It was a success

I received a total of 136 votes for favorite banned author/book. The winners were J.K. Rowling for favorite author... that's no surprise. Favorite banned book was Catcher in the Rye (To Kill a Mockingbird and Harry Potter were out of consideration because they won the past two years). Of Mice and Men, The Giver, and Go Ask Alice were also very close.

Tomorrow I will worry about choosing winners for the drawing. I'm so excited to have received so much participation!

Banned Book Talk...

... was a huge success. We had just under 20 students... most from the education class that was required to come. And they TALKED! It was a discussion rather than a lecture. Every single person was engaged and had something to say.




They enjoyed the food. Each item I brought in was from a banned book:

• Strawberries from Snow Falling on Cedars
• Red appples from The Giver
• Pumpkin pasties from Harry Potter
• Bubble gum from The Great Gilly Hopkins
• Peanut butter sandwiches from Where the Sidewalk Ends
• Chocolate-covered ants (Raisinettes) from The Pigman

It was a good end to a long day.

Banned Books Week 2008

The votes keep coming in, I must be over 120 by now, even after taking the sound off of my animation on the library's Web site... the other librarians and my husband complained about how annoying it was after the sixth or seventh time. I have the filling done for my pumpkin pasties, and I'm anxiously awaiting our discussion tonight, it should be a lot of fun. People have stopped me and other librarians asking, "why was this book banned?" in front of the display. They can't believe their favorites appear on the list. I have never received so much attention!

Banned Books Week 2008

This is so incredible, I can't get over it and I can't account for my own success this morning. I came into work for a few hours yesterday and assembled my Banned Books Week display and Web site. I sent out an e-mail to all faculty, staff, and students inviting them to vote for their favorite banned book on our Web site. This morning I had 95 e-mails waiting for me, 90 of them were votes. I thought maybe one person voted many times, or that we had gotten spammed, but almost all of them are unique votes by our own community. I have never had nearly so many votes in an entire week, let alone a single day. The highest number was two years ago when I got 72.

The only think that I can attribute to myself is the animated advertisement I put on our Web site in addition to the e-mail I sent out with the subject "Sex, profanity, and immorality at the Snowden Library!" But can that make all the difference?

Censorship in healthcare

My cousin sent out an e-mail about a scary health care bill that would allow medical professionals to object to proceedures that go against their conscience. According to the comments going around the Web, this goes beyond the abortion proceedure to not informing a patient of what their options are, or possibly witholding any treatment if the medical provider doesn't agree with their lifestyle choices. While there is information in newspapers in LexisNexis about the bill, it sounds vague as to what proceedures beyond abortion count.

While no one should be forced to perform an abortion, you should be forced to treat a lesbian fairly, or give referal to services that will give comprehensive information on AIDS or prescribe birth control. In short, every patient should get full, accurate information regardless of what health issue is involved, which is a separate issue from whether that particular doctor or nurse is willing to perform it.

So Let Just Not Talk About It?

This is an old example of censorship, but illustrates previous points I have made on the issue of censorship of books like Huck Finn and To Kill a Mockingbird. It seems to me that the teacher led an excellent discussion of the book and the use of racial language. Yet a student wants to take this discussion out of the classroom and never be able to talk about it. How is anyone (particularly Caucasians) ever supposed to learn when you censor the hard truths of the not-so-glorious past? And if 1/3 of their school is African American, they must hear racial slurs over and over again in the hallway and in their community. Shouldn't they know the history of those words?

I'm sure I have many ideas that are offensive to other people on the issue of race and ethnicity... maybe even just the fact that I'm white. But why can't we push forward with open, un-censored talks so that we can all learn what's offensive, why, and take the fear out of the issue? How can we move on from where we are now to something better without these talks? How is this desire controversial? It's a sincere question that begs for comments from any readers who have more experience than I do.

Censorship

I will probably be talking about censorship more and more as it looks like I will be co-speaking with an education professor in a few weeks on banned books at a fireside chat. I will be doing a lot more reading about the issue as we figure out what we will talk about... and look up some good recipes from banned books to serve that night (suggestions welcome!).

I have mixed reactions to a young woman's essay on censorship, which was featured on LISNews. The blog is called Safe Libraries, and is dedicated to undermining the ALA's stance on censorship. The describe the purpose differently, of course. Hey, even I support not forcing pornography on children!

Whenever I bring up the issue of censorship, I feel the need to point out a few things. During my junior year of high school, I complained to my parents about having to read The Chocolate War based on the discomfort I felt within the first few pages, which did not seem to have any point. My father read it and talked about my objection with the teacher, who gave me a different book. I believe every book she had us read that year was on the banned list, and almost all were classics that I am very happy to have read, I just couldn't do this one.

There is a very clear line, though, about a high school teacher requiring to read a book and the library offering it. There are books that are age-inappropriate. As much as I dearly, truly love The Lovely Bones, the rape scene at the beginning of the book is very graphic. It's important to the story, but I'm not sure I would give it even to a high school class unless they were warned and the entire class approved. But it should be in the school library, and it should be in every public library except maybe the smallest ones.

I can't remember what is objectionable in Catch-22 or Catcher in the Rye besides excessive profanity, which you can't avoid anymore. This young woman is wrong to think these were mere tricks to sell more books. She is not so bright as she claims to be if she simply labels these books "garbage" without respecting the opinions of so many others. Sticking to the literature that doesn't offend anyone will deprive the rest of the class, and reduce the course content to mere fluff. The thing that terrified me most about Fahrenheit 451 was the utterly mindless television programming. That's what our schools will be like if we go overboard on this issue. And who decides? Where do you draw that line?

I furthermore feel that while high school students and parents should be able to make reasonable claims for alternative books, that all bets are off in college. Perhaps if she attends Brigham Young, her view will be sheltered enough that this won't be an issue. But back to my comment from a few weeks ago, no one has the right to live an unoffended life, especially now that you are an adult.

Outrage on censorship

I hopped onto LISNews for a few minutes this morning and found several stories that caught my attention and got my blood boiling. It's usually censorship issues, human resources, and general stupidity that get me all riled up, and today is no exception.

There is a story in the Wall Street Journal about an author who did a lot of research on one of the prophet Mohammad's wives, then wrote a historical fiction novel about her. The author has had a two-book deal with Random House that just recently got pulled because of stuff flying around the Internet on how offensive her book was. Only one person involved has actually read the book, a professor of Islam (who is not Muslim). The worst she could say about how offensive this book was, was just a scene where the wife consummates her marriage to the prophet. It describes it in a little detail, though much less racy than many of the historical fiction novels I read (my favorite genre). This one woman has incited near-riots by telling a large number of people how offensive the book was, and this in turn was spread by bloggers all over the Internet. For fear of violent repercussions, Random House pulled its offer.

Why do certain groups hold priority in the right to live an unoffended life? I'm going to sound like the privileged Christian white girl that I am in this rant. However, I think it is ridiculous that you can smear feces on the Virgin Mary and call it art or get rich off a poorly-written, poorly-researched book like The Divinci Code that is incredibly offensive to all Catholics, while a person can't write a well-researched historical novel on an important woman in Muslim history. Even if it turns out the research is awful and the writing is awful, bad books deserved to get published if the publisher thinks they will sell.

The KKK is still allowed to march publicly and gets police protection when they do... that offends me, but no line can be drawn between that and less-offensive examples of free speech. I think those people are morons, and go on with my life. To heck with any Muslim, atheist, or ACLU member who thinks it's okay to offend the majority while minorities shouldn't tolerate the slightest, most accidental offense. I do believe racism is a real problem and that it makes many lives a struggle that I will never understand. However, over-reactions such as this example make people like me terrified of interacting with people who don't look like me in a simple, honest desire to not offend them. Isn't that counter-productive?

Censorship in Academia

I was listening to the radio this morning and got very interested in this story. At first, I thought I couldn't tie it into my blog, but then I realized it has several things to do with what my blog is about. The first is academia, and the second is censorship.

Even before I knew I would be working in academia, it drove me nuts to know how liberal academia tends to be. You can smeer feces on a statue of Jesus and call it art, you can burn American flags, you can claim to be Native American when you're not, you can sleep with your students, and you are usually protected by the administration. Yet voice one conservative opinion and you're in a lot of trouble.

There is an upper-level human resources manager from the University of Toledo that has just been fired for writing an editorial saying the Gay Rights movement does not have anything to do with the Civil Rights movement since being gay is a choice. She is African American, but I'm not sure that is a central issue. She was not representing the University of Toledo in her editorial.

I strongly disagree with what she says. I don't believe that being gay is a choice. For the first time in my life, I am fairly close to a gay couple. I had no idea it was that hard to be gay in our society, and I would happily go to their wedding if they were allowed to have one. If only all heterosexual relationships could be such beautiful examples of love and partnership as theirs is, the world would be a better place.

However, I believe that as I have the right to say this, she has the right to disagree. In the video, she seems like a well-educated, intelligent, reasonable woman. She says as a human resources person, she has hired homosexuals and heterosexuals without discrimination. She believes that others have the right to disagree with her and she respects their opinion. If her practices at work were discriminatory, then she should be fired in a heartbeat and no human resources department should ever hire her again. But that does not seem to be the case. She simply stated her opinion, and for that she was fired.

I suppose I can't help showing my political beliefs in this blog. I am very liberal on certain issues such as gay rights, women's issues, and the environment. Yet there are many that I am very conservative on, such as welfare and education. I'm a libra, I can't pick one side or the other and go through life struggling for balance!

I wish Ms. Dixon luck in her fight to protect free speech. It would be a scary blow to academia if she loses.

Oh, the irony

A mother went into Urban Outfitters looking for clothes for her teenage son. She got terribly upset when she saw some racy books like Pornigomi and Porn for Women (pics of men doing housework). She is calling politicians and upper management of the company.

I don't really have a dirty mind, but I've seen American Pie a few times and I Googled the word to make sure... So here comes the ironic part...

Her last name is "Milfs"

Censorship in the Hoosier State - Story #2

My fiance forwarded a story (here's the older but more complete story) about an experienced teacher in Indiana who was teaching at-risk high school students English. After reading some other books, she found a sponsor to buy over 100 copies of the Freedom Writers Diary (no famous for the movie by a similar name). She got suspended for passing them out after getting tired of waiting for permission from the school board. She sent home permission slips to the parents and all but one student returned a signed slip.

If I understand this correctly, the more recent story is that she gets to keep her job, but can't go back into the classroom until next year (fall 2009), but will get paid.

There may be more to this story, but I can't find anything that comes to the defense of the school board.

All I can say is, "What is up with you Indiana???"

Censorship in the Hooser State

I got my MLS at Indiana University and have a soft spot in my heart for the Hoosier State. It is a red state, as is PA where I live now. I saw a link to a Indystar article this morning that the Indiana governor just signed a bill making bookstores register before they can sell sexually explicit material. The law is clearly aimed at sex shops along freeways, but "sexually explicit" is so broadly defined that many bookstore owners are very worried it could apply to the great classics such as The Three Musketeers, Beloved, or even The Bible. I mean, the Old Testament has some really racy stuff in it, but come on! I think this fear is legitimate, this gives censorship advocates all they need to start launching campaigns against bookstores. I doubt Barnes & Nobel and Borders will have many problems they can't handle, but defending oneself could be the end of an indie bookstore. The governor claimed to have received no complaints. This sounds like a typical politician to me.

Censorship

I get as riled up as the next librarian when I see attempts at censorship, especially since the best books are usually the targets. Today's ALA Direct newsletter has a link to an article of a parent wanting to ban Lovely Bones from a middle school library. This is one of my favorite books ever, even though it is about the brutal rape and murder of a young girl and how her family falls apart after her death.

First of all, I do admire that this woman actually read the book cover to cover. I cannot say how much it frustrates me that censorship promotors rarely read the books and take quotations and events out of context. Anti-Harry-Potter people bring up the quote "There is no good or evil: only power and those too weak to seak it." Yeah, that's the bad guy who says it, it shows how bad he is, and his lack of understanding is his down-fall. Read the darn things if you are going to embarrass your children by turning their censorship into a crusade.

I also have to question the appropriateness of Lovely Bones in a middle school library, but their middle school ranges from 5th to 8th grade. I think many 8th graders can handle this book. A librarian discusses the challenge of developing a collection for this age group, and that it is important not to dumb down the collection for 8th graders.

During my junior year of high school, our entire English curriculum was based on banned books. Most of them were dear classics such as 1984, Farenheit 451, and A Separate Peace (I'm assuming that last one has been challenged... too lazy to look it up tonight). One of the books was The Chocolate War, which after about 15 pages I decided I did not want to read. I told my parents, my dad read the book in one night, went to the teacher and said he didn't think I should have to read it, and I was given another book. I think it was handled well. I still had to learn about the book since everyone else was reading it... I think one of the highlights of my life was that one group did a video as their project on this book. In the video, they went into the bathroom for the famous scene where they blackmail one of the characters with pictures of him pleasuring himself in the bathroom... they zoomed in on the stall, and our teacher is in the back of the room having a heart attack in anticipation. It turned out when they pushed the door open, they showed the character beating the heck out of a rubber chicken. Oh, the joys of working with an honors class! I digress. The point is there is a difference between a teacher assigning a questionable book, and the same book being available in the library. If a student or their parents can make a reasonable argument, give the kid another book. Heck, give them a longer book if you want.

So the gods of librarianship will eventually strike me dead for being somewhat sympathetic to censorship. That is an example of a die-hard ethic that we stand for. But it breaks my heart when some of my favorite books are the most challenged, such as To Kill a Mockingbird, The Giver, Shel Silverstein, and Snow Falling on Cedars. This woman has completly misunderstood Lovely Bones if she thinks it is about rape and murder rather than healing and hope. She judges the mother who has an affair and leaves the family, but not the father who becomes an alcoholic. This woman has no idea what would happen to her family if such a horrible thing happened. And I certainly hope it never does.

Lovely Bones was written by Alice Sebold who also wrote a memoir of her own experience with brutal rape. That book is called Lucky. Talk about graphic. She goes into every detail and makes you feel like it is happening to you (until you put the book down, of course). It talks about the stupid things that she did afterwards, the friendships that fell apart, the good men she couldn't treat right, the stress on her family. So it is a weird title, right? The point was that she was lucky she didn't die, and anyone who says they would rather die than live after such an experience is an idiot. But you can't know that until you have been there. Lucky doesn't really end. Lovely Bones has an incredibly uplifting ending. This woman complains that the bad guy never gets punished... the ghosts of his victims push him off a cliff! The girl comes back for a few hours that she can spend with her would-have-been boyfriend or chase the killer. She felt she'd rather spend her one or two hours back on earth with him than on revenge. The family comes together at the end, the sister is able to have a very healthy relationship that turns into marriage, the wayward wife comes back, the husband forgives her and stops drinking... They fell apart but came back together... The last line is something like, "Have a nice life."

If anyone gets to the end of this raving mess then you must really like these books that I talk about. I'm sorry this is so long. Be glad that some of you don't live near me so you don't have to listen to this every time I see a new story of challenged books.

And please don't turn me in to the gods of librarianship.