• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Banned Books Week

six7s

veretic
six7s
Joined
Jun 17, 2007
Messages
8,716
Free People Read Freely

"We witness today perhaps the most widespread suppression of views the country has known. The suppression comes not from fear of being jailed but from fear of being dismissed from employment, banned from radio work, disqualified for teaching, or unacceptable for the lecture platform. Those sanctions are effective and powerful. They often carry as much sting as a fine or a jail sentence.
<snip/>
It is our attitude toward free thought and free expression that will determine our fate. There must be no limit on the range of temperate discussion, no limits on thought. No subject must be taboo. No censor must preside at our assemblies"
Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas
The One Un-American Act" Nieman Reports, vol. 7, no. 1 (Jan. 1953): p. 20.


Banned Books Week: Celebrating the Freedom to Read
American Library Association : ww.ala.org

Observed since 1982, this annual ALA event reminds Americans not to take this precious democratic freedom for granted.

This year, 2007, marks BBW's 26th anniversary (September 29 through October 6).

BBW celebrates the freedom to choose or the freedom to express one’s opinion even if that opinion might be considered unorthodox or unpopular and stresses the importance of ensuring the availability of those unorthodox or unpopular viewpoints to all who wish to read them. After all, intellectual freedom can exist only where these two essential conditions are met.
Click to expand...
 
I don't know about the other ten (and the IPU knows that I may even agree with banning some or all of them :D ) but banning "And Tango Makes Three" seems to reach a height of imbecility; YMMV. :boggled:
 
Note to self: Drop a line to the ALA letting them know that they might not want to abbreviate Banned Books Week to "BBW."


...or maybe they do.
 
This is the week where the ALA promotes one of the most bizzar defintions of banned books known to man.
 
Ah tis a good week. It reminds me of when they tried to ban Huck Finn i my high school and I went back and cursed out the principal for considering it.
 
I suppose I can agree with the general spirit of "Banned Books Week"; unfortunately, with very few exceptions most of the "challenged" books I've read were so God-awful I couldn't finish them. Note: including something in your book that offends some people enough that they complain should not be a ticket to fame, nor is it any indication of skill or artistry whatsoever. Chances are the book sucks in a complete manner.
 
Joshua Korosi said:
I suppose I can agree with the general spirit of "Banned Books Week"; unfortunately, with very few exceptions most of the "challenged" books I've read were so God-awful I couldn't finish them. Note: including something in your book that offends some people enough that they complain should not be a ticket to fame, nor is it any indication of skill or artistry whatsoever. Chances are the book sucks in a complete manner.
Click to expand...

I totally agree. I tried to read Tropic of Cancer once, and I swear there was no plot, plus the characters were lame and whiny. There was some sex, though, and honestly, it's the only thing that kept me reading as long as I did.
 
And if the objections to the books came on the grounds that they suck, they would not be on the challenged books list. The challenges always seem to come because of sex, and usually homosexuality.
 
No, my objections are that the books suck. In this day and age, it doesn't take a hero or pioneer to include homosexuality as a plot device, and some people are always going to complain.

Perhaps new writers should take this into account: add a provocative or controversial paragraph or two and you'll be an instant celebrity, no matter how much of a hack you are.
 
Joshua has a point. The reason many of these books are on the list are because they're no longer offensive. Yeah, they were, but given how times change, who is really making a difference by broadcasting the same banned books over and over again? If anything, we should be finding more 'banned' books to fight over and let be read. I mean, bring on the American Psychos and all the Poppy Z. Brite books you can get your hands around, THEN we'll have some real controversy here.

Simply standing on the shoulders of giants who have been accepted into society just makes this whole enterprise a pointless affair. Let's really get into offensive literature that still offends people, then we'll have something.

Seriously: if we can't bring the Marquis De Sade into this, we have failed. ;)
 
Joshua Korosi said:
No, my objections are that the books suck. In this day and age, it doesn't take a hero or pioneer to include homosexuality as a plot device, and some people are always going to complain.

Perhaps new writers should take this into account: add a provocative or controversial paragraph or two and you'll be an instant celebrity, no matter how much of a hack you are.
Click to expand...

I always thought the "classic" Catcher in the Rye sucked.
Some people complained about all the swearing but that just made it boring for me.

Kore
 
Zbu said:
Joshua has a point. The reason many of these books are on the list are because they're no longer offensive. Yeah, they were, but given how times change, who is really making a difference by broadcasting the same banned books over and over again? If anything, we should be finding more 'banned' books to fight over and let be read. I mean, bring on the American Psychos and all the Poppy Z. Brite books you can get your hands around, THEN we'll have some real controversy here.

Simply standing on the shoulders of giants who have been accepted into society just makes this whole enterprise a pointless affair. Let's really get into offensive literature that still offends people, then we'll have something.

Seriously: if we can't bring the Marquis De Sade into this, we have failed. ;)
Click to expand...

Seconded (or thirded, I guess).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom