Just in time: Banned Books Week
By Marjorie Kehe | 09.26.08
Given the recent public scuffle over Sarah Palin’s conversations while mayor with a Wasilla librarian about the possibility of banning books, there probably couldn’t be a better moment for the American Library Association’s Banned Books Week, which begins tomorrw, Sept. 27, and runs through Oct. 4.
On their website the ALA asks: Why should we be concerned about the notion of banning books? Don’t most challenges to books in US libraries simply come from parents worried that their children will be exposed to inappropriate material?
Yes, agrees the ALA, “books usually are challenged with the best intentions – to protect others, frequently children, from difficult ideas and information.” But they answer both concerns with quotes.
As to why we should care that a book should not be banned: “If we don’t believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all.” (Noam Chomsky)
As for the rights of parents to protect their children from exposure to ideas they believe are wrong, the ALA quotes from its own Library Bill of Rights: “Librarians and governing bodies should maintain that parents – and only parents – have the right and the responsibility to restrict the access of their children – and only their children – to library resources.”
Banned Book Week has been celebrated since 1982.
Books challenged over the years have included “The Great Gatsby” by F. Scott Fitzgerald, “To Kill a Mockingbird” by Harper Lee, “Their Eyes Were Watching God” by Zora Neale Hurston, “The Call of the Wild” by Jack London, “Gone with the Wind” by Margaret Mitchell, “Of Mice and Men” by John Steinbeck, “The Catcher in the Rye” by J.D. Salinger, and “The Color Purple” by Alice Walker.
More recently, you could add the Harry Potter novels.
John Stuart Mill probably wasn’t thinking of a Harry Potter-type manuscript when he wrote the following words (also quoted on the ALA website): “If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.”
But J.K. Rowling, like every author, benefits from the efforts of those who take Mill’s words seriously.
Comments
2. Bernard Goodman | 09.26.08
The banning of books is the banning of knowledge.The banning of knowledge is the primary way that power sustains itself by dispersing fear to the ignorant. It was a concept that was well known to the Christian church in the third century and was employed to maintain dominance over everyone. The consequence of this over-zealous Christian conservative tactic resulted in the Dark Ages which was the death of progress for over 800 years. We are in the 21st Century and there are still people in great positions of power in this nation and in this world whose mentality has not advanced any further than the thinking of those Church leaders of the 3rd century regardless of all of the scientific and social progress that has been made.
3. Bern Bevenour | 09.26.08
Terrific article. I wonder how many people read and then really understand the John Stuart Mill quote. Thanks for printing it. “Tis to the point.
4. Carmen Brown | 09.27.08
Dear Susan 9-26-08,
Didn’t Thoreau say: “If you find a trout in your milk, you have reason to believe it has been watered”? Upon taking office as Mayor, Sarah Palin fired a number of City officials who had supported her opponent. She was afraid they would not support her. I understand that she had 3 conversations about how library books could be censored and the City Librarian informed her that books were not going to be censored. Ms. Palin attempted to fire the librarian for not “supporting” her. As Alaska’s governor, Ms. Palin fired the State Safety Director, because he did not “support” her. This is her management style. If you feel that an elected official has the right to use her power for her personal agenda, that’s your prerogative. But please do not question those of us who think that it is unethical - and sometime illegal.
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.
1. Susan | 09.26.08
I’d like to ask Ms. Kehe she felt the need to drop Gov. Palin’s name into her article. Especially since the following was to be found in one of Ms. Kehe’s previous articles.
“The Time story suggests that Palin may have threatened to fire the town librarian for saying that censorship would be unacceptable, but subsequent news stories (such as a recent posting by the Boston Herald) don’t seem to support this notion. According to the Herald, Palin did ask the librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons, questions about censorship and Emmons responded by saying that any form of censorship would be entirely inappropriate.
Palin later attempted to fire Emmons (along with other public officials) but there is no evidence that the attempt to remove Emmons was related to the censorship question.”
Get your story facts straight…. Or if you’re just going to name drop Gov. Palin as a form of fear mongering, at least have the decency to admit to what you’re doing.
We’re not dummies out here.