The Book Page

By ron

October 1, 2007 7:52 AM | Link to this

It semms as if everywhere I have gone in the last few years I encounter a young person wth their head stuck in a Harry Potter book.This can’t be a bad thing. A lot of the world’s young people now have something in common,something they can discuss among themselves;and their parents.It isn’t just children that are reading Harry Potter.In my lifetime I’ve read a lot of books,some banned.I have yet to turn to murder and mayhem,or religion.

By Jeff

October 1, 2007 8:06 AM | Link to this

I’m going to say that there ARE two sides.

I’m also going to say that I represent a 3rd side - a middle ground.

I do not believe in curtailing freedom.

However, I DO believe that there are things that we ought to prevent kids from seeing.

For example, I would not let a kid read Without Remorse or Killing Floor (two of the more common place examples I can think of). There’s just TOO MUCH in there that would rob a kid of any innocence he may have left. Note that I personally read Withourt Remorse for the first time somewhere around 15 yo. I would favor putting it on a list similar to rated R movies where no one under 17 can legally purchase or rent it. Not saying they can’t get their hands on it, but they couldn’t do it themselves.

And that is what I favor - a rating system, not unlike the MPAA, but even looser:

Kid-friendly, Mature subject matter, MAYBE one other rating. Mature subject matter would carry the same force of law that rated R movies do, and it would be reserved for books with significant violent or sexual imagery.

Then, libraries could carry ALL books, none would truly be “banned”, but you still have SOME protection from a kid getting a hold of something that could truly warp their mind (in a bad way).

Now, on the traditional book banning front, I would say that both ideological stripes - conservative and liberal - are equally as bad, and I can point to cases that prove my point. (Things like the Harry Potter issue on the conservative side, and things like people protesting libraries carrying Christian fiction - and ESPECIALLY Christian nonfiction - on the liberal side.)

By Georgia librarian

October 1, 2007 8:09 AM | Link to this

As a Georgia librarian, I say hooray for Banned Books Week! The freedom to read and freely acquire information is a hallmark of a truly free society. For contrast, just look at China, North Korea, Saudi Arabia and other countries that both curtail the freedom of speech and severely oppress their populations. I only wish the American Library Association, which sponsors Banned Books Week, would have some guts and condemn the imprisonment of the amateur librarians in Cuba, who continue to suffer for their advocacy of intellectual freedom. Shame on you, ALA!

By workingmom

October 1, 2007 8:32 AM | Link to this

Nothing will make a teenager want to read a book more than putting a “Mature Subject Matter” label on it!

I think banned book week should go one step farther. Everyone should be required to read a book with opposing views to their own (political, religious, whatever.) The point is not to convert but to understand better the other side’s view point even if we disagree.

By Fulton County Mom

October 1, 2007 8:32 AM | Link to this

I did not/do not read Capt Underpants…and have told my children (who do read him) that I find the whole idea silly….however, I guess myself or my family has read all the banned books you listed above.

Books are good thing. Reading is a good thing….Read, get addicted! (Besides Hermione is an avid reader!!!!!)

By Jeff

October 1, 2007 8:43 AM | Link to this

workingmom:

Ah, but at least with a rating label, it would then put the onus of “protecting the children” where it belongs:

On the parent

I’m not a fan of government intervention AT ALL. However, occasionally the government DOES need to take a SMALL step to make sure that people know that taking care of themselves is THEIR job. I think this is one of those times. Put the labels on the books, make the Mature label have the same force of law as rated R movies, and then the government can viably claim “Hey, we’ve done everything we can without restricting freedom. Being a parent is YOUR job, NOT OURS.”

By lovelyliz

October 1, 2007 8:45 AM | Link to this

Banned Book Week to be celebrated in conjunction with Book Burning Month.

By lovelyliz

October 1, 2007 8:48 AM | Link to this

Ever read the Bible? There are some freaky things going on in that book too!!!

There are certain books that my nice does not read, but banning them?

By Kate

October 1, 2007 8:50 AM | Link to this

I saw at my local library that a parent was challenging one of the Hardy Boys books because it mentioned dying in it. She did not want her 9 year old exposed to it. She then admitted that she did not read the whole book, only excerpts.

At the very least, anyone that challenges a book should be required to read the entire book rather than pick quotes out of context. Half of the group that participated in the Harry Potter debacle in Gwinnett admitted that they had not read even one of the books— “we don’t need to, one chapter was plenty.”

Banning books does not just happen in libraries. Last year, my son’s teacher would not allow anyone to read graphic novels or comics. She wouldn’t even let him read Maus which won the freakin’ Pulitzer!!

I like workingmom’s idea of reading a book with opposing views of my own.

