CCBC-Net Archives
[CCBC-Net] CENSORSHIP
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: janeyolen at aol.com <janeyolen>
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 07:52:54 -0400
Of course I have heard of attempts to censor THE DEVIL'S ARITHMETIC because of its title before. (Devil=Hitler in this case. Sigh!)
But thanks for the discussion. Let's not get discussion mixed up with propaganda, however. And let's be sure of facts before we present them as truth because it does no one's cause any good to mix those up. Yes, it appears Palin was hypothetically testing the censorship waters viz her local librarian. Given her strong and extreme religious views, (end of world senarios, Alaska as a Refuge State etc.) I have no doubt she would have liked to impose her will on the library. But we have no list of books because there was--most likely--no exact list to be had. Just a hypothetical question about how to get certain books taken from the library. And a librarian whose job was saved because she served the community who felt she was doing good work. And Mayor Palin understood that. (And probably, though I do not know this as fact) did not have the authority to fire said librarian for such a reason anyway.
But we have all seen librarians around the country--and teachers, too--fired, driven out, thrown to the wolves for book choices. So it is something this group should be talking about. Discussion. Not propaganda.
Jane Yolen www.janeyolen.com
-----Original Message----- From: Randall Wright <randall.w.wright at comcast.net> To: ccbc-net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu Sent: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 7:35 am Subject: Re: [CCBC-Net] CENSORSHIP
By the mere fact that the issue was posted now, at this time, it does appear as if the poster had a political agenda (but only she knows for sure). If Pelan were not the VP candidate the issue would not have been brought up. Why wasn't anything discussed about it when it happened? Because it was a small town and nobody cared at the time (or at least nobody here heard of it).
I am against most forms of censorship (more about that in the next paragraph). I am not against discussing political issues on this list when they are relevant to the purpose of this list--but then I'm not the owner of the list, mostly just a lurker. Let's just call apples apples, shall we?
Unfortunately, there are plenty of cases of this kind of censorship in small towns all across America (especially in my neck of the woods). Some of it is because parents apply pressure to beleaguered librarians who have enough trouble trying to decide themselves which books they have budget for. Other cases are self-righteous civic leaders who think they know what's best for us. Other times it's the librarians themselves who make decisions based on their own biases. Sometimes there is covert censorship going on. For a book I was writing, I was doing research on folk magic. Someone had removed a reference book I needed. I'm guessing because it dealt with witchcraft.
Sometimes censorship is justified (I certainly don't think a terrorist's handbook has a place in a public library, nor certain kinds of pornography) and sometimes not. Who decides? I guess that's my question that comes out of this whole discussion.
Who should decide what public funds should be spent on which books? And what should the criteria be? Certainly a couple of irate women should not have the power to ban a book from a library. This happened in a town in my county. The books? The Devil's Arithmetic (they objected to the title), anything by Christopher Paul Curtis (he advocates disrespect for parents--and he had the word breast in one of his books), of course Harry Potter, and I can't remember what else, but there were more (fortunately, cooler heads eventually prevailed). Neither should public servants have totalitarian control over the library's inventory. Librarians should not be the only decision makers either (or should they?). Public referendum? Town meetings? Committees? Focus groups? Dart board? More funds?
I don't envy librarians their responsibility, but I do envy their continuous exposure to books of all kinds. Go librarians!
I know this issue has been discussed many times before (and really is off-topic for the month). In fact, didn't we make some newspaper somewhere for the discussion we had about censorship? Still, it is an interesting and important topic, politics aside.
Randall Wright (mostly clueless, but middle-of-the-road (watch out for that semi) opinionated none-the-less)
-----Original Message----- From: ccbc-net-bounces at ccbc.education.wisc.edu
[mailto:ccbc-net-bounces at ccbc.education.wisc.edu] On Behalf Of Lbhcove at aol.com Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2008 9:16 AM To: ccbc-net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu Subject: [CCBC-Net] CENSORSHIP
Nancy is right on when she states:
"I don't think that anyone participating in the discussion openly advocated voting one way or the other."
No one did!
Lee Bennett Hopkins
AMERICA AT WAR (McElderry Books/Simon & Schuster)
_www.simonsays.com_ (http://www.simonsays.com/)
**************Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog, plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.
(http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014)
_______________________________________________ CCBC-Net mailing list CCBC-Net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe... http://ccbc.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
_______________________________________________ CCBC-Net mailing list CCBC-Net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe... http://ccbc.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
Received on Mon 08 Sep 2008 06:52:54 AM CDT
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 07:52:54 -0400
Of course I have heard of attempts to censor THE DEVIL'S ARITHMETIC because of its title before. (Devil=Hitler in this case. Sigh!)
