Banned Books Week 2011 (Amnesty International)
The 11 Most Surprising Banned Books (PHOTOS, POLL) (Huffington Post)
Letter re: Slaughterhouse Five Ban in Republic, MO (National Coalition Against Censorship)
First Lady Laura Bush Cancels Poetry Gathering Fearing Anti-War Poems: Democracy Now! Hosts Its Own Poetry Slam with Def Poetry Jam Stars Staceyann Chin, Suheir Hammad and Steve Colman (Democracy Now, 2/7/2003)
Other Turley Blog Posts on the Censorship, Challenging, and Banning of Books
Publisher Announces Intention to Edit Huckleberry Finn To Remove N-Word
On the Banning, Censorship, and Challenging of Books
Brown Bear, Brown Bear, What Do You See?—I See Anti-Marxists Looking at Me!
OT … I just finished reading Elaine’s post regarding OS … Tex and I offer our sincere sympathies to OS and his family in this, their time of mourning..
“Banned Books Week” worth the hype
by Gary Panetta
Journal Star
9/12/2011
http://blogs.pjstar.com/panetta/2011/09/12/banned-book-week-worth-the-hype/
Excerpt:
I winced this morning when I read Jonah Goldberg’s column about Banned Books Week, which takes place this year Sept. 24-Oct. 1.
Titled “Banned Books Week Overhyped Propaganda,” the opinion piece pokes fun at the annual effort by the American Library Association to throw a spotlight on attempts to force school and public libraries to remove books from the shelves that some people consider controversial.
For Goldberg, this effort is a bunch of lefty nonsense. There really is no danger of books being banned in the United States, he writes. This is just an effort to bully parents who are concerned about what books their kids may have access to.
I half agree with Goldberg. I don’t think there is a danger of mass censorship coming to the United States. In fact, thanks to the ALA and “Banned Book” week, people who challenge the presence of a book at the library don’t often succeed. The challenges, though, persist.
And even when there are no challenges, self-censorship can occur, especially in public schools. I can still remember my long ago high school librarian using a pair of scissors to remove pages from a novel that he thought might offend parents.
Of course, if books can’t be banned, they can be “edited.” Case in point: a new rewritten version of “Huckleberry Finn” that’s deemed safer and more child-friendly because racial language has been removed.
Goldberg’s opinion piece shows the weakness of treating issues in a conventional liberal-vs.-conservative terms. Doing so in this case misses some important questions.
Among them: What are the goals of school and public libraries?
In the case of a school library, one goal is the education of the students in science, history, literature and the arts. Another is simply to inspire a love of reading in students. Books have to be selected to meet these goals in terms of substance and accessibility. The interests of pressure groups from the right or left are pretty much irrelevant.
I suppose it is good to be mobile….
My book, A PAINED LIFE, a chronic pain journey, was ‘banned’ to the membership of the association who claimed their mission to be education about the disorder (trigeminal neuralgia). The refusal to acknowledge the book, even the refusal to allow, at a regional conference, business cards with the books’ title to be placed on a table amongst many pamphlets and info on the disorder: including ads, was an effort to keep them from knowing the book even existed. That to me is censorship (actively keeping the book away). (BTW the reason was because I mentioned my experience with a doctor who paralyzed my face – nothing negative just descriptive, as was the rest of the book about the entire experience of living with and striuggling against TN, but, as the presdient of the TNA told me, the reason I could not inform about the book, nor would they, was because the doctor was a board member and major name in TN.)
SwM,
Go to the redistricting thread … I posted a link to the Redistricting Game … it’s fun to play and educational.
I was talking to darby and was on Ireland time. It’s healthy to be mobile … good for you.
Blouise, LOL.
Good morning to you too Blouise. Why are you confused if am or pm? I am out doing fall (or almost) clean up.
Good afternoon, AY … oops, I mean good morning
I will.
darby 190,
Do as you wish.
lame (slang definition) – boring, dull, uninspired.