By Kate

October 1, 2007 8:56 AM | Link to this

Oh, and the other book that my son’s fifth grade teacher wouldn’t let him read was Truman Capote’s A Christmas Memory!!! He begged her to read it which she eventually did. She grudgingly admitted that it was good, but reiterated that he should not be reading Capote. What’s up with that?!

By Jeff

October 1, 2007 9:00 AM | Link to this

Kate,

Eh, I could see not allowing “graphic novels” in class. The term is simply a fancy name for “comic book”.

And don’t go the “but they’re not all porn” route with me. It takes a decently well trained eye to differentiate between the non-porn and the porn ones, which means a kid could EASILY bring a porn one in to school and the first time the school would hear about it was when they were getting sued for allowing porn on campus.

At school, I have COMPLETELY different views on censorship than in the public at large. But I’ve also been a teacher, and that is what frames my outlook on censorship at school.

By One

October 1, 2007 9:05 AM | Link to this

Book Burning Month? Do people actually gather to burn books? I hope it’s those stupid romance novels!!

By Jeff

October 1, 2007 9:08 AM | Link to this

Oh, and I just wanted to plug our “book club” book The Road… I FINALLY got my hands on it. 287 pages, I’m on page 3.

We discuss it one week from today, right Phil?

By Kate

October 1, 2007 9:16 AM | Link to this

Egads, Jeff! Don’t make me come over there and smack you with a mackerel!!

Graphic novels are not comic books. They are novels which use both illustrations and text to tell the story. There are some great ones and some crap, just like the rest of the fiction genre.

Re: porn….if we are to continue along with your reasoning that a student could bring in a racey Manga novel, what is to stop another student from bringing in a soft porn novel? Do you read everything that everyone brings into the classroom?

By Jeff

October 1, 2007 9:30 AM | Link to this

Kate:

With illustrations, you basically have the video game of the book world. ZERO merit, other than the fact that the person happens to be reading a few words in addition to looking at the pictures.

If you want to spend your own money on the crap, feel free. But from an academic perspective - both school and library - I cannot condone it. The ONLY reason I believe it should be in a library is because my view of a library is that it should essentially be a free version of the local Barnes and Noble, but you have to return the book rather than getting to keep it. Since I support the local Barnes and Noble having said crap for purchase by those idiotic enough to do so, I must also support the library having it for those that choose to debase themselves by allowing it to cross their eyes.

By Georgia librarian

October 1, 2007 9:33 AM | Link to this

Ahhh…It’s good to see gun-totin’ Jeff on this blog too…

Everyone,

I certainly agree that parents need to be the ultimate authority on what a child reads. Teachers should also take into account age appropriateness and literary merit before making reading assignments. Having said that, though, the surest way to get a kid to want to read a book is to forbid it. I fondly remember Judy Blume’s Forever being passed surreptitiously from girl to girl in the sixth grade. Parents never knew about it. Now, with the Harry Potter controversy playing out all over the world, my recommendation is that parents, rather than totally forbidding it, read it together with their children and then discuss it in the context of their own values. That way they can impart the values and the kids will LEARN both from the book and their parents. If there was ever a teachable moment, HP is it. Anyway, that’s my humble $0.02…

By Georgia Librarian

October 1, 2007 9:43 AM | Link to this

Uh-Oh.

Take it from a professional, a library should be anything BUT a free version of B&N. There are (and should be) major differences… For instance, libraries must have information sources that are not available at the average store, for the use of researchers. Check out the resources on GALILEO…most of them are not available anywhere else. Also, libraries have something that no bookstore has, a priceless (but underpaid) information and research resource that is always available FREE of CHARGE to anyone. It’s called a librarian, most of whom have 2+ years of graduate (that means post-bachelor’s degree) education specializing in research and information science. Many librarians work behind the scenes to make sure a wide range of information is accessible and usuable for those who need it, whether online, electronic media, or paper. I encourage everyone to visit a library this week not just to see the books, but to see the universe of resources available.

By Kate

October 1, 2007 9:51 AM | Link to this

Jeff, have you read any graphic novels? Would you like a couple of suggestions of good reads?

Phil, have we taken this too far off topic? This could be a whole ‘nuther blog.

By Atlanta Pearl Girl

October 1, 2007 10:05 AM | Link to this

Harry Potter is a magical wonderful story that leaves a childs imagination to unfold into the wonderment of ‘just being creative and thinking outside the box!’……for those straight laced grandma panty wearing mothers who want to ban books….ban them in your own home….

If a book entices a child to read in this world of video games & way too much TV…I consider it a MIRACLE!!!!!!

Stop being such a Puritan….. In fact…. go live on a farm somewhere where you won’t have the ‘temptation’.

