Banning books

[Amnesiac]

After reading an article in the Houston Chronicle (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/life/main/7211563.html) today, I thought this would be a good topic to post on ROTW.

In the United States, school libraries have a habit of banning books they consider "offensive", be it religiously, politically or sexually. This has created some controversy over the years, with some considering books to be first-amendment protected speech that shouldn't be restricted simply due to the complaints of "protective parents".

Do you think schools should be able to ban books? Should students be able to access books schools may consider "offensive"? Should books be treated as "works of art" and left uncensored, or as movies, video games and music and openly censored and banned?

[Syvelocin]

I'm a firm believer in not censoring the artist.

I think book banning is so stupid. I've read books way worse than banned ones that I have heard of, and they have either been on my reading lists or at a public/school library. Narnia and Harry Potter promoting devil-worship and witchcraft? *rolls eyes* That's the least of your worries as far as things that your children will pick up.

I also think that with every artist, there must be a responsible viewer/reader. To witness art, you have to have be level-headed. And, obviously, not every is.

[ShyGuyInChicago]

I think to a certain extent schools should ban books that are obscene, or age-inappropriate or have no serious artistic/educational value.

[Sage]

I think to a certain extent schools should ban books that are obscene, or age-inappropriate or have no serious artistic/educational value.

Who decides these standards? What validates those peoples' authority on the subject? Should the students not decide for themselves?

Censorship never exists for "one's own good". Censorship is the act of those in power holding back information from the public that would put their power at risk. God forbid an unconventional viewpoint see the light of day and shift the status quo.

[Amnesiac]

I'm a firm believer in not censoring the artist.

I think book banning is so stupid. I've read books way worse than banned ones that I have heard of, and they have either been on my reading lists or at a public/school library. Narnia and Harry Potter promoting devil-worship and witchcraft? *rolls eyes* That's the least of your worries as far as things that your children will pick up.

I also think that with every artist, there must be a responsible viewer/reader. To witness art, you have to have be level-headed. And, obviously, not every is.

Agreed. Most books (key word: MOST) are works of art, not commercialized entertainment made for profit. Students should have the right to read what they want to read. Even if it is objectionable, it is still educational — the world isn't a pretty place, and not every story ends happily.

I mean, a school wouldn't ban 1984 for the sex scenes, would they? It's a classic novel that tells more than the story of a man living in a futuristic socialist world. It's a political statement and a work of art, and it should be treated as such.

Another related example: my class was shown the R-rated Schindler's List as part of a history lesson on Nazi Germany. A majority of it went uncensored. Why? Because the movie is a work of art; it shows with stark realism the brutality of the Nazis and the suffering Holocaust victims went through. That shouldn't be censored because some parent will be "offended".

I think to a certain extent schools should ban books that are obscene, or age-inappropriate or have no serious artistic/educational value.

If you used "and" instead of "or", I would agree with you. However, as I stated before, most books are considered artistic and should be treated as such.

[ShyGuyInChicago]

Agreed. Most books (key word: MOST) are works of art, not commercialized entertainment made for profit. Students should have the right to read what they want to read. Even if it is objectionable, it is still educational — the world isn't a pretty place, and not every story ends happily.

I mean, a school wouldn't ban 1984 for the sex scenes, would they? It's a classic novel that tells more than the story of a man living in a futuristic socialist world. It's a political statement and a work of art, and it should be treated as such.

Another related example: my class was shown the R-rated Schindler's List as part of a history lesson on Nazi Germany. A majority of it went uncensored. Why? Because the movie is a work of art; it shows with stark realism the brutality of the Nazis and the suffering Holocaust victims went through. That shouldn't be censored because some parent will be "offended".



If you used "and" instead of "or", I would agree with you. However, as I stated before, most books are considered artistic and should be treated as such.

I was wrong. I apologize. I guess if they are age inappropriate, then those books should be locked away and students will need parental consent to check them out.

[Amnesiac]

I was wrong. I apologize. I guess if they are age inappropriate, then those books should be locked away and students will need parental consent to check them out.

If inappropriate and not considered works of art, then yes. Agreed. :cool:

[ShyGuyInChicago]

If inappropriate and not considered works of art, then yes. Agreed. :cool:

Why does whether it is a work of art matter or if it has educational value or not? What if some parents do not approve of it because they believe that their child cannot handle it. This reminds me of when I was a sophomore in high school and we watched Schindler's List we would not be allowed to watch the film without parental consent. The movie is not the only way to learn about the Holocaust and some people are squeamish about such graphic content.

[Sage]

EASJR1991, you haven't addressed my previous post.

[The Batman]

I think schools do have the right to censor obscene, offensive, and vulgar books. Students don't need to go to the library checking out sex books and students in k-8th grade shouldn't have books filled with profanities and maybe the younger ones shouldn't read the offensive ones either. Besides that though, there's no reason to censor books.

[ShyGuyInChicago]

Who decides these standards? What validates those peoples' authority on the subject? Should the students not decide for themselves?

Censorship never exists for "one's own good". Censorship is the act of those in power holding back information from the public that would put their power at risk. God forbid an unconventional viewpoint see the light of day and shift the status quo.

The opinions of the reasonable person. That is the source of the standards. I do think that some parents have concerns over what they want their children to be exposed to. That is why when it comes to controversial books parents should be able to give consent.

[Sage]

The opinions of the reasonable person. That is the source of the standards.

I think the people who make the standards are entirely unreasonable.

[ShyGuyInChicago]

I think the people who make the standards are entirely unreasonable.

Well then speak out against them.

[Amnesiac]

Why does whether it is a work of art matter or if it has educational value or not? What if some parents do not approve of it because they believe that their child cannot handle it. This reminds me of when I was a sophomore in high school and we watched Schindler's List we would not be allowed to watch the film without parental consent. The movie is not the only way to learn about the Holocaust and some people are squeamish about such graphic content.

Art has a message. It doesn't exist simply to offend or make money off of people, it exists to convey emotion and opinion. Art can hold more educational value than other forms of teaching because it does it in a visual manner that can't be easily reproduced.

I can understand that some parents don't want their children seeing things, but that doesn't mean they should ruin it for everyone by banning books. Plenty of teens and kids are mature enough to handle the content in books some parents find "objectionable".

We weren't allowed to watch Schindler's List without parental consent. However, I firmly believe that film shows teaches about the Holocaust in a superior fashion to other forms of education. It isn't just a bunch of facts squeezed into a paragraph, it actually shows the actions and emotional distress of Europe's Jewish population. It represents real stories and events, it doesn't just TELL them, it SHOWS them.

[ShyGuyInChicago]

Art has a message. It doesn't exist simply to offend or make money off of people, it exists to convey emotion and opinion. Art can hold more educational value than other forms of teaching because it does it in a visual manner that can't be easily reproduced.

I can understand that some parents don't want their children seeing things, but that doesn't mean they should ruin it for everyone by banning books. Plenty of teens and kids are mature enough to handle the content in books some parents find "objectionable".

We weren't allowed to watch Schindler's List without parental consent. However, I firmly believe that film shows teaches about the Holocaust in a superior fashion to other forms of education. It isn't just a bunch of facts squeezed into a paragraph, it actually shows the actions and emotional distress of Europe's Jewish population. It represents real stories and events, it doesn't just TELL them, it SHOWS them.

I got the impression that you said that if it has a message or value then parents should not be able to opt their children out of it.

[Amnesiac]

I got the impression that you said that if it has a message or value then parents should not be able to opt their children out of it.

No, I just don't believe a couple of uptight, old fashioned parents who overprotect their children should be given the power to ban books for the entire student population, a majority of whom are capable of handling such material.

