Top Banned Books of 2003

michaelzhao writes "The ALA (American Library Association) recently published the new 100 most frequently banned books list of 2003. Of the banned books, Harry Potter was in the number 7th place in the most frequently banned. Also included were 'Where's Waldo' and 'The Giver' along with 'Goosebumps' and 'How to Eat Fried Worms.' These books were banned from various public institutions. This means that they were banned from various public libraries and public schools around the nation. (private schools, libraries, and institutions of higher learning don't count) The ALA encourages the people of the United States to fight against the book bans and read a banned book today!"

Comments

Why Harry?

[BigHungryJoe]

Is the objection to Harry Potter that it depicts magic? I don't get it. C.S. Lewis had magic in his books, and Christians love him. What is the difference?

Re:Why Harry?

[UnrepentantHarlequin]

The irony of this whole thing reminds me of something I said long ago to a fundamentalist who was giving me a rough time about playing D&D:

We play games about monsters and magic. You think it's all real. Now which one of us has the problems with reality, again?

She didn't have much to say after that.

Re:Why Harry?

[myowntrueself]

Satanism requires Christianity; because the Satan character only exists in Christian mythology.

Interestingly, Satan exists only in relatively recent Christian mythology as well, largely due to certain, rather late, translations of the bible.

Judaism has nothing remotely resembling a devil character whatsoever (unless you count that thing (can't remember the name) who recounts to God all the wicked things you did when you are up for judgement).

Islam has a kind of satan like figure (Iblis or shaitan), but in essence this character is on the level of humans, not a fallen angel (its a Djinn; created by God from fire just as humans were created from clay).

Zoroastrianism has a devil like character, but its power and nature is exactly equal to that of the good god character.

The so-called 'pagan' religions of Europe had nothing like the Devil; for the most part they hac a trickster character (eg Loki). But that nothing like the Devil.

What I would like to know, mistranslations aside, is where did the modern Christian notion of the Devil come from? Did it arise out of the collective guilt complex of Christianity? Or was it deliberately concocted as a means of social control?

Because it (the devil) is a novel concept in the context of the mythologies of the regions which gave rise to Christianity.

I think that modern christianity needs a devil to keep its congregation under control.

banning

[BoldAC]

I used to think my high school literature teacher was the coolest person in the world. (Oh, and she was HOT!) Obviously a previous bra-burning flower girl...

Then, the school board told her that she had to quit teaching A Brave New World -- and she did.

What a wimp. I lost all respect for her for not fighting it.

AC

Re:Waldo

[M. Silver]

Perhaps someone who's read the article (it's loading in another tab, but I'm not holding my breath) can say for sure, but my best guess would be that the ban list must include books that are not "banned" so much as "excluded by policy," perhaps in this case because "Every time we buy a Waldo book, some smart aleck has to go through and circle Waldo on each page, so we should stop wasting our money on them."

Or some such.

It's *still* loading, though.

Is this the most important information?

[Phanatic1a]

See, I think that a more important list of which books were banned would be a list of which public institutions did the banning. If there are provincial, backwards-minded, insular communities out there banning books, I'm more interested in knowing where they are than what they're banning.

Pft, whimpy stuff

[u-238]

There are much more serious and interesting instences of banning, like the actual 1995 book burnings of Germar Rudolph's published findings (a German chemist who found evidence showing no signs of Zyklon-B use in Auschwitz other than in delousing chambers). Extreme or not, his publications were literally burned...

And another similar instance wherein publication was halted and pages were ordered torn out of a medical study which showed people of Jewish ancestry to be significantly genetically linked to the Arab and Palestinian population.

A Wrinkle in Time

[Citizen_Kang]

A Wrinkle in Time is apparently banned because it contains magic and "new age" nonsense. (http://solonor.com/bannedbooks/archives/001742.ht ml). Oddly enough, Madeline L'Engle was openly Christian, known to run with other prominant Christian authors like C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien. It boggles the mind.

Re:So What?

[secolactico]

My parents vetted my reading

So did mine. And that was a sure fire way of getting me to obtain and read those books ,-)

Your point is valid, tho. I get to decide what my child reads or not but I have no business doing to same with your kid. The problem is, how do I know if my kid gets a book I don't approve of at the school library? Maybe he reads it there and doesn't bring it home so I'll never find out.

