Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew H.
A book should only be considered "banned" if it's illegal.
|
We'll have to agree to disagree there. To me, not being available in a library due to an outside decisions does certainly qualify.
Quote:
|
Is a book also banned if a library decides not to carry it?
|
No, obviously not. If the board of governors tells the school librarian "remove this title" on the other hand, it is.
Quote:
|
But removing a book from a school library is not "banning" it locally.
|
Of course not. Only in that particular school, that particular library.
Quote:
|
But of course all of these governments actually outlawed possession, sale, or importation of the books
|
Not necessarily, and certainly not in the beginning. When the Nazis staged public book burnings, e.g., it was not illegal to buy, much less possess, these books. There was mounting public pressure against these authors, of course, many emigrated of their own free will (well, more or less), and later, when they were denied membership in the Reich Chamber of Literature they were simply forbidden to publish (actually, publishers were prohibited from printing their works). Would those be "banned books" in your opinion, then?
Quote:
|
Harry Potter was not, and has never been, banned in the US, or in any city, state, or county of the US.
|
Certain school libraries, though. Which, really, is the point.