If a parent wants to not have their child see or read something "offensive", fine, just don't push it on everyone else.

[ShyGuyInChicago]

No, I just don't believe a couple of uptight, old fashioned parents who overprotect their children should be given the power to ban books for the entire student population, a majority of whom are capable of handling such material.

If a parent wants to not have their child see or read something "offensive", fine, just don't push it on everyone else.

I never said that they should be banned, unless as I said above there is nothing to be gained from it.

[Amnesiac]

I never said that they should be banned, unless as I said above there is nothing to be gained from it.

I never said that you said they should be banned, I agree they shouldn't be bought by the library in the first place if they're both offensive and non-artistic.

[The Batman]

They could just go to the public library and get them.

[huginnmuninn]

why buy the book in the first place if it has things you dont want in the library or school?
Ok lets get rid of all the books that have religion, blood, war, drugs, racism, slavery, magic, fighting, any thing that isnt real, and sexual content. what are we left with a kid friendly library or garbage?

[deadpie]

Banning things will only make someone want to do the thing that was banned more. When a book is banned, people will want to read it even more now. Banning things is just a shit logic that doesn't work, but only causes people to outrage and question things (Which isn't necessary a bad thing).

And for someone to say "Age Appropriate" is so fucking stupid. I'm pretty sure you and your friends have talked about allot more dirtier, offensive, and vulgar things then in some books. It's not going to be anything new, unless you're reading something like Carlton Mellick III.

[Suicune]

Ugh. I hate my school library and what they do.

They buy Manga/Comic Books/Whatever, and then just snip out the characters with a B cup size or larger.
But seriously, if a book in my library has a scene which violates the passage in the School's policy on pornography, or graphic content, they cut it out. Some books are missing major sections of chapters. Yet they offer magazines, with ExTenz advertisements at the back.

I think the whole idea of censoring books in school libraries is pointless unless miraculously, Playboy appeared on all the shelves.

[Amnesiac]

Ugh. I hate my school library and what they do.

They buy Manga/Comic Books/Whatever, and then just snip out the characters with a B cup size or larger.
But seriously, if a book in my library has a scene which violates the passage in the School's policy on pornography, or graphic content, they cut it out. Some books are missing major sections of chapters. Yet they offer magazines, with ExTenz advertisements at the back.

I think the whole idea of censoring books in school libraries is pointless unless miraculously, Playboy appeared on all the shelves.

That's a RIDICULOUS waste of taxpayer money. I can't believe a library would be as prudish to buy offensive books and then physically censor everything mildly objectionable. If you don't like the content, just don't buy the fucking books, god damn.

[Suicune]

That's a RIDICULOUS waste of taxpayer money. I can't believe a library would be as prudish to buy offensive books and then physically censor everything mildly objectionable. If you don't like the content, just don't buy the fucking books, god damn.

That's why I buy my own, uncensored of course.

[Amnesiac]

That's why I buy my own, uncensored of course.

Good for you :P, but for those students who can't afford to buy their own books, shouldn't they have access to uncensored works of art at their school library?

[Suicune]

Good for you :P, but for those students who can't afford to buy their own books, shouldn't they have access to uncensored works of art at their school library?

They should, but they don't. I'm just glad that the High School's library will be much bigger and not be censored. Apparently 1 grade level changes your level of mental understanding and composure when it comes to reading.

[Amnesiac]

They should, but they don't. I'm just glad that the High School's library will be much bigger and not be censored. Apparently 1 grade level changes your level of mental understanding and composure when it comes to reading.

That's unfortunate. Middle school students are mature enough to handle boobs, I mean, seriously, plenty of middle school girls already have them. Are we going to make them wear sweaters every day because of that? It's the same principle as censoring books with images of cartoon characters with "large" breasts.

Middle school is always the most censor-happy and constitutionally edgy stage of the public school system. It's stupid and doesn't encourage maturity or development on behalf of the students.