During Banned Books Week, Readers Explore What It Means to Challenge Texts(npr.org)
npr.org
During Banned Books Week, Readers Explore What It Means to Challenge Texts
https://www.npr.org/2021/09/30/1041610286/during-banned-books-week-readers-explore-what-it-means-to-challenge-texts
48 comments
I don't think anyone is saying that. People are rolling their eyes because these lists are inevitably comprised of extremely popular books that were once, usually temporarily, removed from a single school library somewhere in the US.
There are books these libraries cannot even buy and which the school librarians will often not buy or even destroy for ideological reasons, but these books do not appear on these lists. Only the popular, famous, and widely available books that are often on required reading lists.
EDIT: A great example is To Kill A Mockingbird, which always appears on these lists. TKAM was once 'banned' because people considered it too antiracist, now it is often 'banned' (rare isolated instances in either case) because it contains racial slurs. Nevertheless for the past 20 years almost every American schoolchild has been required to read TKAM. It is absolutely absurd to speak of it in any meaningful sense as a banned book. It's just a book librarians and teachers love that sometimes gets complaints.
There are books these libraries cannot even buy and which the school librarians will often not buy or even destroy for ideological reasons, but these books do not appear on these lists. Only the popular, famous, and widely available books that are often on required reading lists.
EDIT: A great example is To Kill A Mockingbird, which always appears on these lists. TKAM was once 'banned' because people considered it too antiracist, now it is often 'banned' (rare isolated instances in either case) because it contains racial slurs. Nevertheless for the past 20 years almost every American schoolchild has been required to read TKAM. It is absolutely absurd to speak of it in any meaningful sense as a banned book. It's just a book librarians and teachers love that sometimes gets complaints.
Educators are, by conventional understanding, supposed to educate. These lists contain books that either have educational value, or are otherwise instrumental in the educational process (read: books that cause children to develop positive reading happens, typically by containing fantastical elements that Christian groups disapprove of).
This is what distinguishes TKAM (a selective choice, given that the overwhelming majority of the books in TFA are much newer) from Mein Kampf.
This is what distinguishes TKAM (a selective choice, given that the overwhelming majority of the books in TFA are much newer) from Mein Kampf.
It’s odd that truly offensive titles like Mein Kampf are missing. This study relies on self reported figures so may not tell the full story. This is also interesting: https://old.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/pvbkug/what_is_a...
Nothing about censoring COVID information either. https://www.wired.com/story/amazon-quietly-removes-coronavir...
Nothing about censoring COVID information either. https://www.wired.com/story/amazon-quietly-removes-coronavir...
When librarians speak of banned books, they are talking about books other people wanted banned, not the books librarians themselves wanted banned.
Harry Potter gets on these lists because some christian groups in America demanded that librarians remove the book from their shelves, while the librarians didn't want to. But books that the librarians themselves chose to not stock don't get on the list, because to a librarian, a librarians job is to select which books to stock and which not to. You are very unlikely* to find a copy of Myth of the 20th Century on the shelves of your local public library, not because of external pressure but because the librarians themselves think that people shouldn't read it. And to librarians, that is not banning.
*(I checked. Of the two library systems I have a card for, one doesn't have it and the other has a single copy in German, which they won't let you check out, but no copies in English. Since this is an American library, the German copy would be inaccessible to huge swaths of the population anyway.)
Harry Potter gets on these lists because some christian groups in America demanded that librarians remove the book from their shelves, while the librarians didn't want to. But books that the librarians themselves chose to not stock don't get on the list, because to a librarian, a librarians job is to select which books to stock and which not to. You are very unlikely* to find a copy of Myth of the 20th Century on the shelves of your local public library, not because of external pressure but because the librarians themselves think that people shouldn't read it. And to librarians, that is not banning.
*(I checked. Of the two library systems I have a card for, one doesn't have it and the other has a single copy in German, which they won't let you check out, but no copies in English. Since this is an American library, the German copy would be inaccessible to huge swaths of the population anyway.)
> (I checked. Of the two library systems I have a card for, one doesn't have it and the other has a single copy in German, which they won't let you check out, but no copies in English. Since this is an American library, the German copy would be inaccessible to huge swaths of the population anyway.)
