71–80 of 284 posts
Two of my favorite examples of grammatical importance:
Seriously though, good on her.
There are no books banned in EU... Some countries have laws that criminalise glorification of nazism or communism, but I never heard any book was "banned" as a result. Here in Poland we had "Mein Kampf" by certain Austrian painter in my primary school library for example.
According to that list, in Germany unannotated editions of Mein Kampf are still banned.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In this context it doesn’t literally mean banned, it means the book wasn’t allowed somewhere. and what is a good word to use when something isn't allowed somewhere? perhaps... "banned"? i dont understand why people think something needs be unavailable globally to be considered "banned". there's a million examples of the word "banned" being used when X isn't allowed in Y context . people only get touchy about it whe…
In your opinion is Hustler magazine a banned book becuase its not allowed in schools?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
the confusion is fake. books are the only time people get fussy about the word. (despite the same conversation occurring every month or two here) dang bans someone from HN? no confusion. alcohol banned in public? no confusion. weapons banned from schools? no confusion. books? oh my god, they aren't banned they just aren't allowed
> dang bans someone from HN? no confusion. alcohol banned in public? no confusion. weapons banned from schools? no confusion. Notice how all of those bans include a specific context? From HN, in schools, in public. No confusion. Notice how the only context in the headline is “in Portugal” but the books are not banned in Portugal? Confusion. It’s really not hard.
For those of you pretending to have trouble understanding 'banned' in this context, it means essentially the same thing as when someone gets 'canceled'. People who are canceled are not literally thrown in prison and executed.
I miss the days when words still had meaning
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Books that are simply bad books and in addition to being bad take an aggressive, political bent. (eg: the handmaid's tale) Weird example. The Handmaid's Tale is quite good. Edit: wow, downvotes for stating a book is quite good. HN at its worst. Edit 2: in fact it's so bizarre, also seeing other commenters here downvoted for saying Handmaid is a good book, that I struggled to see the reason for the ire. I'm not from…
[flagged]
> It was a thinly veiled world-building exercise on the subjection of women in Islam… then it ends. Nothing really happens.
The Handmaid's Tale wasn't about Islam but about religious Christian fundamentalism and, by Atwood's own words, an extrapolation of trends she saw in the US.
It's a good book, it seems contentious to list it as a "bad book" as a given, and expect people to agree with you. It's an acclaimed book and well received by other authors.
> Nothing really happens.
Bizarre take.
In structure it has a lot of parallels to 1984, the protagonist is trapped in an oppressive regime seemingly without escape, some authority figures are ambiguous, there's some hope but it can turn into a trap, and finally a sort of open end (both Winston's and Offred's fates are implied but unresolved, though Offred's is more ambiguous) and a an epilogue explaining the regime and its implied downfall.
Do you also find 1984 as a novel where nothing happens?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe when most libraries and stores use the term 'ban', they rely on PEN America's definition: "any action taken against a book based on its content and as a result of parent or community challenges, administrative decisions, or in response to direct or threatened action by lawmakers or other governmental officials, that leads to a book being either completely removed from availability to students, or where acce…
Thanks, this is useful. > "any action taken against a book based on its content and as a result of parent or community challenges, administrative decisions, or in response to direct or threatened action by lawmakers or other governmental officials, that leads to a book being either completely removed from availability to students, or where access to a book is restricted or diminished." Though this is a fascinating de…
That's not what the definition you just quoted says. In fact, the definition you quoted is very close to the common definition of "ban": a refusal to allow something, usually by an official entity.
It matters a lot who does it.