Holy Cow.

Atlanta Pearl Girl

P.S. ::::waving my magic wand at you…:::poof:::: you’re a frog!::::

By Jeff

October 1, 2007 10:18 AM | Link to this

Kate:

Actually, I was once quite a fan. Never went rabid over them like many kids today do. (Indeed, while I have been a fan of quite a few things in my life, I don’t think I’ve EVER gone to the levels you often see in “fans” of any particular thing.)

But I did enjoy them, on occassion.

However, the meat of my reading at the time was things like Box Car Children and Hardy Boys. Entirely appropriate for the age and actually quite interesting, though I’m sure if I went back and read them now I would see them as simplistic.

Also note that I began my love affair with “adult” books (non porn, I’m talking techno-thrillers and other books that kids don’t normally read) at LEAST by 6th grade. (I distinctly remember getting Debt of Honor and possibly The Hunt for Red October or some other techno-thriller from my grandmother after one of my surgeries from that era.)

I am starting to think though that the “graphic novel” might be a good discussion topic on another day…

By Jeff

October 1, 2007 10:28 AM | Link to this

Librarian:

OK, so the library should be a free B&N with enhanced features. My point being it should be stocked with the same kinds of things you would find in your local B&N. Not musty old books that stink. (A common problem in the library I haunted as a teen was that very issue - if it was a current release, the library WOULD NOT have it for at LEAST 2 years. Contrast that to my recent experiences, where a book that I had been waiting to come out in paperback - it had just come out in hardback in August- was at my local library no later than late August, and I had it in my hands labor day weekend.)

By Georgia librarian

October 1, 2007 10:43 AM | Link to this

Jeff, I disagree on old books. Many very valuable resources have gone out of print and are only available in older “packages”. This is another area where the library shines- providing things that, while they do not have the mass-market appeal you seek, are still important, still worthy of taking up that franction of a linear foot of storage that they do, and still appreciated by someone. If they are musty, that is because they are not being cared for properly. Comparing a library to a mass-market chain bookstore is like comparing apples and oranges. Both are fruit, but each has a different texture and flavor, each is used in different recipes, and each is an entirely different eating experience. If you are using your local library the way you use a B&N, then you are only scratching the surface. Go a little deeper.

By Jeff

October 1, 2007 11:00 AM | Link to this

Librarian:

Personally, I stopped using libraries for the most part once I got a job and could start building my own. I don’t use them professionally - though I have built a decent professional library through my own acquisitions - primarily because most of my research can easily be done online.

Now, I primarily use libraries (and this is a recent development - the book I mentioned in my last post was the first in nearly a DECADE from a library) as a way to be able to read a book without forking over the $5 - $20 to buy it.

Hence, the reason I feel they should be more like your local B&N, with the caveats already mentioned and hopefully a bigger selection. (For example, there are exactly 27 copies of a certain author’s two books that I am currently interested in SOMEWHERE in GA in a library. Contrast that to the fact the NOT A SINGLE BOOKSTORE I have been in in the Albany and Kennesaw/ Acworth areas has a SINGLE copy of this author’s works - at ALL, much less the two I am interested in. In fact, there are 85 copies of this author’s works in GA libraries. Again, note the discrepancy between that and the ZERO in any bookstore I’ve been in.)

THAT is what I want: A free B&N that happens to have a VASTLY improved selection.

And, with gapines.org, it becomes even EASIER to use the library than a bookstore!

I LIKE the evolution we are seeing in public libraries now. Just wish it hadn’t taken so long!

By Georgia Librarian

October 1, 2007 11:14 AM | Link to this

So you are mainly interested in mass-market books…which brings me to a couple of other points…Georgia libraries (especially academic, but also some public) have more non-book resources than they have books. If you look at the wide array of databses available on an academic library’s GALILEO, you will see the most up-to-date scholarly information on the planet- and guess what? For the most part it is NOT availaable on the internet at all. We are really nothing like B&N. It is a fallacy that adequate scholarly research can be done entirely (or mostly) on the web. In fact, in many ways, the web is dumbing us down.

By Phil Kloer

October 1, 2007 11:15 AM | Link to this

It’s nice to see a spirited discussion that doesn’t get ugly the way same blogs do. Thank you all.

I’d like to go back to the idea of a rating system to be used on certain books in school libraries. We use voluntary industry-controlled (non-governmental) rating systems for movies, CDs, TV series and video games. And some parts of the web at least attempt to say if you are under 18 don’t come in here. (Yeah, I know, works really well.)

But my question is: If all these other media have voluntary rating systems, shouldn’t we have something similar for books? Why have them for everything else, and exempt books? Is there something sacred about books that makes them different from other media?