If you really want to test your hypothesis out, a simple search is not enough. There are tons of books the libraries I'm a member of don't have. However, libraries are often part of networks that will lend or purchase requested books for their members from other libraries or publishers.
Ask a librarian if they can help you borrow or find the book. Chances are they'll help you out or point you to someone who can if they can't.
If you really want to test your hypothesis out, a simple search is not enough. There are tons of books the libraries I'm a member of don't have. However, libraries are often part of networks that will lend or purchase requested books for their members from other libraries or publishers.
Ask a librarian if they can help you borrow or find the book. Chances are they'll help you out or point you to someone who can if they can't.
To be frank, I do not want to get that book nor do I want my name to be in their system as somebody who is interested in that book. A search of their online catalogues through Tor was enough to confirm my suspicion that they would not have the book generally available. My understanding of how librarians think about and consider "banned books" comes from my interactions with a few librarians in my social circle; the search for the book was simply to illustrate my point with an example.
I just Googled what the book is and I don't blame you. Point is that libraries act as a network, and if you really want to check out a book, librarians tend to work with you to make it happen.
But really, more often, it comes down to budgeting and not taste or personal politics.
Perhaps a better metric of a "banned" book would be the most requested yet unaccepted book.
Does anyone even want to read that book though? It would be more interesting if there was some widely read book that wasn't available.
All of the books on the NPR list are available at my local library and Amazon. Seems ridiculous to call them the most banned books in that case.
The Anarchist’s cookbook is on Amazon but not my local library for example.
The Anarchist’s cookbook is on Amazon but not my local library for example.
Most people don't want to read most earnestly banned books. It's a very notorious book though, it would probably garner more attention than many uncontroversial books in the long tail of most library collections, which are neither loved nor hated, notorious nor famous.
But a lot of the people interested in reading it would probably have right wing inclinations, and the average librarian doesn't want to support that sort of thing (not least because the nazis themselves were big on book burning..)
But a lot of the people interested in reading it would probably have right wing inclinations, and the average librarian doesn't want to support that sort of thing (not least because the nazis themselves were big on book burning..)
I would not be surprised to learn that modern librarians have permanently destroyed and lost more books in the past five years than the Nazis did in their entire reign.
Most of it is less nakedly ideological - its presented as necessary due to the collection size - but certainly not all of it. There are many famous cases if you Google it, and it is happening quietly all the time on the local scale. Talk to your local librarian - I was shocked to learn their methodology.
Most of it is less nakedly ideological - its presented as necessary due to the collection size - but certainly not all of it. There are many famous cases if you Google it, and it is happening quietly all the time on the local scale. Talk to your local librarian - I was shocked to learn their methodology.
It's all about books that people read, not books they don't read. Nobody's going to read Mein Kampf because it's a boring screech.
For example, Harry Potter is on the 2019 list of challenged/banned books.
So popular titles are going to get challenged for various reasons.
For example, Harry Potter is on the 2019 list of challenged/banned books.
So popular titles are going to get challenged for various reasons.
Remember--Amazon is just a private company, so it's not censorship! Say it three times fast and it becomes true :)
It’s true if you say it only once, or even not at all.
in the age of monopolies - the whole "it's private" has less and less practical meaning. Is it a violation of 1A? No.
should we be reconsidering laws in an age where all ephemeral discussion is gone and near all discussion or communication or media is now permanent and flows through Google, Amazon, Facebook, and Twitter?
Absolutely. The web was never meant to be so centralized and monopolized. The web has "disrupted" so many industries (ie, flat out destroyed them and then consolidated their functions under one of the main web companies), there's decreasing less alternatives for private platforms.
Censoring speech on private platforms was a really different animal 10 years ago.
should we be reconsidering laws in an age where all ephemeral discussion is gone and near all discussion or communication or media is now permanent and flows through Google, Amazon, Facebook, and Twitter?
Absolutely. The web was never meant to be so centralized and monopolized. The web has "disrupted" so many industries (ie, flat out destroyed them and then consolidated their functions under one of the main web companies), there's decreasing less alternatives for private platforms.
Censoring speech on private platforms was a really different animal 10 years ago.
A distinction should be made between banned books that were actually censored by governments, and "banned books" that merely featured in pathetic political quarrels at American middle schools and whose "banning" consisted of a school board of boomers removing them from the school library
It's funny that the latter description is probably just as accurate for the people who banned To Kill a Mockingbird as it is for the people who banned Stamped: Racism, Antiracism, and You, given that the two groups are probably diametrically opposed to each other politically. Both groups seem to have a problem with depictions of racism.
Schools are part of the government.
So? If the extent of the "ban" is discontinue of availability at a middle school by the authority of a local government or citizen school board in Oklahoma or some such place, it is still a very feeble form of censorship that I don't find interesting at all - just as I'm not interested in what books are or aren't available at the premises of any other local Oklahoma government department building. Anyone can just buy these supposedly banned books themselves if they want to read it. It's not comparable to books that are actually banned.
These bans probably mostly effect kids, who are probably the least likely people to be able to buy the books themselves.
Yes, the annual banned books list is essentially a list of books favored by the averaged ideology of education majors, librarians, and journalists. There is never anything actually suppressed or controversial on the list.
I'm not even arguing that truly censored books do have intrinsic merit, but the banned books list is just a list of books certain people want you to think are edgy and that you should read to advance their ideology. It's marketing. Amazon and other bookstores are actually banning books, often in collaboration with government funded NGOs. 95% of these books are actual trash fires, sure, but those are banned books. On top of that, public libraries are performing slow, partly ideological purges of existing collections - there's probably more books being permanently destroyed/lost today than in the history of mankind.
I'm not even arguing that truly censored books do have intrinsic merit, but the banned books list is just a list of books certain people want you to think are edgy and that you should read to advance their ideology. It's marketing. Amazon and other bookstores are actually banning books, often in collaboration with government funded NGOs. 95% of these books are actual trash fires, sure, but those are banned books. On top of that, public libraries are performing slow, partly ideological purges of existing collections - there's probably more books being permanently destroyed/lost today than in the history of mankind.
[deleted]
These listed books are nonetheless targeted. Yes, they are basically books people want to read, but busybodies complain about these books, not the garbage fire of books that nobody will ever bother reading.
There are plenty of busybodies running the school libraries ensuring books people would read never get bought and purging collections of books now deemed heretical.
There are plenty of busybodies lobbying bookstores to stop selling books.
These books don't, or rarely, make banned book lists. It's done quietly out and out of the public view. The books that get shilled as 'banned books' are all largely (not wholly) books agreeable to a particular class of people.
For example, a very popular children's author who passed away some time ago is completely banned from my library system for ideological reasons.
There are plenty of busybodies lobbying bookstores to stop selling books.
These books don't, or rarely, make banned book lists. It's done quietly out and out of the public view. The books that get shilled as 'banned books' are all largely (not wholly) books agreeable to a particular class of people.
For example, a very popular children's author who passed away some time ago is completely banned from my library system for ideological reasons.
Yeah seems like this should have made the list. https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/books/2021/03/0...
> For example, a very popular children's author who passed away some time ago is completely banned from my library system for ideological reasons.
Which author, and which library system?
Which author, and which library system?
Pertinent:
https://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbook...
a list of the Top 10 Most Challenged Books in order to inform the public about censorship in libraries and schools. The lists are based on information from media stories and voluntary reports sent to OIF from communities across the U.S.
So it's (1) voluntarily submitted, like an Internet poll, (2) it is from libraries AND schools (not just school libraries), and (3) the library had to already carry the book, which means that if the library itself felt like the book was too inappropriate to shelve, it will not be represented here.
In other words, take the NPR article with a grain of salt, or skip altogether. Whatever you learn is unlikely to be accurate.
https://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbook...
a list of the Top 10 Most Challenged Books in order to inform the public about censorship in libraries and schools. The lists are based on information from media stories and voluntary reports sent to OIF from communities across the U.S.
So it's (1) voluntarily submitted, like an Internet poll, (2) it is from libraries AND schools (not just school libraries), and (3) the library had to already carry the book, which means that if the library itself felt like the book was too inappropriate to shelve, it will not be represented here.
In other words, take the NPR article with a grain of salt, or skip altogether. Whatever you learn is unlikely to be accurate.
Talking about censorship and banned books should be to highlight what is politically incorrect and indefensible in society, the ideas that are too dangerous to even consider. By seeing what ideas we reject on instinct we can highlight society’s biases. I find it hard to believe that most people would consider the books on this list too dangerous to allow people to read, they seem relatively tame. It’s much more likely that we would ban books dealing with pedophilia or rape, classified government information, COVID misinformation, or encouraging violence.
