From: Ruth I Gordon <druthgo>
Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 12:20:46 -0800

I am probably reading some postings incorrectly and trust I will be set right (well, read "left"). IF I understand some of the messages, they carry with them a distrust of the young and suggest that the youngster and his parent(s) decide what is appropriate for the child. That is the end of pivacy and the right to choose. It is the beginning of a fear of trusting oneself. One of my teachers in high school was unhappy that I was reading "Studs Lonigan" (sp?) which was "hot" when I was young. My parents did not object and, indeed, didn't censor my choices. I am not suggesting that that has made me a better person, but I knew I was trusted. Thus, later on I made choices that I thought would be within the quiet codes set for me.

In my years working with young (and older) people the only times when youngsters hid books and thus lied to adults, was when they were forbidden to read what interested them. Does anyone remember the situation in Oakland, CA., when a step?ther raised hell about his daughter reading
"Daddy Was Numbers Runner"? O.K.--in public she did not read it--but hid it behind other books and sneak-read. She had learned to lie. It appears that nowadays objections to certain titles come from one sector of the populace. We all want young people to read, but too often when they find something that is popular beyond belief, voices are raised for the books to be removed--or, in a case or two, burned.

Then again, I think we all deserve privacy. I hope I have misread some of the messages on this list because another implication is that to "protect" young people, collections become so safe as to be pap.

Doktor Ruth

(a.k.a., Big Grandma)

"You may not be able to change the world, but at least you can embarrass the guilty." Jessica Mitford (191796)
Received on Tue 06 May 2003 03:20:46 PM CDT