Missouri public school bans Kurt Vonnegut's 'Slaughterhouse Five'.

[vxf]

Banning books, building walls. Always bad.

But I also thing arguments are being mixed. One thing is to not include a book in teaching curriculum. Another thing is to ban it from a library.

Pretending this was NOT religious is either naive or intellectually dishonest.

And, as a general rule, I can't take anyone seriously who speaks of 'deviant sexual behavior'. That's just code for 'you are different and I don't like you'.

And yes, I live in the bible belt. In the bucket of it, Oklahoma. Oh the irony, calling this 'the land of the free, the home of the brave'. Free to read what religious nuts approve? Brave enough to be scared of a book, afraid of revolutionary ideas such as Darwin?

No offense, I love my adoptive country. But I don't love the censors.

[queentess]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

That would be any number of John Wayne propaganda war movies.

Originally Posted by anamardoll

Heh. Those CLEARLY promote violence, though, and are NOT age-appropriate.

You may laugh, but I had to watch clips of those in my high school U.S. history class! Clearly not appropriate for anyone of any age. Oy, the acting, the dialog, the directing...

Not sure what Saving Private Ryan is rated, but that's a movie that should be shown in schools.

[anabolina]

I'll admit I have a different perspective on this. Despite being a librarian for 4 years ( I never would have mentioned this during any of my classes for fear of being burned at the stake) and having studied English for my BA, I see no problem with banning books or censorship. Maybe it does have something to do with being from the Bible belt and living in the Bible Belt despite not being a bible thumper.

If someone in the community objects to a book, it is RIGHT for the library and it's board(or in this case the schoolboard) to review the book and determine if it's right for that purpose and community. Just because the book was bought doesn't mean it's appropriate, especially for a public school library. If there are people within the community who want to support the challenged book, they should speak up. This is why all libraries need written and thorough policies.

It's nice not to have to worry about this in my current position, I work for a overseas medical school and there's never been a challenge to any of the dry medical texts.

[anamardoll]

@anabolina,

I worry that you seem to be treating "the community" as a unified whole and not realizing that the tyranny of the majority over the minority is a serious issue in these cases. That's sort of WHY the SC says you can't remove books from libraries because Crystal Dragon Jesus doesn't like the book.

[taustin]

I can't help but wonder if people realize that banning a book from the school library will actually increase the number of student who read it over making it mandatory.

[Ditchleyportrait]

Originally Posted by taustin

I can't help but wonder if people realize that banning a book from the school library will actually increase the number of student who read it over making it mandatory.

unlikely. hs kids don't read a lot. this will probably go over their heads.

[queentess]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

@anabolina,

I worry that you seem to be treating "the community" as a unified whole and not realizing that the tyranny of the majority over the minority is a serious issue in these cases. That's sort of WHY the SC says you can't remove books from libraries because Crystal Dragon Jesus doesn't like the book.

The library should be designed to serve the majority. But this is a school, not a public library. The school receives funds, probably from the local community, so the local community should have input in what those funds are used to purchase. I'm not sure how school board voting at that particular school works, but voting at my high school was open to the public, and the public was welcome to show up and present their viewpoints.

I think it's very telling that several of the board members didn't show up to vote at all. I really wonder if this will stand up or if they'll end up back-pedaling.

And I must have missed something. What's "the SC"?

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by queentess

And I must have missed something. What's "the SC"?

Supreme Court

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by queentess

The library should be designed to serve the majority. But this is a school, not a public library. The school receives funds, probably from the local community, so the local community should have input in what those funds are used to purchase. I'm not sure how school board voting at that particular school works, but voting at my high school was open to the public, and the public was welcome to show up and present their viewpoints.

I think it's very telling that several of the board members didn't show up to vote at all. I really wonder if this will stand up or if they'll end up back-pedaling.

And I must have missed something. What's "the SC"?

But as far as I can tell, this wasn't a purchasing decision with regards to S5. The book apparently already existed and was removed. That is very different.

I don't disagree that a library can spend its limited funds how they wish. But I do not think that this case has anything to do with that hypothetical situation.