> highlight what is politically incorrect and indefensible in society
The big one here of course is communism. Arguably the most censored idea in the history of American politics. The government even held hearings to track down adherents.
In some places it's still difficult to have an uncensored discussion about much tamer topics like labor organizing.
> pedophilia
Lolita was frequently banned
> classified government information
This is generally celebrated rather than challenged by readers. The Pentagon Papers, Snowden leaks, and the Panama papers are famous examples.
The big one here of course is communism. Arguably the most censored idea in the history of American politics. The government even held hearings to track down adherents.
In some places it's still difficult to have an uncensored discussion about much tamer topics like labor organizing.
> pedophilia
Lolita was frequently banned
> classified government information
This is generally celebrated rather than challenged by readers. The Pentagon Papers, Snowden leaks, and the Panama papers are famous examples.
In regards to classified information it’s come up in some Tom Clancy style novels and contemporary military histories. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Easy_Day
Ah I see what you mean.
Although in that case the author had a contractual requirement to clear the book and didn't. In that sense it's similar to defying an NDA or publishing your company's trade secrets.
Although in that case the author had a contractual requirement to clear the book and didn't. In that sense it's similar to defying an NDA or publishing your company's trade secrets.
Worth noting, this only cover new bans in 2020.
> The ALA Office for Intellectual Freedom tracked 156 challenges to library, school, and university materials and services in 2020.
So you really have two categories of books.
1) New books which had widespread media coverage in 2020, which someone considered controversial. (Most of the books on the list)
2) Old Books which were considered classics but are now being challenged because of changing societal norms. (Of Mice and Men, To Kill a Mockingbird)
> The ALA Office for Intellectual Freedom tracked 156 challenges to library, school, and university materials and services in 2020.
So you really have two categories of books.
1) New books which had widespread media coverage in 2020, which someone considered controversial. (Most of the books on the list)
2) Old Books which were considered classics but are now being challenged because of changing societal norms. (Of Mice and Men, To Kill a Mockingbird)
There is a list of oft-banned books in the US on Wikipedia [0] that has some...interesting items on it. For example, The Adventures of Super Diaper Baby's crime is "Encouraging poor spelling."
0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_commonly_challeng...
0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_commonly_challeng...
My wife, a librarian, would probably support banning a lot of Pikey's books and graphic novel in general before those dealing with mature or challenging content. Crimes against the word vs. the world, I guess.
Then she hasn't seen Pilkey's literary cleverness. I about fell out of a chair when, after chapters and chapters of set up, Pilkey titled a chapter "The Great Cat's Bee" at the turning point in a narrative. Then I turned to my kid and I explained why it was so funny.
https://dog-man.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_pop_culture_referenc...
https://dog-man.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_pop_culture_referenc...
There was nudity in Where's Waldo!?
Oho! Seems like same kinds of people who complain about “censorship” these days are the kinds of people doing it at the school level.
> But there's been a "notable shift" in the subject matter of books now being challenged in the U.S. When the American Library Association released its list of the Top Ten Most Challenged Books of 2020 in April, the books that received the most challenges to libraries and schools dealt with "racism, Black American history and diversity in the United States,"
> But there's been a "notable shift" in the subject matter of books now being challenged in the U.S. When the American Library Association released its list of the Top Ten Most Challenged Books of 2020 in April, the books that received the most challenges to libraries and schools dealt with "racism, Black American history and diversity in the United States,"
If you read the reasons books are banned, it seems to come from both sides of the political spectrum, depending on the book.
Sure, but I was referring to the part, “the books that received the most challenges,,,”
Yeah, but books dealing with, "racism, Black American history and diversity in the United States" were challenged from both sides of the political spectrum. Maybe I'm misunderstanding who you were referring to in your original comment.
No mention of the most dangerous author of them all: Dr. Suess.
How often has Dr. Seuss been banned?
It was in the news cycle recently: https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/books/2021/03/0...
Did I miss the part where his books were banned?
[deleted]
We seem to have completely lost the message: this kind of censorship matters the most, because it overwhelmingly concerns public repositories of knowledge and people who otherwise can’t access that knowledge (minors).