Redneck Mother, and Pandagon (twice), and Feministe all write in honor of Banned Books week. Most book banning in America takes place in public school libraries. It never fails to amaze me that people want to control what their children read rather than encouraging them to read everything they can get their hands on. I wrote in gratitude for my own unsheltered childhood here.
UPDATED: Joel Monka critiques the concept of Banned Books Week. Joel comes out in defense of the right of parents to decide what books are carried in their local public school library. I agree with much of what he says. It is beyond question that parents should have the right to control and monitor their children's reading. Of course, that is not to say that parents SHOULD prevent their children from reading certain books or prevent school libraries from carrying certain books. Parents should have every right to forbid their children from reading "The Diary of Anne Frank" or Harry Potter - but I have the right to pity those children for what they are missing and to urge parents to let their children's minds have free reign.
To me, the beauty of Banned Books Week is that it clearly illustrates the power of the written word and informs us what topics and ideas scare or threaten American parents. "To Kill a Mockingbird" is considered inapproriate, and "Huck Finn," too! Who knew?
Joel's post is also worth reading (and commenting on) because it touches on what I think is a crucial issue that I haven't quite figured out yet. On the one hand, I sympathize with parents who feel at odds with the values their public schools are teaching. Some parents believe that homosexuality is a sin, so isn't a public school overstepping the line if it teaches that homosexuality is not a sin? What if it were the other way around and the public school were teaching kids that being gay is bad -- I certainly wouldn't like that. So where do we draw the line as to what values are appropriately taught in public school and what teaching interferes with the parents' freedom to pass on their own values?
On the other hand, aren't their certain values, civic values, that Americans all should share, and that should be taught in public education? Is it worrisome that a significant minority of the population is now home schooled and therefore possibly learning a very different version of civics than the conventional? (such as beliefs that Biblical law should enjoy equal precedence with the Constitution in governing the country or that judges should disregard precedent -- I don't know how many people actually believe this bu I know for a fact that such people are out there.) Is it ever appropriate for the government to say, "There are certain principles regarding what it means to be American that all schoolkids should learn even if their parents disagree."
Also, at what point (if ever) should children be considered to have their own separate rights to educational opportunities? I suppose most states require that children be taught the basics (reading, 'riting, and 'rithmetic), but should there be any recognized right for children to be taught contraceptive and safe-sex practices essential to their health? Or to be exposed to the theory of evolution and the scientific method? Or to have access to certain literary classics?
As a private matter and as a potential parent, I think children should have the opportunity to explore far and wide. Your mind should be considered your own, even when you are eight.
I try and steer kids away from depressing things... especially anything focused on body image with my daughter. There are clearly trash books and I'd hate to think the school library would be buying them.
Posted by: Bill Baar | September 27, 2006 at 07:56 AM
I'm also glad my parents let me read everything. When they thought it was crap, they flat out told me that and why.
And I think it was good that way. Because since they told me they think a book is dumb and why always made me (if i wanted or not, i had the criticizm always in the back of my mind) actually think and read it critically (which is an important thing to learn anyways) and then could decide on my own. Sometimes I disagreed with my parents but mostly I agreed (sometimes it took my years to agree but hey...).
Talking about teaching your kids an independent and critical world view...
Posted by: Dodo | September 27, 2006 at 08:26 AM
Yeah, talking to kids is key too!
Posted by: The Happy Feminist | September 27, 2006 at 08:54 AM
I have to admit that although I would never support banning any book, when my son was little I struggled with the urge to track down Dav Pilkey and strangle him. (And I'm a Quaker and committed to non-violence!) My son and his best friend thought the Captain Underpants books were hilarious and fancied themselves George and Harold. Some of their imitative "adventures" almost got my 7-year-old kicked out of school. Yes, I explained why, even though the ideas were funny, they were mean and damaging in real life--and eventually the lessons kicked in, but not before some really bad stuff happened. Talking to other parents I've learned that our experience wasn't unique. The books are really clever and engaging, and if I didn't have kids I would probably have found them delightfully subversive. As it is when I see the books on those banned lists, I tsk-tsk about censorship, but there's a part of me that really, really gets it.
Posted by: Dr.Sue | September 27, 2006 at 09:05 AM
It never fails to amaze me that people want to control what their children read rather than encouraging them to read everything they can get their hands on.
Perhaps because some of us have kids who are voracious and intelligent readers, and therefore don't feel that we need to encourage or permit our kids to do the reading equivalent of rolling in dogshit because, by golly, if you're reading something it's got to be good.
HF, I hope you are not one of those people who gets her undies in a wad if she sees a little child being taken to a violent R-rated movie by parents who couldn't get a babysitter. I mean, you're against censorship. Right?
Posted by: mythago | September 27, 2006 at 11:20 AM
Right on, Mythago! My moment of glory as a toddler was yelling, "Oooh tummy!" in a crowed theater during the raunchy sex scene in an "R" movie. I don't think there's anything wrong with taking kids to see whatever.
You know, as an example, I suppose if my (hypothetical) kid were holed up memorizing "Mein Kampf" and listening to Prussian Blue, I would definitely be alarmed. My solution would probably be to sit down and have a major talk with him or her. I have never thought restricting movies and reading is the way to go.
Posted by: The Happy Feminist | September 27, 2006 at 11:34 AM
Meh, I don't know about the movie thing. I've been to too many R films (horror, etc) where I overhear kids sitting around me begging their parents to leave the theater b/c they get scared out of their minds. Makes me want to turn around and smack the hell out of those parents. Children's minds are like sponges, they absorb everything, but do not yet possess the capacity to understand what they see/hear/read. But it is always the *parent's* responsibility, rather than the government, to make sure their child is introduced to new things in a timely manner.
-CT
Posted by: | September 27, 2006 at 12:25 PM
I am on the fence about this one. I do not like the idea of banning books. But, we all agree that books have an influence on children.
I want my child's library stocked with good books. I do not want my child's library stocked with books that all show the girls becoming servants to the men or promoting the idea that all girls should be thin with big breasts. I do not want my child's library to be stocked with books about killing, rape and torture. That is certainly censorship.
It is a fine line to walk though.
Posted by: will | September 27, 2006 at 12:26 PM
Books are kind of obsolete...what I really don't want is my kid getting to myspace at the school library or home...
Posted by: Bill Baar | September 27, 2006 at 01:11 PM
Will-- Are you suggesting that a child who reads a lot of books that contain killing, rape and torture will be damaged by such reading? Isn't it the other way around, that is, a child who is damaged may want to read a lot about killing, rape and torture? Your suggestion, logically extended, supports banning some books ... and some television shows, and some movies, and some musical groups, etc etc.
Posted by: Richard | September 27, 2006 at 01:13 PM