I’m just wondering.

By Georgia Librarian

October 1, 2007 11:22 AM | Link to this

Hey Phil. The key word is VOLUNTARY. The publishing industry should not be forced to do this. As far as labeling in libraries, I believe it is up to the individual school or public library to evaluate the needs of their constituency and do as they see fit. This should not be mandated at the state or federal level. Every community is different and has different information needs. Let the people, their representatives, and their information science professionals decide how (or if) to handle this locally.

By Jeff

October 1, 2007 11:38 AM | Link to this

As I stated earlier, I believe that in this case the government should take a SMALL step - requiring the labels - in order to drive the point home that it is NOT the government’s job to parent: it is the PARENT’S.

Now, exactly how to implement this could prove a useful discussion, but I believe the labels are DEFINETELY merited, and in fact I would go so far to say that they should be on books regardless of the destination. In other words, I don’t believe this is a library v bookstore issue.

By comp133xi7y

October 1, 2007 11:45 AM | Link to this

Is there something sacred about books that makes them different from other media?

Frankly, yes. Books allowed mankind to shuffle off the chains of ignorance and illteracy and ushered in the ages of Reason. Books, more than anything else, allow us to learn and grow. TV and Movies don’t do it. Games don’t do it. Books do.

The obsession with categorizing things in this country is getting wildly out of hand. So many parents are soooo terrified that their innocent little child will be exposed to some concept that will scar him for life. Get over it! I read Lord of the Flies in fourth grade and I have yet to bash in anyone’s head.

The thought of some government-appointed ratings board putting labels on books turns my stomach. Someone has to stand up to the self-righteous prigs who are trying to destroy education and learning in this country - leave the damn books alone.

By Jeff

October 1, 2007 11:51 AM | Link to this

comp:

Books, as inanimate objects, are no more responsible for the Age of Reason than a rock is for starting the Information Age.

By Jennifer

October 1, 2007 11:54 AM | Link to this

When I was in school, every book I had to read for school (or chose to read as part of a project) my mother read at the same time. We read anything and everything, it felt like — and there wasn’t ever a time that my mother said “You can’t keep reading this book,” but there were plenty of times she’d ask what part of the book I was up to and we’d talk about it. In one case there was a book with sex scenes and my mother asked if it made me uncomfortable, or if I thought sex was really like that. Seriously, folks, is that so hard — for a parent to do their job?

I remember one book in particular, where the heroine was raped by the hero. Sure, they eventually fell in love and the story was a fabulous typical romance novel, but my mother made it a point to sit me down and talk about that rape scene and the overall story not being that rosy.

I FIRMLY believe that books ought NOT be “rated” and certainly not banned.

By Phil Kloer

October 1, 2007 12:04 PM | Link to this

Atlanta Pearl Girl: Several posts higher, you turned someone into a frog. Turning people into frogs is frowned upon on this blog. Go to the UGA blog for that sort of nonsense.

Jennifer: I so relate to parents reading their kids’ books for as long as they can. My dad did that with/for me until I was about 12, and he joked that he stopped cause I was reading too fast for him to keep up. Then I kept track of what my daughter was reading very carefully for years. There is no substitute for loving parental involvement, and I’m not just talking about books.

But in order for parents to make informed decisions, a voluntary rating system would be helpful, or even just something like Mature warning.

I think of this particularly for Young Adult books. These books are all grouped together in bookstores and libraries. They can range from completely innocuous subjects to content that includes rape, molestation, drug use, etc. Those are valid topics for YA books, and I am not advocating censorship. But some clear way of helping parents would be helpful.

By comp133xi7y

October 1, 2007 12:05 PM | Link to this

Without the proliferation of knowledge, represented by books, the Renaissance might very well have foundered or stagnated. Instead, the new availability of books allowed for the rediscovery of Classical literature and philosophy, the development of scientific disciplines with shared jargon and ultimately Descarte’s codification of the modern scientific method.

The impact of the invention of the printing press on Western intellectual development can simply not be understated.

By Jeff

October 1, 2007 12:06 PM | Link to this

Jennifer:

Guess how much interest I would have in a book that is appropriate for a child (even 10 yo or so)?

If you said “more than likely, less than zero percent”, you would be CORRECT.

And I’m an AVID reader!

Can you even IMAGINE a parent that has ZERO interest in books in general???

Like I said, the exact logistics of who and how can be worked out. That it should happen, in my opinion, is BEYOND contestation. Note, however, that I do NOT favor a system in which anything is censored. If it is in print, it should be available for adults. The only reason I suggest one is to make it easier for parents to do their jobs and yet still promote reading for those kids whose parents are flat-out not interested.

