27 September 2009

Banning Schmanning

Let's get one thing straight: I'm not promoting the ALA. I am promoting the recognition of our freedom to speech, our freedom to freely express and consume ideas regardless of how they relate to current or past ideology. In light of my last post on Banned Books Week and the discussion that took place in the comments section, I thought it necessary to stress this.

The American Library Association's website has the following to say: "Banned Books Week (BBW) is an annual event celebrating the freedom to read and the importance of the First Amendment. Held during the last week of September, Banned Books Week highlights the benefits of free and open access to information while drawing attention to the harms of censorship by spotlighting actual or attempted bannings of books across the United States.

Intellectual freedom—the freedom to access information and express ideas, even if the information and ideas might be considered unorthodox or unpopular—provides the foundation for Banned Books Week. BBW stresses the importance of ensuring the availability of unorthodox or unpopular viewpoints for all who wish to read and access them."

I am 100% against any form of overt censorship in public forums. No one has the right to tell me what I can or can not read, watch, or hear. If I, an adult, want to sit down with Madonna's Sex book while watching Debbie Does Dallas and listening to some rapper talk about killing cops...well that's my right. Now I'm not quite so loosey-goosey when it comes to those under 18. I'm pretty sure letting a 12 year old do the above is not necessarily the best idea, BUT when people no longer see the distinction between allowing a 12 year old to read Madonna's Sex and freaking Bridge to Terabithia, we have a serious problem.

If you don't want your child to read some of the best books ever written like The Catcher in the Rye, To Kill a Mockingbird, or Of Mice and Men, well I guess your child can go ahead and stick to Goodnight Moon until they go to college. Sorry they'll be a bit behind when they get there.

Everyone should join in the Banned Books Challenge I posted about yesterday!
Posted by Trisha at 10:08 AM
Labels: ,

18 comments:

  1. I agree 100% - also regarding topics expressed in books/other media which I do not necessarily agree with. Well written post.
    ReplyDelete
  2. The Banned Books Challenge is such a great one. I haven't read your first post yet, but I'll click over now.
    ReplyDelete
  3. Okay, I'm curious about your first line. What do you mean, you're not promoting the ALA? Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but it sounds like you're anti-ALA? If that's the case, may I ask how come? I've never heard anything bad about the ALA...anyway, just curious.
    ReplyDelete
  4. These resources may also be of interest:

    "American Library Association Shamed," by Nat Hentoff, Laurel Leader-Call, 2 March 2007.

    "Finding Censorship Where There Is None," by Mitchell Muncy, Wall Street Journal, 24 September 2009, p.W13.

    "National Hogwash Week," as coined by Thomas Sowell.

    "US Libraries Hit Back Over Challenges to Kids Books," by Sara Hussein, Agence France-Presse [AFP], 6 September 2009.
    ReplyDelete
  5. I am most definitely not against the ALA; my understanding is that they do many wonderful things. And just as SafeLibraries has posted links to anti-ALA articles, I have absolutely no doubt there are links to pro-ALA articles.

    If this issue needs to be debated, however, I would prefer it not be done here. I just wanted to keep the conversation focused on book banning instead of any ALA issues.
    ReplyDelete
  6. Ah, I see. I was just confused. Sorry, didn't mean to sound argumentative or anything.
    ReplyDelete
  7. Not at all Amanda! I agree that the way I phrased it seems sort of anti-ALA; your question was definitely valid.
    ReplyDelete
  8. Isn't absurd that this is an issue in our day?! I like to think that we're enlightened, but then I read a news story about some book being challenged in a school ... argh!

    my kids certainly have the freedom to read ... maybe not Madonna, but pretty much anything else :) We also encourage discussion, if I see a subject that may not have been explored as a family (in age-appropriate terms, of course!)

    Again, I like to think we're enlightened/progressive, but my kids probably think I'm a restrictive dinosaur for other reasons!
    ReplyDelete
  9. a couple of quoted from the ALA's "Free Access to Libraries for Minors"...with my highlighted phrases...
    "Library policies and procedures that effectively deny minors equal and equitable access to all library resources and services available to other users violate the Library Bill of Rights...The "right to use a library" includes free access to, and unrestricted use of, all the services, materials, and facilities the library has to offer. Every restriction on access to, and use of, library resources, based solely on the chronological age educational level, literacy skills, or legal emancipation of users violates Article V.... Librarians and library governing bodies have a public and professional obligation to ensure that all members of the community they serve have free, equal, and equitable access to the entire range of library resources regardless of content, approach, format, or amount of detail. This principle of library service applies equally to all users, minors as well as adults.

    It is just me, or does no one find that rather disturbing? So, I take it if your 8 year old requests the afore mentioned Madonna's Sex from the interlibrary system, to take your example, he must be given it, right? Regardless of content, right or his age, right?