But thanks for the discussion. Let's not get discussion mixed up with propaganda, however. And let's be sure of facts before we present them as truth because it does no one's cause any good to mix those up. Yes, it appears Palin was hypothetically testing the censorship waters viz her local librarian. Given her strong and extreme religious views, (end of world senarios, Alaska as a Refuge State etc.) I have no doubt she would have liked to impose her will on the library. But we have no list of books because there was--most likely--no exact list to be had. Just a hypothetical question about how to get certain books taken from the library. And a librarian whose job was saved because she served the community who felt she was doing good work. And Mayor Palin understood that. (And probably, though I do not know this as fact) did not have the authority to fire said librarian for such a reason anyway.
But we have all seen librarians around the country--and teachers, too--fired, driven out, thrown to the wolves for book choices. So it is something this group should be talking about. Discussion. Not propaganda.
Jane Yolen www.janeyolen.com
-----Original Message----- From: Randall Wright <randall.w.wright at comcast.net> To: ccbc-net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu Sent: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 7:35 am Subject: Re: [CCBC-Net] CENSORSHIP
By the mere fact that the issue was posted now, at this time, it does appear as if the poster had a political agenda (but only she knows for sure). If Pelan were not the VP candidate the issue would not have been brought up. Why wasn't anything discussed about it when it happened? Because it was a small town and nobody cared at the time (or at least nobody here heard of it).
I am against most forms of censorship (more about that in the next paragraph). I am not against discussing political issues on this list when they are relevant to the purpose of this list--but then I'm not the owner of the list, mostly just a lurker. Let's just call apples apples, shall we?
Unfortunately, there are plenty of cases of this kind of censorship in small towns all across America (especially in my neck of the woods). Some of it is because parents apply pressure to beleaguered librarians who have enough trouble trying to decide themselves which books they have budget for. Other cases are self-righteous civic leaders who think they know what's best for us. Other times it's the librarians themselves who make decisions based on their own biases. Sometimes there is covert censorship going on. For a book I was writing, I was doing research on folk magic. Someone had removed a reference book I needed. I'm guessing because it dealt with witchcraft.
Sometimes censorship is justified (I certainly don't think a terrorist's handbook has a place in a public library, nor certain kinds of pornography) and sometimes not. Who decides? I guess that's my question that comes out of this whole discussion.
Who should decide what public funds should be spent on which books? And what should the criteria be? Certainly a couple of irate women should not have the power to ban a book from a library. This happened in a town in my county. The books? The Devil's Arithmetic (they objected to the title), anything by Christopher Paul Curtis (he advocates disrespect for parents--and he had the word breast in one of his books), of course Harry Potter, and I can't remember what else, but there were more (fortunately, cooler heads eventually prevailed). Neither should public servants have totalitarian control over the library's inventory. Librarians should not be the only decision makers either (or should they?). Public referendum? Town meetings? Committees? Focus groups? Dart board? More funds?
I don't envy librarians their responsibility, but I do envy their continuous exposure to books of all kinds. Go librarians!
I know this issue has been discussed many times before (and really is off-topic for the month). In fact, didn't we make some newspaper somewhere for the discussion we had about censorship? Still, it is an interesting and important topic, politics aside.
Randall Wright (mostly clueless, but middle-of-the-road (watch out for that semi) opinionated none-the-less)
-----Original Message----- From: ccbc-net-bounces at ccbc.education.wisc.edu
[mailto:ccbc-net-bounces at ccbc.education.wisc.edu] On Behalf Of Lbhcove at aol.com Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2008 9:16 AM To: ccbc-net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu Subject: [CCBC-Net] CENSORSHIP
Nancy is right on when she states:
"I don't think that anyone participating in the discussion openly advocated voting one way or the other."
No one did!
Lee Bennett Hopkins
AMERICA AT WAR (McElderry Books/Simon & Schuster)
_www.simonsays.com_ (http://www.simonsays.com/)
**************Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog, plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.
(http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014)
_______________________________________________ CCBC-Net mailing list CCBC-Net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe... http://ccbc.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
_______________________________________________ CCBC-Net mailing list CCBC-Net at ccbc.education.wisc.edu Visit this link to read archives or to unsubscribe... http://ccbc.education.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/ccbc-net
Received on Mon 08 Sep 2008 06:52:54 AM CDT