The party was lame.
I, initially was afraid to post here as I viewed some of the posters hostile. I am not sure if the women hate men. I get a feeling of some general hostility.
I am trying to figure out what “lame” means. My friend is lame because of the incident. I am unsure if I should post anymore, that word seem very unsympathetic when placed out all by itself.
darby190,
Everyone is welcome. Strength to your friend and to those who support and comfort her.
Elaine M.,
You said:
“That means it will no longer be available to any other child/person who wants to read it.”
So true, so true….
jvemeer51,
There is most definitely more than one way to ban a book. That said, a book store is a far cry from a public/school library.
*****
I worked as an elementary school librarian for a few years. I had a limited budget. My main goal was to purchase age-appropriate books that were high quality literature and books that helped to support the curriculum.
Many book challenges can be cordially addressed with a parent who is concerned about his/her child reading a particular book.
In Raphael’s response to Goldberg’s column, she wrote:
“Librarians have always supported a parent’s right to decide what his or her family should read. But in our democracy, other families should be able to make different choices for their own families, not dictated by a particular
political or religious viewpoint.”
The problem comes when one parent or group gets a book removed from a school or public library. That means it will no longer be available to any other child/person who wants to read it.
“It is important to note that, out of the four School Board Members, only one has actually read all three books.” (Elaine)
That sums it up nicely. Ignorance is bliss.
This is my second time to respond on this site. I have been watching from afar and it is late here in Ireland. I have been asking myself, have I found a home for feminist? It is presently about 2:18 p.m.
In Cork we had an assault last night of a very close friend of mine, she was in her 60s. The gardia is presently investigating. If anyone knows anything please contact them at 063-81222.or at Mallow Garda station on 022-31450.
There is more than one way to ban a book. The educational establishment, including librarians, are overwhelmingly leftist. They can ban books, and avoid being listed as the book banners, simply by not selecting books which question the liberal orthodoxy. I worked for a college book store at the U of Washington for three years. The number of conservative books chosen by a leftist faculty was minimal.
Zach,
“If you want to call it ‘censorship’ to pull a book from a library that’s unsuitable for kids or that doesn’t deserve shelf-space compared to a better book, fine call it censorship. But if that’s the case, then there’s nothing unwholesome, dangerous or sinister about censorship whatsoever.”
Unfortunately, it isn’t always the case that books are removed from library shelves because they are unsuitable for kids or are replaced by better books. There are people and groups in this country who think the Harry Potter books are bad for children. The Potter books have been some of the most highly challenged of children’s books.
*****
“Newspapers have a much more obvious and direct connection to the First Amendment, but we don’t consider harsh letters to the editor — i.e. “challenges” to editorial policy — to be censorious.”
That’s not a good comparison. Some challenged books–which happen to be quality literature–are removed from libraries. I haven’t ever heard of any harsh letters to the editors being the cause of a newspaper being banned.
Ultimately if you find this treacle persuasive then there’s little I can say to convince you otherwise. If you want to call it “censorship” to pull a book from a library that’s unsuitable for kids or that doesn’t deserve shelf-space compared to a better book, fine call it censorship. But if that’s the case, then there’s nothing unwholesome, dangerous or sinister about censorship whatsoever. As to whether it violates the First Amendment, that strikes me as nonsense too. Librarians have somehow convinced themselves that they are the final constitutional authority about what should or should not be in libraries, often including relatively unfettered access to online porn.
Oh, and to answer Magliaro’s question, my answer is Yes, I think it might be a good thing if there were more challenges to librarians’ judgment about what books kids should be reading. Newspapers have a much more obvious and direct connection to the First Amendment, but we don’t consider harsh letters to the editor — i.e. “challenges” to editorial policy — to be censorious. But when a parent questions the judgment of a librarian that’s supposed to be ominous threat to free speech? That’s bunk.
–from Jonah Goldberg’s response to this article.