Matter of fact, thinking about it now, maybe not even an outright “rating” so much as more of a label such as that on food:

This book contains drugs, murder, torture, rape, a view of the Vietnam War, and a transcendental story of the power of love and fate to change one man’s fate and - in the process - change the course of a nation. Parental guidance strongly suggested.” might be found on *Without Remorse. At that point, I, as the parent, could read the book first and let my kid read it as I see fit.

By Jeff

October 1, 2007 12:14 PM | Link to this

comp:

You sound like a librarian or other such with a strong interestin / partiality towards the history of books.

I maintain that the knowledge would have been rediscovered and that history would not have changed other than to possibly slow it down. ie things that are happening now might not have happened unntil 2400 had the printing press not been invented.

Note that books, however, have existed FAR longer than the printing press. Indeed, we STILL recover Mesopotamian stone tablets - the “books” of their day.

Now, if you want to make a case for written language in general, I could possibly agree with you there.

By t

October 1, 2007 12:22 PM | Link to this

harry potter is evil

By Freedom1

October 1, 2007 12:51 PM | Link to this

Yep, there are definitely two sides to this issue:

1. Freedom

2. Oppression

I’ll take Freedom, as guaranteed by the First Amendment any day.

By Survivor

October 1, 2007 1:02 PM | Link to this

Locally, some tried to ban “A Separate Peace” from the high school last year. Utterly ridiculous.

In 8th grade, I really began reading a variety of books. My folks - both schoolteachers - encouraged it. They knew very well what I was reading, too. Since it was one of the best reading years of my life, I recall a whole bunch of what I tackled:

• Animal Farm (George Orwell)
• A Separate Peace (John Knowles)
• One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest (Ken Kesey)
• Various Stephen King novels
• Several Lewis Grizzard books, including “Don’t Bend Over in the Garden, Granny, You Know Them Taters Got Eyes” (if unfamiliar, it’s Grizzard’s look at love. it includes discussion a of movies, teaching your dog to read, and Kathy Sue Loudermilk’s sweater.)

I read Richard Bachman’s (Stephen King) Rage in high school. Though I understood a bit of the viewpoint of the main character, it didn’t make me a double murderer and a hostage taker. Except for the violent behavior, I think the book was pretty spot-on in regards to teenage emotions.

Outside of a few liking Harry Potter, we can’t even get the kids interested in anything at the local school. If they’re required to read a book, it’s a 75 page 3rd grade level thing. At least one of the educators is going to use Animal Farm this year.

By EAVDad

October 1, 2007 1:04 PM | Link to this

I think common sense has to prevail as well.

While I strongly opposed banning any book, I think there needs to be an awareness in a SCHOOL library that some books may or may not be appropriate. And to that end, there needs to be a discussion. Just because someone doesn’t think something is appropriate for a school library doesn’t mean that person wants books to be censored.

However, that said, it’s gotta be a pretty high bar to take something out of any library.

By EAVDad

October 1, 2007 1:04 PM | Link to this

I think common sense has to prevail as well.

While I strongly opposed banning any book, I think there needs to be an awareness in a SCHOOL library that some books may or may not be appropriate. And to that end, there needs to be a discussion. Just because someone doesn’t think something is appropriate for a school library doesn’t mean that person wants books to be censored.

However, that said, it’s gotta be a pretty high bar to take something out of any library.

By Jeff

October 1, 2007 1:09 PM | Link to this

EAV:

I completely agree. There should be ZERO restrictions on what an adult can get their hands on at the public library. Put the labels on books to make it easier for parents to know what their kids are reading. Same reason we put ratings on TV, movies, and games, and the same reason we have labels on food.

After all, aren’t books “brain food”??

By V for Vendetta

October 1, 2007 1:12 PM | Link to this

The fact that we even have a banned books week is a disgusting testament to our puritan ancestors and overly-religious society.

If you’re not a smart enough parent to stay informed on what your children are reading, perhaps you don’t need to reproduce. Spare us all. You know, evolution and all that.

Oh, wait, I forgot, some of you don’t believe in evolution. Guess you’ve been reading the wrong books.

By Jeff

October 1, 2007 1:17 PM | Link to this

V:

As I pointed out in my first post today, liberals are just as bad as conservatives when it comes to banning books. The only difference is the flavor.

Ever read “The Language Police”? Fascinating look at this issue.

By kcohen1017

October 1, 2007 1:26 PM | Link to this

First, I’d like to repeat an earlier comment about this not becoming a flame war. Thank you, everybody.

Now for my two cents plain. I see no reason why books are so special that there cannot be a rating systems devised for them. Censorship? Absolutely not, but why not a common sense methodology along the lines of video games, music, television and movies? That would make things a lot easier for this sometimes befuddled parent. It would also put the responsibility of deciding what reading material is allowed in my home where it belongs, with me!

By V for Vendetta

October 1, 2007 1:53 PM | Link to this

Jeff, if you’ll notice, I never put a label on who I’m talking about. People who view the world through the distorted prism of religion fall equally on both sides of the aisle (just as people who are pro-censoship). Putting arbitrary ratings on books will not help, either. Movie ratings are some of the most non-sensical and arbitrary ratings we have. Who decides what is inappropriate? Why is ultra-violence more acceptable than sexual themes? it’s all in the eye of the beholder.

The decision should NEVER rest in the hands of the government, it should ALWAYS be up to the parents. You might label me a liberal for saying that, since I am not a fan of organized religion and all, but I can assure you, I’m not. Yes, there are certain scenarios when we need the government to step in. This isn’t one of them.

Again, if you are not responsible, intelligent, or involved enough to monitor what your kids watch, listen to, or read, then, perhaps, you should not be having kids. This isn’t a liberal or conservative issue, this is a common sense issue.

Other countries don’t waste time worrying about insignificant crap like this. They have better things to do.

By Jeff

October 1, 2007 1:59 PM | Link to this

V:

That’s why my idea is evolving into more of a “food label” rather than a simple rating. Put this label in books just like you do Library of Congress information, dedication page, etc. No more hassle on anyone than currently exists with the sheer effort of publishing a book, and yet parents get up front information about what is in the book. Check out my (incomplete - I forgot to mention the cussing) sample for Without Remorse in one of my posts from an hour or two ago.

By GaLiberal

October 1, 2007 2:08 PM | Link to this

The only books that should be “banned” from a library are ones that have no literary value. I’m thinking here Hustler and the like. Even Playboy has literary value on occasions. People who want books banned based on their personal religious views or sensitivities are a danger to an open and free society. I’ve read Candide and it was full of raunch, but it is considered a classic. I’ve read Brave New World, an excellent book, which was considered unsuitable for civilized people. The housewife that tried to get Harry Potter banned is a much bigger threat to this country than bin Laden or Saddam. If she doesn’t want her kids reading it fine, but don’t force your narrow religious or personal values on everyone else. That’s called a theocracy. I’ll bet she never read any of the books so the facts won’t get in the way of her delusions. But it’s not all her fault. The Rethuglicons have made everyone believe that dirty books full of sex, anti-family, and anti-Christian messages are everywhere in grade school libraries as part of a large liberal conspiracy to break down society. When you vote Rethuglicon, you vote against your own bests interests.

By V for Vendetta

October 1, 2007 2:20 PM | Link to this

The difference, Jeff, is that food labels protect us from things that are physically harmful, or could have adverse effects on our health.

Morality should never be regulated under and circumstances.

I’ve read Without Remorse myself, and I agree with your assessment that it is not appropriate for kids under 15 or so. But that’s not up to anyone but me to decide for my kids.

By Jeff

October 1, 2007 2:30 PM | Link to this

V:

This really isn’t about regulating morality so much as giving parents a tool to make their job easier while still enforcing the fact that it is THEIR job and not the government’s.

TRUST me, books like Without Remorse can have SEVERELY debilitating effects on certain people. Indeed, had I read it when I first saw it - in 8th grade - it is quite possible that I would have NEVER recovered from the tailspin I was already in.

Even more mundane books can serve to take a child’s innosence if one is not cautious. (I’m thinking Sparks’ The Notebook here!)

That is why I support the label idea: Let parents know what is in the book. You don’t have to say a WORD about plot, just put on there “This book contains…..” and list the various “ingredients”. If parents don’t want the kids to read anything having to do with those ingredients, they can ban it for their kid. If parents want to read it first and make the determination, that would also be their option. Or, if parents flat out don’t care what their kid reads - for whatever reason - they could just ignore the page entirely.

By jason

October 1, 2007 3:26 PM | Link to this

Banning books is more than curtailing freedom, but inhibiting learning, creativity, and imagination…areas long under oppression in this day and age, as can be seen by the cutting of art/humanity oriented programs in the schools. Government control of what we are allowed to write and read is intolerable, having ratings on them may be ok - but then WHO is doing the rating? Parents need information as to what is appropriate for their children, I will not deny that with all that is out there, but keep in mind…Parenting means being involved with your child. Knowing what they are reading, by reading it yourself may assist parents in being inclusive to that which interests their child…and more likely to not be seen as unbearable when having to censor them from inappropriate material. But even censoring your child will have to be followed with an explanation. Saying no without reason only stems the secretive search by the child to learn why… Banning books….? No, I say. If the Gwinnett mother does not wish her children to read material she questions…then LET HER BAN THESE BOOKS FOR HER OWN CHILDREN…IN HER OWN HOME! And if you want to save the children or the world…do so in some other more productive manner!