EDIT TO ADD: Indeed, if the book was already bought and held in the library, then this decision is not only a concern from a separation of church/state issue and a rule-of-the-majority issue, but it's also FLAT OUT WASTEFUL.

My god, schools can barely make their budgets meet and we're spending time and money REMOVING purchased books from the library? Seriously? Gah.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by Ditchleyportrait

unlikely. hs kids don't read a lot. this will probably go over their heads.

But there are those who will read it for no other reason than because the school says they can't.

[vxf]

Originally Posted by anabolina

If someone in the community objects to a book, it is RIGHT for the library and it's board(or in this case the schoolboard) to review the book and determine if it's right for that purpose and community.

I really don't get this. Why should a group (community, church, school, sports team, whatever) be allowed to prevent its members from reading something?

Not promoting a book? Sure. But why should a community decide its members are not ALLOWED to read something?

I think this gets to the distinction between not purchasing a book (which, in my view, is akin to not promoting it) and banning it from a library (which is akin to not allowing students to read it - at least, not allowing them to read it unless they can afford to purchase it).


And it is a slippery slope, one we shouldn't even get close to approaching.

[Hellmark]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

But as far as I can tell, this wasn't a purchasing decision with regards to S5. The book apparently already existed and was removed. That is very different.

I don't disagree that a library can spend its limited funds how they wish. But I do not think that this case has anything to do with that hypothetical situation.

EDIT TO ADD: Indeed, if the book was already bought and held in the library, then this decision is not only a concern from a separation of church/state issue and a rule-of-the-majority issue, but it's also FLAT OUT WASTEFUL.

My god, schools can barely make their budgets meet and we're spending time and money REMOVING purchased books from the library? Seriously? Gah.

Yeah, huge difference to me between choosing not to buy something and buying it but then deciding to get rid of it.

Originally Posted by queentess

The library should be designed to serve the majority. But this is a school, not a public library. The school receives funds, probably from the local community, so the local community should have input in what those funds are used to purchase. I'm not sure how school board voting at that particular school works, but voting at my high school was open to the public, and the public was welcome to show up and present their viewpoints.

I think it's very telling that several of the board members didn't show up to vote at all. I really wonder if this will stand up or if they'll end up back-pedaling.

And I must have missed something. What's "the SC"?

The books were already bought. They had been in the library for a while. The vote was to remove them from the curriculum and from the library (although, I know that at least one of the books was not in the cirriculum). As far as the vote goes, at this particular school, based on the info I've read from various reports from both citizens and newspapers, the vote wasn't made well known before hand, and the only ones getting to vote were the 4 (of 7) board members present.

[vxf]

Originally Posted by taustin

I can't help but wonder if people realize that banning a book from the school library will actually increase the number of student who read it over making it mandatory.

I think they do and they don't care. This type of action is just posturing by a politician trying to appeal to religious voters and stirring trouble so he can say 'look, I care about your religious values'.

The fact that his actions actually end up promoting said book is irrelevant to the politician. The only question is - does it get them votes? The sad answer is yes, which should tell you a lot about the intelligence of religious-minded voters.

Then again, if you still believe in ghosts in the 21st Century...

Yes, yes, I am just kidding.

Kind of

[taustin]

Originally Posted by vxf

I think they do and they don't care. This type of action is just posturing by a politician trying to appeal to religious voters and stirring trouble so he can say 'look, I care about your religious values'.

Except they very deliberately said "this is not about religion, this is about age appropriateness," which - and having lived in rural Missouri, I know - is going to put off the religious types more than if they'd just declined to get involved. It isn't good enough to just ban a book they want banned, it has to be openly done for their reasons, or you're the tool of the devil.

[Fbone]

Originally Posted by Hellmark

Yeah, huge difference to me between choosing not to buy something and buying it but then deciding to get rid of it.



The books were already bought. They had been in the library for a while. The vote was to remove them from the curriculum and from the library (although, I know that at least one of the books was not in the curriculum).

The books are still available for those 18 years old which would include most Seniors. The age appropriateness only applies to those 14-17 years old.