    Hey, not looking for a fight, really..I don't even have any kids...but I am curious how you with children feel about this. And let me just say, if I remember anything about being a kid, I really doubt that little boy is going to talk to mom and dad before he requests the book..
    ReplyDelete
  10. I completely agree that ALL books/materials must be accessible to people of ALL ages. The library DOES NOT have the right to deny anyone, even an 8 year old, a book. If an 8 year old gets ahold of something highly inappropriate, that's the parents fault. You should know what books your kids are checking out of the library.

    The problem is where you draw the line. My librarian tried to deny me books on two separate occassions when I was in grade school: once for a Babysitter's Club book and once for Shakespeare. She felt I was too young. My grandmother came in and gave her a what-for let me tell you.

    So I absolutely agree with the ALA statement, and I feel that the responsibility lies with the parents. The library isn't a babysitter and parents should pay attention to their children. And if one "inappropriate" book sneaks in now and again, I'm pretty sure it won't kill the kid's morals.
    ReplyDelete
  11. I totally agree that it's up to the parents...and I'd hope that in most cases (age appropriateness and all that) they'd still let the kid read the book, and have a discussion about the book. If parents are too scared or lazy to take the time to discuss controversial topics (or opposing viewpoints) with their kids, than why'd they have kids in the first place??
    ReplyDelete
  12. Why are libraries so different? We control what children have access to all the time.
    An 8 year old will not be allowed to see an R rated movie at a theater. We don't allow children to buy "adult" magazines in a convenience store or a newsstand. We don't let him go into a bar and order a drink. Who are we to decide that he doesn't deserve a nice shot of vodka after a hard day at school?

    My local library is in a residential area. Any kid just walking around, assuming you allow your children to walk freely around, can just go in and demand any book, any material, with no possible paternal supervision and you see no problem with that?
    Like I said...I don't have a god in this fight.
    ReplyDelete
  13. kikifitz - There's a very simple solution to this: if you're a parent who thinks your child is going to pick inappropriate books at school when you aren't around, don't get him a library card! A parents' signature is needed for a library card, and without one, that 8 year old can't go get Sex by Madonna. Or any other book. Parents have that control.

    And, if you think about it, a parent can take a child to an R rated movie. The R rating is only for if the child is alone.
    ReplyDelete
  14. So, for the library, it must be all or nothing?

    Why is a rating for age appropriate material required for some media (movies) and forbidden under any circumstances for another, that controlled by the ALA?
    So yes, yes make an equal case to the R rated movie. A similar analogy to movies is that certain material at the library would be restricted by age, but that it could be borrowed with a guardians approval...like an R rated movie admittance or borrowing Trisha's Babysitter's Club.
    ReplyDelete
  15. I wouldn't have a problem with ratings on books, to tell you the truth. Let's make Catcher in the Rye PG, Madonna's Sex R, whatever. But if you try to take a book out of that library because of its rating, because you don't even want your kid to be able to see it; then we will have a problem. And that's what we are talking about here really - the REMOVAL of books from libraries and school reading lists because of a handful of people.

    Heck assign ratings all you want; although, as we discovered quite quickly with movies and CDs, you put that R rating on it, and your kid will be even more curious as to what's inside.
    ReplyDelete
  16. As the WSJ article above discussed, one problem is that we are throwing that word "Banned" around a bit too much. If I can buy it on Amazon, how is it "banned' in any real way, as just one example.

    Second, how it is considered "banning" for people (citizens, parents, taxpayers) to (question, challenge) how their money (taxes) is spent by government employees (librarians.) Because read the ALA site. That is what they consider banning.

    So much for free speech indeed when we loose the right to even question the decisions of the government, especially where our children are concerned.

    Third, when you get the ALA to agree to a rating system and some control over what material is available to children without any parental over site, you let me know. Because it will be never.
    ReplyDelete
  17. I do not in any way believe it right for a book to be removed or barred from a libary - no matter if you can get it elsewhere or not. The library is for the public; school is for the public. If you do not want your child exposed to things in the library or in the school, send them to a private one.

    As for free speech, bitch, teach others, moan, complain, write letters to the editor, that's fine. You may say whatever you'd like; but when it comes to the physical action of limiting someone else's access, not a chance. You certainly have the right to NOT READ something; you do not have the right to prevent me from reading it.

    And I think what the ALA is getting at is that we need to be aware that people still challenge books, so that we don't backslide to the dark ages, where our access to ideas was seriously limited.
    ReplyDelete
  18. ...so taxpayers who disagree with PUBLIC policy, in this case how PUBLIC libaries and PUBLIC schools, that we pay for should just pay up and shut up if we disagree? Don't think so, thank you.

    I wish the ALA had the honestly to simply admit what they object to. Decisions are made every day on what will and will not be purchased for a library and they suppose that only they are qualified to make that decision. What they are talking about is not actual book banning but any sort of objection to their decisions as to what is and is not appropriate in a public, taxpayer supported institution and how it is disseminated.

    In the present age of the internet, actual banning, which does actually exist in many countries (think Cuba...Iran...China...) is all but impossible in the US. The ALA minimized that real issue with their dishonestly about the US situation.
    ReplyDelete

Talk to me baby!

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)