By jason

October 1, 2007 3:27 PM | Link to this

Banning books is more than curtailing freedom, but inhibiting learning, creativity, and imagination…areas long under oppression in this day and age, as can be seen by the cutting of art/humanity oriented programs in the schools. Government control of what we are allowed to write and read is intolerable, having ratings on them may be ok - but then WHO is doing the rating? Parents need information as to what is appropriate for their children, I will not deny that with all that is out there, but keep in mind…Parenting means being involved with your child. Knowing what they are reading, by reading it yourself may assist parents in being inclusive to that which interests their child…and more likely to not be seen as unbearable when having to censor them from inappropriate material. But even censoring your child will have to be followed with an explanation. Saying no without reason only stems the secretive search by the child to learn why… Banning books….? No, I say. If the Gwinnett mother does not wish her children to read material she questions…then LET HER BAN THESE BOOKS FOR HER OWN CHILDREN…IN HER OWN HOME! And if you want to save the children or the world…do so in some other more productive manner!

By Phil Kloer

October 1, 2007 4:14 PM | Link to this

Just a quick heads up: I’ve posted another entry today on all the authors coming to town this week, and didn’t want people to miss it.

Now back to the fray. Jeff, I appreciate your thoughtful posts, but I have to question when you say “liberals are just as bad as conservatives when it comes to book banning.” I really question that statement. Now when it comes to issues like campuses regulating offensive speech, yes there are liberals who argue for restricting freedom. And there may be people whom others consider liberals who have argued against books like Huck Finn.

But I would say those Huck Finn haters aren’t true liberals, they are just folks with a grievance. The vast majority of book banning is done by conservatives.

By All For It!

October 1, 2007 4:20 PM | Link to this

I’m 100% behind this content plan.

Warning: This book contains graphic violence, rape, murder, sexual servitude, incest, fratricide, sexual imagery, brutal warfare and slavery.

That’s right folks - let’s get this system going and slap the above label on The Bible. That’ll give parents just what they need to filter their children’s reading habits.

By Jeff

October 1, 2007 4:23 PM | Link to this

Phil:

The Language Police has the case better than I remember it, but the basic idea is that the extremists on either side favor banning books that disagree with their ideologies.

Conservatives favor banning witchcraft and homosexuality, among other topics.

Liberals favor banning books promoting traditional family values, anti-abortion issues, or the history of Christianity (unless it makes Christianity look bad).

Read that book SEVERAL years ago though, and only remember that primary theme: both are equally bad.

By Jeff

October 1, 2007 4:27 PM | Link to this

All for it:

Caveat is that I would also mention the good things (if any) about a book so that parents can make a determination based on the ENTIRETY.

Notice the part in my sample for Without Remorse that included the love story and how the story of that book ultimately affects the entire country? (Well, it does in Clancy’s universe anyway. Without John Kelly becoming John Clark, Jack Ryan dies in Red October, most certainly in Clear and Present Danger, among other times that Clark saved Ryan’s tail.)

By Jeff

October 1, 2007 4:31 PM | Link to this

All for it:

Also note that while you single out The Bible, the holy books of virtually every religion on the planet would have similar warnings. (Ever looked at The Koran or the Book of Mormon, just to name two? They make the Bible look like downright TAME in comparison!!)

By All For It!

October 1, 2007 5:29 PM | Link to this

Apparently my irony was lost on you.

I wasn’t criticizing the Bible. The Bible is what it is - to seek to sanitize any text, particularly one that was so significant in the development of Western culture is a crime against knowledge.

No, I was merely making the observation that all of the content traditionally deemed “unsuitable” by the crusading Religious Right in their yearly pogroms against education, reason and liberty are contained within the pages of the book they claim to hold holy and inerrant.

So one has to ask - is it truly the specific content they find so objectionable, or the ideas represented within? Religious fundamentalists tend to be more fearful of ideas and questions than non-fundamentalists, so my guess is that it’s the latter.

And just to put to rest the myth that you are attempting to promote - that the left- and right- wing are equally guilty of championing the ugly cause of censorship, (http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/bannedbooksweek/challengedbanned/challengedbanned.htm#mfcb)[HERE] is a web link to the American Library Association’s Banned Book week page, including lists of the most frequently complained-about books and the reasons for the complaints.

I think that even a right-wing ideologue will have a hard time refuting the assertion that conservatives, FAR more than liberals, are responsible for challenges to books and for calls to censorship.

By All For It!

October 1, 2007 7:54 PM | Link to this

C’mon, Tom Clancy - where is your erduite rebuttal?

