BiblioAddict


The Hobgoblin of Little Minds

On Banned Books Week, kicking people in their shins, devil-worshiping children, and censoring a book on censorship:

Most of you already know we’re in smack dab in the middle of Banned Books Week (Sept. 27 – Oct. 4).  I, like every other avid reader out there, despise the very notion of book banning.  It makes me want to kick someone in their shins (I’m looking at you Governor).  Tell me I can’t read a book and you might end up having several thrown at your head.

It doesn’t surprise me that close-minded people would want to ban books, because there will always be those out there who think it’s their responsibility to protect you from yourself.  What surprises me are the stupid and downright ignorant reasons that people challenge and ban books.  And I find it disturbing that some of the greatest literature we have ever known have at one time or another been banned.  What if these books had been banned forever, everywhere?  How much of an anemic and dull culture would we have?  The idea of never having the chance to read To Kill a Mockingbird, The Twelfth Night, or The Odyssey is frankly – and perhaps appropriately given the time of the year – the stuff of nightmares.

In honor of this week, here’s a list of a few banned books and the reasons why they were banned/challenged (via The Forbidden Library).  Some of it is just… mindboggling:

A Light in the Attic. Shel Silverstein. Harper. Challenged at the Cunningham Elementary School in Beloit, Wis. (1985) because the book “enourages [sic] children to break dishes so they won’t have to dry them.” Removed from Minot, N.Dak. Public School libraries when the superintendent found “suggestive illustrations.” Challenged at the Big Bend Elementary School library in Mukwonago, Wis. (1986) because some of Silverstein’s poems “glorified Satan, suicide and cannibalism, and also encouraged children to be disobedient.”  (Really?!  I loved this book as a child.  I guess this means I must have been a devil-worshiping, cannablistic disobedient seven-year-old.  I need to ask my mother about this.)

Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland. Lewis Carroll. Ace; Bantam; Crown; Delacorte; Dover; NAL; Norton; Penguin; Random; St. Martin. Banned in China (1931) for portraying animals and humans on the same level, “Animals should not use human language.” (Alrighty then…)

Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee. Dee Brown. Holt. Removed in Wild Rose, Wis. (1974) by a district administrator for being “slanted.” The administrator also said “if there’s a possibility that something might be controversial, then why not eliminate it.” (For the same reason you don’t eliminate people who say controversial things.  Or, do you? It is, after all, a slippery slope.)

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Roald Dahl. Bantam; Knopf; Penguin. Removed from a locked reference collection at the Boulder, Colo. Public Library (1988), where it had been placed because the librarian thought the book espoused a poor philosophy of life.  (No comment.)

Fahrenheit 451. Ray Bradbury. Ballentine. Ironically, students at the Venado Middle School in Irvine, Calif. received copies of the book with scores of words–mostly “hells” and “damns”–blacked out. The novel is about book burning and censorship. Thankfully, after receiving complaints from parents and being contacted by reporters, school officials said the censored copies would no longer be used (1992).  (Oh, the irony. I love it.)

James and the Giant Peach. Roald Dahl. ABC-Clio; Knopf. Challenged at the Deep Creek Elementary School in Charlotte Harbor, Fla. (1991) because it is “not appropriate reading material for young children.” Challenged at the Pederson Elementary School in Altoona, Wis. (1991) and at the Morton Elementary School library in Brooksville, Fla. (1992) because the book contains the word “ass” and “promotes” the use of drugs (tobacco, snuff) and whiskey. Removed from classrooms in Stafford County, Va. Schools (1995) and placed in restricted access in the library because the story contains crude language and encourages children to disobey their parents and other adults.  (Wow! I thought I’d read this book, but I don’t remember all of that.  Perhaps a re-read is in order.  They’ve made it sound good.)

Where’s Waldo?. Martin Handford. Little. Challenged at the Public Libraries of Saginaw, Mich. (1989), Removed from the Springs Public School library in East Hampton, N.Y. (1993) because there is a tiny drawing of a woman lying on the beach wearing a bikini bottom but no top. Yes, but did they find Waldo? (My question, exactly.)


7 Comments so far
Leave a comment

My favorite rationale for banning/challenging a book was for The Diary of Anne Frank. A school administrator insisted it was “a downer.”

Comment by Andi

This is such a great post that I printed it out so that I could read it more easily! I often break dishes because I don’t want to wash them. What’s wrong with that? Also, Alice in Wonderland is totally about drugs, but I think the people who wanted it banned were too stupid to understand it.

I think I might post about this too–eventually. Maybe I can find some more idiotic reasons why people want to ban certain books.

Comment by chartroose

Andi: Ha! Books about the Holocaust should be cheerful, after all. Otherwise, why read them?

God, the stupidity of some people.

Comment by J.S. Peyton

Chartroose: I’ll bet you won’t have any trouble find other stupid reasons people have banned or tried to ban a book. I’m just waiting for someone to say, “I just didn’t like it,” as their reason for having banned a book. That’s what it all boils down to, anyway.

Comment by J.S. Peyton

Devil-worshiping, cannablistic disobedient seven-year-olds unite!

I loved that book. Although I did grow up to not believe in god. Hmmmmmmm.

And I love the new header…I do hope they’re reading banned books.

Comment by softdrink

softdrink: Hey, you know I did too! That is interesting… I wonder just how many other kids Silverstein has indoctrinated with his seemingly simple poems. There could be a whole segment of agnostic/atheists who were converted back when they were six or seven.

Comment by J.S. Peyton

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory espouses a “poor philosophy of life”?! That’s hilarious. I think I’m going to try and work that phrase into every conversation I can from now on!

Comment by writemeg




Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>