Checking out banned books

» 10 Comments | Post a Comment

Come on. You know you want to. How do you know it’s bad if you don’t try it yourself? Who knows, you many even like it.

If you are thinking about drugs, shame on you. I want you to pick up a book, for heaven’s sake. The trouble is it might be one of “those books.”

Some have been merely challenged. Some have been banned outright.

The American Library Association promotes Banned Books Week each year at this time. The 2008 commemoration runs Sept. 27 through Oct. 4, so there’s just a couple of more days left to go find that ragged paperback copy of “Catcher in the Rye” you picked up at a yard sale but never got around to reading.

J.D. Salinger’s famous coming of age story is one of the most challenged books written in the 20th century. The novel was the most challenged, censored or banned book between 1966 and 1975. “Catcher” has been called obscene and filled with “excess of vulgar language, sexual scenes, and things concerning moral issues.” According to one observer, in the first eight chapters alone, the main character takes the Lord’s name in vain 96 times.

Some books that are challenged have a less obvious drawing card of controversy. Like Lorraine Hansberry’s landmark drama “A Raisin in the Sun.” The award-winning play was the first major stage drama written by an African-American, female author. In the play (and numerous film adaptations) a Chicago family struggles to achieve their part of the American dream, in spite of the prejudice of the times.

But the racial relations or minority authorship of the play has not gotten “Raisin” in trouble. Nearly 30 years ago, Utah’s Ogden City School District restricted access to “A Raisin in the Sun” after pressure from an anti-pornography group.

“A Wrinkle in Time” by Madeleine L’Engle has drawn attention since it first appeared in 1962. A Newbury Medal winner as the outstanding American book of 1963, L’Engle’s novel for young adults combines science fiction, fantasy and a dose of philosophy. The Murray siblings’ quest for their father takes them to fantastic places and begins with the (now clichéd) famous opening line, “It was a dark and stormy night.”

In one of the obituaries for L’Engle, who died September, 2007, Julia Eccleshare offered this assessment: “She was attacked for being too religious by the most secular of critics while also being one of the authors most banned from Christian schools and libraries that regarded her brand of religion as deeply suspect.”

Public schools have also taken issue with “Wrinkle.” In 1990, complainants in an Alabama school district objected to “the book’s listing the name of Jesus Christ together with the names of great artists, philosophers, scientists and religious leaders when referring to those who defend Earth against evil.”

And speaking of Jesus, even the Bible has been challenged. Have you heard of William Tyndale?

Tyndale (1494-1536) was a 16th-century Protestant reformer. He was a gifted linguist who felt called to translate the Bible into the early modern English of his day. He said, “I will cause the boy that drives the plow in England to know more of the Scriptures than the Pope himself!”

Tyndale published his translation of the New Testament in 1525. After attempts to continue and eluding the authorities, he was captured and imprisoned in Belgium. He was tried and found guilty of heresy and condemned to death.

His sentence: Tyndale was tied to a stake, strangled and then burned to death. William Tyndale was martyred for making a New Testament in the vernacular.

In 1611, 75 years later, the authorized King James Version of the Bible was published. Fifty-four scholars, with the blessing of England’s King James, took the existing translations of the day and revised them into one version.

Most of the New Testament in the KJV is based on Tyndale’s work.
Jeff Walker is an independent columnist who lives in Culpeper. He appears Wednesdays in the Star-Exponent. E-mail

Advertisement

 
View More: No tags are associated with this article
Not what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
 

Advertisement

Reader Reactions

Flag Comment Posted by wonderbread on October 03, 2008 at 4:34 pm

copper: OBama supporters wanting to ban books?????? Huh? Wouldn’t you think that most ‘liberals’ (that bad word you and others like to throw around) like Obama and his camp would be for more freedoms of books, choices, etc.? The comparison to dem. gun issues and freedom of expression and/or what to read or not to read or make available does not compute.

Flag Comment Posted by rjma on October 03, 2008 at 9:37 am

Lets try to keep to the subject, Copper.  This is about books, not guns or illegal immigrants. So may I take it that you are for tax dollars to be used to purchase Playboy magazine for the school library?  There is absolutely nothing that you’d consider off limits?

