CCBC-Net Archives
But who was talking about 'censorship'?
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Maia <maia>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 08:24:16 -0400
I get so weary of hearing the word 'censorship' tossed around, or tossed
_at_ folks who bring up objections to books. I don't believe that any of us who expressed our deep concerns about the LIW series, for example, were suggesting that the books be 'banned'.
Instead, every teacher makes choices about what will be taught in their classroom, just as librarians make choices about what they will include in their libraries. Why wouldn't we want to make good choices? Okay, so we can all argue about what is 'good', but the point is that teachers and librarians make choices all the time, and one would hope that those choices are based on something other than using what's easiest. Otherwise, why not just hire distributors to come to libraries and classrooms, analyze the shelves, and tell you what to order, as happens in much of the book business?
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, there is a difference between a person's right to read a book and another person's right to inflict that book on someone else. Teachers have captive audiences, 6 hours a day, three seasons of the year. No one is talking about what the teacher is
'entitled' to read in his or her spare time, or even what the kids are
'entitled' to read in their spare time. What we're talking about is the decision that one individual makes for 30 less empowered individuals, or the decision that one individual makes for an entire school or town.
To equate thinking and making choices with censorship just doesn't make sense. What's next, choosing books randomly by number using IBSNs? Then, I guess, no one would be responsible for making or defending their choices...
Maia
Received on Wed 20 Oct 1999 07:24:16 AM CDT
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 08:24:16 -0400
I get so weary of hearing the word 'censorship' tossed around, or tossed
_at_ folks who bring up objections to books. I don't believe that any of us who expressed our deep concerns about the LIW series, for example, were suggesting that the books be 'banned'.
Instead, every teacher makes choices about what will be taught in their classroom, just as librarians make choices about what they will include in their libraries. Why wouldn't we want to make good choices? Okay, so we can all argue about what is 'good', but the point is that teachers and librarians make choices all the time, and one would hope that those choices are based on something other than using what's easiest. Otherwise, why not just hire distributors to come to libraries and classrooms, analyze the shelves, and tell you what to order, as happens in much of the book business?
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, there is a difference between a person's right to read a book and another person's right to inflict that book on someone else. Teachers have captive audiences, 6 hours a day, three seasons of the year. No one is talking about what the teacher is
'entitled' to read in his or her spare time, or even what the kids are
'entitled' to read in their spare time. What we're talking about is the decision that one individual makes for 30 less empowered individuals, or the decision that one individual makes for an entire school or town.
To equate thinking and making choices with censorship just doesn't make sense. What's next, choosing books randomly by number using IBSNs? Then, I guess, no one would be responsible for making or defending their choices...
Maia
Received on Wed 20 Oct 1999 07:24:16 AM CDT