A desicion has to be made by the school custodian (or PTA or whatever) as to what books to have available at the library. It is unrealistic to think that the librarian will have a list of allowed books per student.

If I'm interested in making sure my opinion counts in deciding what books will or will not be available to my kids at school, I'll make sure my voice is heard at the committee that does the deciding.

That said, I believe children should be able to read what they please and form their own oppinions instead of being "censored" into thinking like we do. If my kid wants to read "Mein Kampf", I won't forbid it to him. I will, however, make sure he has access to counterpoint arguments and will sit down to discuss it with him.

Judy Blume?

[puzzled]

I read a Wrinkle In Time by Madeleine L'Engle a million years ago and I forget the details. I've read all of the Harry Potter stuff, J.D. Salinger's Catcher In The Rye, Flowers For Algernon, S.E. Hinton's The Outsiders, the
Lord Of The Flies, Slaughterhouse Five, A Brave New World, A Light In The Attic, both Mark Twain books, all three Stephen King books, and this is a bit embarrasing and out of character for me, but I *own* a copy of Howard Stern's Private Parts.

The last time I busted my roomie watching Howard Stern they were interviewing a female dwarf porn star and I must say this is the most
redeeming episode I've seen, but his book examines corporate ownership of radio stations and is a fine read in a Hunter S Thompsonesque sort of way.

I see a smattering of gay parents are OK books and various juvenile magic manuals - no surprise on these getting the evil eye, but what is Judy Blume's stuff doing in there? She has five of the hot 100 and I just don't
understand ... I never viewed her as a particularly controversial writer.

Can anyone shed some light on Judy Blume's presence on this list?

Re:Waldo

[Deadstick]

That brings to mind a vaguely similar series of books: Stephen Biesty's Amazing Cross Sections, which show cutaway views of all manner of engineering works: pyramids, ships of all eras, trains, skyscrapers, on and on...they're very minutely detailed, and in almost every one, there's a tiny little person somewhere taking a dump. (In the case of Lord Nelson's Victory, there's a whole line of guys waiting to use the two-hole head.)

Not a lot of folks realize how meaningful that is: shit was the very first engineering challenge, and how we get rid of it speaks volumes about where we are on the development timeline. And kids treat it very much like a Waldo book, examining all the details as they race to find the guy on the crapper.

rj

Re:topless sunbather

[Kell_pt]

I agree with Hogwash McFly in finding a relation between facing problems with information and good-sense, rather than attempting to supress them.
Maybe it's just that puritanism doesn't work. :) Do you recall seeing how the Administration recommends abstinence as means of stopping AIDS in African countries? Well, it's not just about that being hypocrite, that's a fine example of puritanism at the higher levels. Don't you find it at least a bit odd?! I mean... c'mon, abstinence? They don't have TVs or computers to spend their times in... ;) And the worst part is that I can imagine many people in most states in the US, in their homes watching TV and nodding in consent at those declarations of abstinence. Then they'll quietly change channel to the pr0n cable network.

Topless sunbathing is allowed in every beach in Portugal. Yet, it's a very conservative country, and quite religious (at least middle-age up). The thing is, it's a matter of personal choice and context. Respect for the other people and facing issues with information rather than attempting to hide'em, that plays a large role in the lack of sex-related crimes and a population with a healthier mind. Drinking is allowed to people above 16 that don't show signs of mental disorder, and although we have our share of people who exceed their account, most people are raised in the notion that there is a limit. It's a matter of teaching good-sense instead of forcing people to obey rules.

Another fine example - I've been to Marrocos, and that's a country where the majority follows the islamic religion. I felt ashamed at how easily they meet foreigners and accept the difference in cultures. They'll make jokes about Allah showing us the way while we're there and will usually meet you with curiosity as opposed to the arrogance you'd find for being a foreigner in a more developed country. In comparison, in the US and in other more developed places, pre-conceptions and the belief that "we know best"... well... you know where this is going, and I don't want to be moderated as a troll. :)

Cheers.