View Single Post
Old 03-13-2021, 08:19 AM   #214
SteveEisenberg
Grand Sorcerer
SteveEisenberg ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.SteveEisenberg ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.SteveEisenberg ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.SteveEisenberg ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.SteveEisenberg ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.SteveEisenberg ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.SteveEisenberg ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.SteveEisenberg ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.SteveEisenberg ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.SteveEisenberg ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.SteveEisenberg ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 7,435
Karma: 43514536
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: near Philadelphia USA
Device: Kindle Kids Edition, Fire HD 10 (11th generation)
Quote:
Originally Posted by hildea View Post
Do you think there's some law that requires a publisher to keep all books they've ever published in print, forever?
No. Some countries have laws that go the opposite way, and some people want to suppress books that they disagree with even in countries where freedom to read is traditional. But I have never heard of one that requires keeping books in print or eBooks for sale. I am OK with a law that has such an effect by putting withdrawn eBooks in the public domain. The reason I only say "OK" is that copyright-holding book suppressers could evade the law by putting a ridiculously high price on any title they wanted to keep me, or my heirs, from experiencing. So the law might not do what I would hope.

Theodor Seuss won three Caldecdott children's books awards. The Geisel heirs, or their assigns, are suppressing two of them (If I Ran the Zoo and McElligot's Pool) because they, or someone they hired, think some words, or more likely drawings, in those books embody ideas they don't agree with. It is a bit disappointing that, on a reading site, this isn't seen as a general problem.

As for the idea that they ever gave Caldecott honors to books that were unambiguously racist, pushing children to hate each other, I don't buy it. Much more likely they gave Caldecott honors to books that are subject to multiple interpretations.
SteveEisenberg is offline   Reply With Quote