Flag Comment Posted by copper on October 03, 2008 at 8:56 am

I’m not surprised by rjma’s comments. Just like Hitler banned books he also took away citizen’s guns which then allowed him to take away their rights. So rjma, you want gun rights taken away in Town and you want books banned? No surprise, most Barack supporters want the same thing. Since you don’t want illegals removed from our Country and you don’t like guns and you want to ban books, why not move to a Country that is more in tune with your beliefs, you would be much happier. Communist China, Russia, or North Korea would make you very happy, they ban guns and books….

Flag Comment Posted by anmlluvr on October 01, 2008 at 11:15 am

I read A Wrinkle in Time as an elementary school student (either 5th or 6th grade), it was fascinating and totally held my attention, most any book I chose to read was available to me, sans Playboy. To ban these books from the schools and libraries is taking quality literature out of the children’s hands. I guess maybe we should also ban “Gone With the Wind” (which I also read in 7th grade) for it’s portrayal of slavery?? Ban pornography and books touting hatred, yes, ban classics, no.

Flag Comment Posted by rjma on October 01, 2008 at 10:12 am

bj- good now we’re getting closer. Sounds like you’re saying that libraries ban books but that they just don’t call it banning. That’s fine with me.  Actually I don’t have any particular problem with any of the libraries, either public or school.  Although if I read every single book I might think otherwise.  But by and large, I think they are screening (sounds so much nicer than banning doesn’t it?) about right.

Flag Comment Posted by bjroberts3rd on October 01, 2008 at 9:08 am

Of course not, RJMA. Libraries provide resources to readers within the limits of what the librarian and library board, as representatives of a public institution, deem useful to the constituency. More often than not a library’s collection remains restricted by budgets and opportunities to acquire new resources. Many find Playboy and KKK material offensive…obviously simper fi mom finds art showing Christian subjects covered with manure offensive. It’s all a judgment call on the librarian and library board’s part. Where do we draw the line for the good of the inquisitive public that uses the library? Hopefully somewhere in the middle, not at one extreme or the other.

Flag Comment Posted by rjma on October 01, 2008 at 8:57 am

bj and SF,  So you think there should be no restrictions whatsoever on any materials that the taxpayer buys for a school or public library?  We should buy Playboy magazine?  KKK books?  You dont’ want to draw the line anywhere?

Flag Comment Posted by semper fi mom on October 01, 2008 at 8:23 am

rjma - You really surprised me…you think banning books is perfectly acceptable? This was a serious statement?  That you ban books unacceptable for your children IS fine because they are your children and you are guiding them.  Letting any governmental body ban books is not right. (didn’t Hitler do that…)  Those books should be in libraries and the individuals free to make that choice.  Public Schools, however, are tougher because the parent does not control what is accessible - however, most libraries in public schools have books that parents can say “yes” or “no” for their child to check out. I know because my son had to get a permission slip signed to check out a book because it had some vocabulary that was marked as “potentially” unacceptable to young readers.  If we’re gonna ban books - then let’s ban much of so-called art that is really filth (i.e., the defication on Christ, and that sort).

Flag Comment Posted by bjroberts3rd on October 01, 2008 at 8:18 am

There’s quite a difference between parents preventing their own children from reading certain books and a public institution like the library preventing all readers from making an educated choice whether to read a book that might not be right for them. Libraries provide a wide variety of material, never complete, of course, but should strive to provide a vast reservoir of resources. Librarians can recommend books for readers, or steer them clear from ones they might not find appropriate, but the choice still remains the reader’s. To publicly, officially ban books smacks of Nazi fascism, and we don’t need any more of that than we already have.

Flag Comment Posted by rjma on October 01, 2008 at 6:26 am

I know banning books from school and public libraries has been characterized as a throwback to more Puritanical times but I think banning books is perfectly acceptable.  I have long “banned” books that were not appropriate for my kids why is it any different for a public official to do the same thing.  Granted this is a slippery slope and they sometimes go too far.  I think a librarian has the responsibility to provide the most appropriate reading material for the public.  It it becomes too controversial for the librarian perhaps a citizen’s advisory committee could do the heavy lifting.

Post a Comment(Requires free registration)

The commenting period has ended or commenting has been deactivated for this article.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Online Features
Blogs
DataCenter
Restaurant Guide
Movie Times
 
Video
Breaking News

Advertisement