151–160 of 176 posts
I like to use "The Turner Diaries" as a kind of litmus test for people who don't want to ban books. I notice that, while all of the books this article calls out specifically are available at the Brooklyn Public Library - per their online catalog, "The Turner Diaries" is not and neither are any books by its author - either his real name or pseudonym. The Turner Diaries, for reference, is a white supremacist novel that…
I like to use "The Turner Diaries" as a kind of litmus test for people who don't want to ban books. I notice that, while all of the books this article calls out specifically are available at the Brooklyn Public Library - per their online catalog, "The Turner Diaries" is not and neither are any books by its author - either his real name or pseudonym. The Turner Diaries, for reference, is a white supremacist novel that…
Banning can best be thought of as external. If a library has a book, and a politician (e.g., library board or school board member) demands the book be removed, that is a call for the book to be banned.
Not all banning is external, to be sure. A library that refused to acquire books of interest to people of color, or to LGBTs, can definitely be said to be banning books. Librarians I have known have pretty much all had the opinion that, as much as possible, acquisitions should be responsive to the needs of the community, and would not be supportive of policies like that.
As for the Turner Diaries, I'd echo the OP that, even if a library chose to include it in its collection (and thus spend money on it that would not be available to spend on other books), it should be held in a Special Collections division, available only on request. But my guess is that my dog poop art book would get more circulation than the Turner Diaries.
I think this project is great and I fully support it. However, it's only a list of books challenged by mostly christian conservatives dealing with race and gender. Left-leaning progressives challenge books ALL the time. This is bristling to hear, but it's true. Books that are deemed to contain racist or sexist words or images are challenged every year. Huckleberry Finn, Dr. Seuss books, books about Christopher Columb…
Which of the books on the ALA's list of the 100-most-challenged books of the 2010s do you believe was probably challenged by "left-leaning" busybodies? https://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbook...
[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-race-captain-underpan...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
More like"after review, not carried"
I guess what I am asking, is that in some states I am under the impression that the state legislature got involved. If library staff maintain autonomy and can carry whatever they want, I wouldn't say it is banned. If the state government got involved and provided a list of books to remove from public libraries, then to me that is banned. I know in some states such lists were produced by legislature, but I don't know…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably a better test for Library Genesis would be books that are notorious in Russia (whatever those might be, I don't know.) I doubt the Turner Diaries has much notoriety in Russia, due to the language barrier if nothing else.
Indeed. If it's supported (tacitly or explicitly) by the Russian government, I would expect them to have books that polarize Americans.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where is the line between banning and just not caring about a book? I have written a book of my own. No library in the world has it. No publisher chose to pick it up. Does that mean I am the most "banned" author in the world? Or maybe people have deemed that what I wrote is just not worth their time?
Just a guess, but I suspect a book gets banned because it's well known; it has content judged as immoral, unnecessarily sexual, etc.; and parents in an area suspect that teachers or librarians will try to convey the book to their children against the parents wishes. They thus take action through their school boards to draw a perfectly clear line. BPL is not subject to any of those jurisdictions, so they're legally un…
Where banned=not paid for with public funds. Words have meanings. The books are still available, just not in schools.
So Twitter, a private company, has to fund speech it doesn't like but a public library can be forbidden from using public money for books people don't like
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Couldn't much the same thing be said about Florida schools "banning" books with so-called "critical race theory" and/or LGBTQ themes? Students aren't going to get expelled for reading these books. Their parents aren't going to be criminally charged for buying them for their kids to take to school and read. Everyone in Florida is welcome to buy as many copies of these "banned" books as they want. The schools in Florid…
>The schools in Florida have just chosen not to buy some books they feel didn't have educational value. So what's all the fuss about? The fuss is about the state deciding what Florida schools can and cannot do. Yes, I think the same concepts apply in Florida, but you are misstating what is happening there. The political wings of the government are making these decisions. I want the experts to make these decisions, th…
The state decides what Florida schools do because the state runs Florida schools. My employer tells me to do things all the time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just a guess, but I suspect a book gets banned because it's well known; it has content judged as immoral, unnecessarily sexual, etc.; and parents in an area suspect that teachers or librarians will try to convey the book to their children against the parents wishes. They thus take action through their school boards to draw a perfectly clear line. BPL is not subject to any of those jurisdictions, so they're legally un…
I'm glad you didn't use loaded language there.