Censored Books in the USA

[cristina1]

This list gives reasons and places, but is outdated and far from complete. I was quite surprised at some of the titles. I think my whole high school required reading list is on here, plus some!

This list gives the 50 most frequesntly banned books in the 90's, although it doesn't list where the books were banned.

[phoenixx]

A lot of my favorite poets and authors made the list. Puzzled as to why run of the mill "classic horror" by King and Koontz made the list though....

[cristina1]

I'm amazed that Shel Silverstein is on there

[frazzledspice]

We had a banned books writeoff a few years ago. I reviewed "Flowers for Algernon."

Other participants were:

elorraine, wildvirgogirl, teskue, jenninca, penguinlady, janesbit1, jennifer_gibbons, eric_james, elizajane, jgibson2, erik_kosberg, susanwhiple, foxfroggy, kinganamort, and kurt_messick.

It was an interesting writeoff to participate in. Most of the books were required reading in many junior high and high school curricula.

http://www.epinions.com/book-review-...39D6A587-prod2

[Redlass]

Well, um, Shel Silverstein did frequently write for Playboy. But yeah, it seems silly to ban Where the Sidewalk Ends.

The interesting thing about banned books is that sometimes it is appropriate to "ban" a book. I would be uncomfortable if I saw Stephen King in an elementary school library, though it wouldn't bother me at all if it were in a high school library.

Some of the reasons that the books are challenged are amusing. And yet, I'm encouraged that there are parents out there still that care enough about what kids are reading to challenge the book--and to read it to find that it is objectionable.

Also, some of the books are considered banned because they were rejected for purchase by a school board. Well, I don't have a problem with a school board saying that they'd rather spend their money on a book other than Cujo.

It does remind me of an argument I frequently engaged in in college. There are a great number of people who think you shouldn't read books that conflict with your personal values. They argue that if you put "garbage" in, you'll get garbage out. They reject the capability of the human mind to analyze and choose.

Given that philosophy, is it really surprising about any of the books on the list?

[Redlass]

I could make guesses on why most of the books in the second list were banned:

Of Mice and Men Language.
The Catcher in the Rye I had a friend in high school who petitioned to have this book removed from the required reading list. He showed me a copy that he had highlighted with all the vulgarities and "bad" language. Two years later, it was no longer required for AP English and I never read it. I recently picked up a copy of it realizing that I've missed out.
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn Racism issues. Which is sad given that it is ultimately a book about a boy discovering the futility of racism. Sometimes, in order to tell a good story and make a point, you have to illustrate why something is bad.
Bridge to Terabithia. There is some pretty intense stuff in this book. I challenge anyone to read it without crying. However, the reason I imagine it is on the list is because of the protagonist's views on religion. Ironic given that the author is herself highly religious.
The Witches. There are those who find any mention of witches, magic, occult, etc. to be objectionable and would want to shelter their children from them.
Daddy's Roommate. Homophobia still exists.
Curses, Hexes, and Spells See above.
A Wrinkle in Time This is a highly spiritual and religious book. Any time you bring in religion, you're going to have people who object--either because it contains religion or because it contains a religion that is different from their own.
Blubber There are many parents who want to believe that their children stay innocent and thus object to any of Judy Blume's work.
15-16, more magic
18 homophobia
I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings There are those schools who don't want any book with sexuality in it. This book gets pretty intense about the abuse that the author underwent. Same with Color Purple.
The Headless Cupid. Rather accepting of the occult and witchcraft. Again, there are those who object. This goes for anything else on the list by Zilpha Snyder or John Bellairs.
In the Night Kitchen has nudity. Albeit pretty mild.
The Handmaid's Tale is pretty graphic and carries a heavy pro-choice message. I can see that some people would freak at having their kids read it.

What I find sad about that list is that the books on it make up some of my all-time favorites. I've read over half of them and some of them were books that had a pretty profound effect on me. There may be some that I would hesitate to let my child read at certain ages, but it is such an individualized thing. I'd much rather the child read something disturbing and let us talk about it. Giving a child only those books which are bland will guarantee that he or she will despise reading and never develop it as a habit.

[lambchops]

Great great topic...sometimes I just don't "get" it. I personally find it's hilarious that, for example, Red Riding Hood (Grimm Bros.) is singled out. If that's too violent (which I suspect to be the problem) then, well, isn't the rest of the Grimm Bros?

