[HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Banned Books Week - question

[Shaun Hately]

On 27 Sep 2004 at 16:23, spinelli372003 wrote:

> I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this.  I do not 
> agree with books being banned.  At all in any way shape or form.  I 
> do however think that a parent is ultimately responsible for a childs 
> reading material.  

I don't disagree with this at all. I believe extremely stongly that 
the parent is ultimately responsible for their child's reading 
material.

What I want is for parents to accept that responsibility, and not 
expect a library to do it for them. If it is the parents 
responsibility, then they should be the ones looking at what their 
kids is reading deciding if they want to do that or not. They 
should not be leaving such an important decision up to a librarian, 
and they certainly shouldn't be seeking to have rules imposed that 
will take the right to decide away from other parents when it comes 
to their child.

When a book is aged restricted, it becomes less accessible to 
*every* child, including those whose parents have no objection to 
their child reading the book. These parents are having their right 
to decide what their children read restricted.

That is not your call. You have the right to make decisions for 
your child. You do not have the right to have those decisions 
imposed on other people's children.

If you believe it is your responsibility to decide what your 
children read, then exercise that responsibility. Don't put those 
decisions in the hands of other people.

If I wanted to, in three years time, I could be a children's 
librarian (and I have actually considered it a couple of times, 
though I don't think I'll take that path). Would you like me to be 
the person at your local library who is making the decisions as to 
what is on the shelf and what isn't? Are you confident enough that 
what I think is appropriate for your child to read, is going to 
match what you think your child should be reading?

If this is something that really concerns you, you should be 
fighting for the right to decide for yourself what your children 
read - not supporting the right of other people to limit that 
decision.

You also have to realise that very, very, often librarians do not 
have enough information to make these decisions. Librarians have 
generall not read every single book on a libraries shelf, and often 
only have a very limited idea of their contents. They often don't 
know what to restrict and what not to restrict. I'll just give a 
couple of examples.

When I was 14 or so, I was really into science fiction and fantasy 
books (I still am, actually). One of the more popular series in our 
school library were Piers Anthony's Xanth novels, and these were 
pretty appropriate for kids (I stopped reading them after a while, 
so I don't know if that continued to be the case). Our librarian 
knew this was a popular author, and so ordered other Piers Anthony 
books, assuming they'd be popular as well. One of those series was 
'Bio of a Space Tyrant', which I read. And in one of the books in 
that series - I think either the first or the second one, but I'm 
not sure anymore, the 'hero' of the book rapes a woman, and the 
scene is fairly graphic.

The thing is our school librarian based her decision on what books 
to get on fairly sensible grounds. She went and bought other books 
by the same author who had proven popular and appropriate. And it 
didn't work.

Librarians cannot and do not read every book in their library. They 
cannot know the contents in many cases.

Another example - one of my favourite series of science fiction 
books today is 'The Seafort Saga' by David Feintuch. Brilliant sci 
fi (in my opinion, of course) and it's a series I *strongly* 
recommend to profoundly gifted children over the age of 10 or so - 
mainly because the fifth book in the series has a highly accurate 
portrayal of a PG child as one of its major characters.

The thing is this series is currently... seven books long (unless 
he's put out another one without me looking).

I would have no problems with putting the first three books in the 
series into the hands of an emotionally stable PG 10 year old 
(there's some material that means I wouldn't think it'd be wise for 
kids with certain emotional issues, or experiences to read them). 
But in the middle of the fourth book is a section about 10 pages 
long that I *really* wouldn't want most ten year olds to read, no 
matter how gifted. Then the rest of the fourth book, and the fifth, 
sixth, and seventh go back to being pretty much like the earlier 
books in the series.

The odds of a librarian being aware of a ten page sequence in 
probably something like 2500-3000 pages of the series is pretty 
remote. A librarian who read the first three books wouldn't have a 
clue of what comes later.

Then there's also the same authors first Fantasy novel - 'The 
Still'. I wouldn't put that book in the hands of any child under 
16, and I'd probably advise them not to read it if I saw them with 
it (actually, I'd advise anyone not to read it, just because I 
think, in addition to its content, I think it's just a really, 
really, really bad book).

The thing is, you can't leave these decisions up to librarians, 
because they often will not be aware of what is in a particular 
book, or a particular series, even if they make real efforts to be 
informed. Unlike movies which have ratings that can give you a 
quick burst of information about the likely suitability of a 
particular movie, books are extremely difficult to classify.

I have a children's picture book sitting on my book shelf that 
contains full frontal male nudity - something most people wouldn't 
expect to find in such a book.

My favourite story of book censorship involved a book either 
challenged or actually removed from a library (I can't remember the 
precise details because I read about it a long time ago - I think 
it's a case that often comes up in examples though). The book was 
called 'Making It With Mademoiselle', and it's probably really 
obvious why that book was attacked.

Personally, I don't see anything wrong with a book of sewing 
patterns from Mademoiselle magazine, but...

> Whether he signs the form at the library saying 
> yes he may have acess to the whole library or whether he says only 
> the childrens section.  It is the parents choice.  I think it is 
> important that the world not take a parents rights away.  and leaving 
> everything out there for the child to choose at such a young age is 
> for me not appropriate.  

It's not appropriate 'for you'. Well, I'm sorry, but that is *your* 
issue, not mine.

You do not have the right to decide what other people's children 
get to see.

If you do not like what is displayed in a particular public 
library, then make the choice not to take your children to that 
library. Don't expect the rights of every other parent and every 
other child to be restricted so the library matches your comfort 
zone.

There are people out there, remember, who don't think it's 
appropriate for their children to see books that show black and 
white kids playing together.

There are people out there, remember, who don't think it's 
appropriate for their children to see books that show women with 
occupations working outside the home.

> I don't care how advance a child is there 
> are some things that he/she does not need access to.  Being on a 
> restricted shelf does not mean a child can not have them.  it means a 
> child needs the parents permission to have them.  on a seperate 
> note.  something that also came up for me in your post about being a 
> bigot because i think a parent should be involved in a childs choices 
> I found to be insulting.  

Well, I'm afraid I can't help it if you read something into my 
posts that wasn't there. I made it 100% abundantly clear that I 
believe a parent SHOULD be involved in a child's choices. I 
absolutely, completely, one hundred percent, manifestly SUPPORT 
parents doing that, so I find it rather ridiculous to find that you 
think I am suggesting that a person who does that is a bigot.

> I am not a racist or a bigot because I 
> beleive that a child should have a parent involved in his her 
> learning process.  I do think all children should be able to learn at 
> the level of there ability. Not sure mayber your library system in 
> Austrailia is different in the US.  Just because we have a restricted 
> section does not mean a child can not use those books it merely means 
> a child must have a parents permission to use that area. 

Actually, in the thirteen public libraries I am fairly familiar 
with (having used them in recent years), I don't recall ever having 
seen a restricted section. I wouldn't be at all surprised to find 
there are some libraries around here that probably have them - but 
it certainly doesn't seem at all common.

The only age restrictions I have ever encountered in a public 
library have related to the borrowing of video cassettes (and 
probably now DVDs, but I haven't checked).

> Again,  I 
> need to point out my stand on banning books is that it is not 
> acceptable.  If you reread my very first post on this you will find 
> that.  It is merely that I as a parent and also as a caregiver to 
> young children feel it is my right and my responsibility to see that 
> children receive that which is age appropriate.  sherry

Sure. So exercise that responsibility for your children - and leave 
the decision as to how to exercise it for other parent's children 
up to their parents.

Don't abrogate your responsibilities to a library system. Don't let 
a library system limit your choices.


Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia