Last one before moving on to the usual banalities
Kate sent me this article and I meant to post it last week, but I got distracted:
From the Washington Post, September 8, 2005:
Challenges to Library Books on the Rise
By HILLEL ITALIE
NEW YORK -- Attempts to have library books removed from shelves increased by more than 20 percent in 2004 over the previous year, according to a new survey by the American Library Association.
Three books with gay themes, including Maya Angelou's "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings," were among the works most criticized.
"It all stems from a fearfulness of well-meaning people," says Michael Gorman, president of the library association. "We believe in parental responsibility, and that you should take care of what your children are reading. But it's not your responsibility to tell a whole class of kids what they should read."
The number of books challenged last year jumped to 547, compared to 458 in 2003, with the library association estimating four to five unreported cases for each one documented. According to the ALA, a challenge is "a formal, written complaint, filed with a library or school requesting that materials be removed because of content or appropriateness."
National organizations such as the American Family Association have been involved with library challenges, but far more complaints come from individual parents and patrons, according to the ALA.
The ALA study was to be released Friday in anticipation of the 25th annual Banned Books Week, which runs Sept. 24 to Oct. 1 and is co-sponsored by the ALA, the American Booksellers Association and others. Gorman acknowledged that few books are actually banned, adding that Banned Books Week is a "catchy name."
Robert Cormier's classic "The Chocolate War" topped the 2004 list of challenged books, cited for sexual content, violence and language. It was followed by Walter Myers' "Fallen Angels," a young adult novel set in Harlem and Vietnam and criticized for racism, language and violence.
No. 3, Michael Bellesiles' "Arming America," has been widely disputed, even by its original publisher. First released in 2000, the book challenges the idea that the United States has always been a gun-oriented culture and was awarded the Bancroft Prize for history. But questions about Bellesiles' scholarship led publisher Alfred A. Knopf to drop the book and Bancroft officials to withdraw the prize.
"If you're a freedom-to-read person, pulling a book like that one is not that different from any book that might have fake scholarship," Gorman says. "No matter how wrong a book might be, people should have access to it. It's a slippery slope once you start removing books like that."
Also high on the ALA list were Angelou's memoir and two other books with gay content, "The Perks of Being a Wallflower" by Stephen Chbosky, and "King & King," by Linda de Haan and Stern Nijland...."It's a perpetual problem, and it attacks fundamental American liberties _ the attempt to impose one's own positions on society as a whole," Gorman says.
By HILLEL ITALIE
NEW YORK -- Attempts to have library books removed from shelves increased by more than 20 percent in 2004 over the previous year, according to a new survey by the American Library Association.
Three books with gay themes, including Maya Angelou's "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings," were among the works most criticized.
"It all stems from a fearfulness of well-meaning people," says Michael Gorman, president of the library association. "We believe in parental responsibility, and that you should take care of what your children are reading. But it's not your responsibility to tell a whole class of kids what they should read."
The number of books challenged last year jumped to 547, compared to 458 in 2003, with the library association estimating four to five unreported cases for each one documented. According to the ALA, a challenge is "a formal, written complaint, filed with a library or school requesting that materials be removed because of content or appropriateness."
National organizations such as the American Family Association have been involved with library challenges, but far more complaints come from individual parents and patrons, according to the ALA.
The ALA study was to be released Friday in anticipation of the 25th annual Banned Books Week, which runs Sept. 24 to Oct. 1 and is co-sponsored by the ALA, the American Booksellers Association and others. Gorman acknowledged that few books are actually banned, adding that Banned Books Week is a "catchy name."
Robert Cormier's classic "The Chocolate War" topped the 2004 list of challenged books, cited for sexual content, violence and language. It was followed by Walter Myers' "Fallen Angels," a young adult novel set in Harlem and Vietnam and criticized for racism, language and violence.
