Comments on: A book is hardly worth reading if no one has tried to remove it from the library’s shelves.

By: mischiefmanager

mischiefmanager — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 00:52:24 +0000

So true, Hill Rat. As a huge Harry Potter fan, I’m always particularly amused/annoyed that so many people who want to ban particular books haven’t bothered to read them.

Book-banners, you don’t deserve books. Stick to Chick tracts.

By: SarahMC

SarahMC — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 13:11:02 +0000

Challenging the bible is a no-brainer if you’re into book banning.

By: Hill Rat

Hill Rat — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 03:55:24 +0000

One of the great ironies of my upbringing is that while my folks had TV and movie watching on lockdown, I was always allowed to read anything I wanted to. The wife and I have already decided that’s how we’re gonna roll.

so the book banning begins, and becomes more and more absurd, until the instigator parent walks into the principals office wanting to ban the bible…

There’s a legit case to be made if you’re banning books to ban the Bible. There is a ton of ill shit in the Bible; incest, murder, fornication, the list goes on forever.

By: Mackey

Mackey — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 11:24:53 +0000

I was watching some fluff tv show (needed to unwind) and it depicted the zeal with which a group of parents in a school community wanted to ban books – as a result of one of the parents seeing her child reading “Madame Bovary” for English..

so the book banning begins, and becomes more and more absurd, until the instigator parent walks into the principals office wanting to ban the bible…

By: bellacoker

bellacoker — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 23:33:19 +0000

truth.

By: emilyanne

emilyanne — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 22:27:19 +0000

bellacoker, good point – it’s still badly written though….

By: bellacoker

bellacoker — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 21:32:06 +0000

@emilyanne:
On the Road is a lot like Mein Kampf; a historical record of how women were treated in the 50′s.

By: Endora

Endora — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 21:25:00 +0000

@emilyanne: I’ve never read On the Road, but I loved the description of it as “badly written and full of the sort of adolescent arrested development that allows predominantly but not always male undergraduates to think that they make sense while on speed.”

Based on the people I’ve seen who love it, that’s pretty much what I imagined it would be, I have to admit, and also seems like a fitting description of a certain literary subgenre in general…

By: emilyanne

emilyanne — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 19:43:55 +0000

I’m of the opinion that no books should be banned (yes that is a bit libertarian but I feel that people should be aware of terrible books such as Mein Kampf, for example, in order to understand history and record it, if you ban something like that it gives it an even more malignant power. Plus it’s obvious that once you start banning books, you end up banning things for the most bizarre reasons).

That said if i could ban one book it would be Jack Keroauc’s On The Road on the grounds that it is badly written and full of the sort of adolescent arrested development that allows predominantly but not always male undergraduates to think that they make sense while on speed.

By: bellacoker

bellacoker — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 18:59:43 +0000

There is a lot of discussion in the library world about the ethical responsibilities of librarians especially whether or not librarians should consider what use our patrons have for the information they are asking for and if they could use that information to harm themselves or others.

Here is a slightly academic example: http://www.sir.arizona.edu/lso/archives/symposium06/papers/DaleSavage.pdf

I am in the free access to information camp; mainly because it’s easier and I don’t feel qualified to act as a human filter. That being said, I understand people’s desire to control who has access to information about things like how to build a bomb or commit suicide, etc.

Book-banning on the other hand has always struck me as puritanical zeal run amok.