I was hoping you’d bless us with your anti-intellectual nonsense…your “I read pop-fiction-so-I’m-qualified-to-discuss-literature-with-people-with-advanced-degrees” crap that so many uneducated or barely-educated right-wingers love to trot out…the “Limbaughization” of intellectual discourse.

Don’t disappoint me, barely-educated cretin…tell me again how complex themes in literature should be editorialized down into what YOU think are GOOD and BAD themes…bring it on, pop-fiction-moron!

By Jeff

October 1, 2007 11:19 PM | Link to this

All for it:

AJC.com headline RIGHT NOW:

“Gays slammed in School Paper. Some say Kell student’s editorial should have been censored”

Two guesses which ideological bent those “some” have. I’d only need one, and I’d be correct.

Now, as far as calling me out. Yamamoto once said “I fear we have awoken a sleeping dragon.” You’d be wise to heed his warning.

Granted, I don’t read crap. The things I read have to be interesting to me, or at least about a subject I am interested in. I AM, however, more well read in a wider range of literature than 99% of Humanities majors in general and English majors in particular that I have ever met. Roughly once a year or so, I pick up a book that is HUNDREDS of years old and read it just for the sake of reading it, and I’m not even counting the Bible there. I can name names of at least a dozen English majors that I know from prominent universities that can’t make the same claim.

When I speak of something, I generally carry the voice of someone who is decently well acquainted with the subject in question FOR A REASON: there really isn’t too much that I don’t read up on. If my current interests don’t happen to lie there, give me a couple of years and they probably will. (Only exceptions being Chemistry and Calculus, but even in those areas I have a good enough understanding to follow along with most conversations and even many peer reviewed articles.

I can make these claims based on one fact: In any given content area, there are HUNDREDS better than me. But RARE is it that you will find someone with more general knowledge than I. And I’ve got the Academic competition titles to prove it.

Son, you want to come at me you’d better come correct. Otherwise, at the end of the day, you WILL bow that a$$ down!”

By Georgia Librarian

October 2, 2007 7:57 AM | Link to this

You know, when someone has to so vehemently beat his chest about his intelligence, qualifications, education, reading habits, etc. and use it to verbally abuse someone else, there’s usually not much behind the claims.

By Jeff

October 2, 2007 8:31 AM | Link to this

Librarian:

Suffice it to say there’s two reasons why I’ve never lost a fight:

1) I generally try to avoid them. However, I was in a bad mood already last night, so I decided to call all for it on his challenge, which leads me to my second reason:

2) I typically let people underestimate me, and then prove them wrong when it comes time to battle them. All for it’s mistake was in thinking that just because I primarily read pop fiction (if you can call it that - RARE is an author I read on any bestsellers list), I for some reason don’t have the qualifications to stand toe to toe intellectually with the best of them - and I do. Again, much of my outward appearance in the academic realm is DESIGNED to make people think that I’m some kid that got a 1080 on his SAT. Which I did - in seventh grade.

Truly, I’m not typically one to beat my chest. When I do - such as last night - it is typically because I’m ticked off about something unrelated, too tired to fight, don’t really WANT to fight (yet looking for a fight), and I’m trying to convince the other guy to back down before I DESTROY him.

Anyways, back to the topic. This chest thumping is boring even me.

By Georgia Librarian

October 2, 2007 10:17 AM | Link to this

Egads, Jeff. Get some therapy already.

This blog has become tiresome. Goodbye!

By V for Vendetta

October 2, 2007 12:47 PM | Link to this

yikes,

All For It and Jeff, neither of yall are coming across very well right now. I sense a playground brawl is needed, or something else equally immature.

By Jeff

October 2, 2007 2:18 PM | Link to this

V:

Honestly, a good knock down drag out would feel pretty good right now. Relieve some of the tension.

After all, there are 3 basic forms of tension for guys, in my experience. One can be dealt with by vegging out. (Most common). Another can be dealt with with the help of your wife (or gf or whatever. I don’t want to spell it out.) This one is rather common as well.

But there are times when you just need a good knock down drag out physical fight. Win or lose, doesn’t really matter - as long as no trips to the ER are necessitated. The point is the fight.

After all, didn’t they make a MOVIE about this? (ahem - FIGHT CLUB - ahem)

By V for Vendetta

October 15, 2007 1:33 PM | Link to this

Sure, right. And people who think Fight Club is really about the fighting are usually the immature ninnies who would propose something like that, the types of people who miss the point ENTIRELY.

Bragging, boastful assertions, and/or impossible-to-prove claims mean NOTHING when broadcast over the internet. Perhaps one of these days (years?), Jeff, you will learn this. Until then …