I also think it's hilarious that ANYONE would ban One Hundred Years of Solitude, by Gabriel Garcia Marquez. Seriously. If somebody (be it teen or adult) can read that book, they should be commended.

I think that banning books is a double edged sword. On one hand, you ban a book and people wonder what all the fuss is about. So they run out to Borders and buy the book. And read it. And maybe even like it. On the other hand, banning a book means that folks don't think that we have the ability to think and choose and comprehend. What good does it do to ban a book about witches from kids? Witches are everywhere--Disney, halloween, books, television...EVERYWHERE. To ban a book because of witchcraft really is futile.

Gack. Just a very intersting topic. Plus, I wonder why many of the books I've greatly enjoyed don't appear on that list. They surely are more, uh, controversial. Then again I highly doubt that many people with the intellect required to ban a book could wade through most of them.

[mtomm[$]]

ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST
by Ken Kesey

Removed from required reading list by Westport, Massachusetts, 1977.
Banned by Freemont High School, St. Anthony, Idaho. (Instructor was
fired.)
Challenged by Merrimack (New Hampshire) High School, 1982.

That was South Fremont High School. And, yes, Mr. Fogarty was fired. It was a pretty dumb on his part actually with no tenure and considering the make-up of the community. This caused quite a rukus.

Maybe I'm too sensitive but I do not care to read books with lots of explicit sex or vulgarity in them. I also would not be happy if it is required reading for my children even at high school age.

[mjfrombuffalo[$]]

mtomm said

I also would not be happy if it is required reading for my children even at high school age.

Personally, I'd rather kids be exposed to this stuff in well-written books than in rap/hip-hop music or videos, or on television. At least a book provides some sort of context and rationale for the vulgarity or - ahem - activity, as opposed to music videos, for example, where "Ho's" just fall into rap star's beds for no apparent reason. (Or maybe they've stumbled and fallen because they were blinded by the reflection off the bling-bling, and the bed just happened to be there. Or something.) But it depends on how specifically it's "required" - is it required, period, or is it part of a list of 10 books, from which a student is required to read three, meaning the student could choose to read something else.

[Redlass]

And that is where I sometimes wonder if the term "banned" is too strong.

It's a pity that the instructor was fired for introducing a book that can rightly be considered a classic. It rather impinges on the whole ideal of intellectual freedom.

That being said, you've brought up an interesting point. How do we balance things? Do we think there is a certain level of cultural literacy that our children should possess upon graduating from high school? If we do, they will end up reading some things with explicit sex or vulgarity (if we get rid of all vulgarity, we'll have to get rid of Shakespeare. He's extremely baudy and often very explicit). Yet, do parents not have a right to set certain boundaries? As a parent, I'd like to think so. My son is much younger than high school, but to pull the example of Shakespeare again: We don't let him see most of the Shakespeare tragedies even though his father is in them and he adores the comedies. Or we'll pull him out during certain scenes because we think they are too violent. I think we get to reserve that right as parents. Even if it means we're cheating our son out of a cultural experience.

[mtomm[$]]

And it was the parent's who didn't appreciate Mr. Fogarty's choice of required reading for his class. I think part of the reason he was fired was because he didn't have respect for the parent's wishes.

It's a pity that the instructor was fired for introducing a book that can rightly be considered a classic. It rather impinges on the whole ideal of intellectual freedom.

And as adults they should have every opportunity to choose that book to read. As a high schooler I'm pretty sure as a parent I'd be against it. Age being a big factor in what I consider appropriate. I guess I just want to keep them innocent for as long as possible.

Personally, I'd rather kids be exposed to this stuff in well-written books than in rap/hip-hop music or videos, or on television. At least a book provides some sort of context and rationale for the vulgarity or - ahem - activity, as opposed to music videos, for example, where "Ho's" just fall into rap star's beds for no apparent reason. (Or maybe they've stumbled and fallen because they were blinded by the reflection off the bling-bling, and the bed just happened to be there. Or something.) But it depends on how specifically it's "required" - is it required, period, or is it part of a list of 10 books, from which a student is required to read three, meaning the student could choose to read something else.

I hear ya. I'm just being a protective mother.