No. 3, Michael Bellesiles' "Arming America," has been widely disputed, even by its original publisher. First released in 2000, the book challenges the idea that the United States has always been a gun-oriented culture and was awarded the Bancroft Prize for history. But questions about Bellesiles' scholarship led publisher Alfred A. Knopf to drop the book and Bancroft officials to withdraw the prize.
"If you're a freedom-to-read person, pulling a book like that one is not that different from any book that might have fake scholarship," Gorman says. "No matter how wrong a book might be, people should have access to it. It's a slippery slope once you start removing books like that."
Also high on the ALA list were Angelou's memoir and two other books with gay content, "The Perks of Being a Wallflower" by Stephen Chbosky, and "King & King," by Linda de Haan and Stern Nijland...."It's a perpetual problem, and it attacks fundamental American liberties _ the attempt to impose one's own positions on society as a whole," Gorman says.
This is a perfect example of the hoisting of one's personal view upon others.
And I actually received a comment to my last post in which the commentee asked if I was a sinner. Crock of shit. My point is, if I "sin", let me believe what I wish about what will happen to my so-called eternal soul; don't push your belief of heaven, hell, reincarnation, etc. onto me. The Bible is a book. Of stories. Use them how you will, but don't judge me for looking at them as a piece of literature and nothing more.
ANYWAY, I really am done. I don't want to turn into THAT person and I don't want my blog to be a forum for religious crack pots wanting to "educate" me about my wayward, heathen views.
So, we now return you to our regularly scheduled programming: Bryan and I had an action-packed weekend.
*Caught as much of the Satins-Sox series as we could stomach (which meant mostly watching the highlights on NESN)
*Went to a bizarre cookware demonstration for which we received a 3-day, 2-night certificate for an all-inclusive stay at an Allegro resort (mostly found in Mexico and the Dominican Republic)
*Attended the first annual Pond St block party
*Witnessed a beautiful wedding vow renewal ceremony
*Saw our first "Utilikilt" which is exactly what it sounds like, a kilt with loops all over the top of it in which to put useful things. Like chains
*Checked out Colleen's new apartment
*Ate dinner, probably for the last time in a while, with Bryan's cousin Jeff who heads to NYC this weekend for a new job challenge
I'm reading a fantastic book that I heartily recommend, The Shadow of the Wind by Carlos Ruiz Zafon. It is the story of a boy and a mysterious book and an even more mysterious and elusive author. The boy introduces himself: "I was raised among books, making invisible friends in pages that seemed cast from dust and whose smell I carry on my hands to this day." I have been hooked ever since. It is reminiscent of Borges and Eco though most of the literary reviews say that it fell short of this lofty position. I am finding it well-written and suspenseful, and during the day, I find myself wishing that I were reading the book to find out what happens next instead of cataloging books and answering emails (sigh).
posted by Jill O. @ 2:23 PM
1 comments
1 Comments:
Sorry Literary, didn't mean to come across as a religious crackpot. I just wanted to challenge a 'tolerant, intelligent liberal.' Usually they react with intolerance and name calling. Hopefully you yourself will rise above this. I was trying to get you to think through your conclusions. You want a moral base but no one can tell you you are sinning. Don't you see the irony there? If I can't point out you are sinning there is no moral base. Do you believe Hitler was a bad man? Or President Bush? Based on what moral basis? There has to be something to measure against. I believe this measure is the Bible. I disagree with you on your analysis of the Bible. It is not a book of stories but of moral teachings. For example, read this statement by Jesus: "You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.' But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart." Is that a story? I am sure you failed to mention the strippers that your fiance most likely saw on his bachelor party, but he has just committed adultery against you. With this statement by Jesus, it is proof that the Bible is a divinely written book as it claims to be. If a human man was writing this book, would they include this damning statement or would they say when you die you will go to be with 70 virgins as in Islam?? So that concluding matter that you must face Literary is, who is Jesus? He claims you are a sinner...is He lying?
Post a Comment
<< Home