I ran across an article about challenges the Canadian libraries and school libraries faced for the year 2010. Despite lagging a year behind in their statistics, the outcome was quite pleasing to me, as someone who has written so much on banning books from school and public libraries in the US. Report of the Annual Survey of the Intellectual Freedom Committee, Canadian Library Association. The opening declaration that no challenges were made for a specific book –the first time it hasn’t been challenged since it was published, astounded me. The statement seemed so triumphant. I needed to decode.
“And Tango Makes Three, the children’s picture book published in 2005 by Peter Parnell and Justin Richardson. Even so, another LGBTQ-positive picture book was challenged for the first time in 2010, Uncle Bobby’s Wedding, a 2008 publication by Sarah S Brannen.”
I should be a hipster and understand the anagram, but LGBTQ is beyond my limited brain capacities. I’m guessing if someone wanted a kid’s picture book banned, the first L stands for lesbian-G for gay, B for, hmm brotherhood is too gender specific for this group, so I’m going with, Between? Gay Lesbian Between —T for Two? Gay Lesbian Between Two? Q?? Q for Queer?Although used as a derogatory slang word by some, it’s also used within the gay community. So I’m left with, Lesbian Gay Between Two Queers as the anagram.
Seriously, I’ve no idea what it stands for, I guess that and the following anagram will have to be ignored and I’ll just move on to the rest of the challenged books. (Whoops! finally googled it–should have known, lol, it stands for, Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender. Still have no idea which of the 4 types represented was the subject of the picture book.)
What I found surprising and satisfying, although 92 challenges were made, only a very small per percentage resulted in removal or restriction of ‘offending’ material.
The 87 challenges were to library resources and five involved library policies.
“A resource challenge is an attempt to remove or restrict materials based on objections of a person or group, in order to prevent or limit access. A policy challenge is an attempt to change access standards for library resources.”
“Two series were challenged, once each, the Dark Horse manga series of 14 titles based on four of the Star Wars movies, and the seven titles in the Harry Potter movie series. (A challenged series is counted as the total number of individual titles.)”
Really? I mean, really? Do we still have nitwits out there that believe if an impressionable kid reads or sees Harry Potter they’d suddenly decide they had to become a character in a repetitive
plot with just enough tweaks to make it seem as if an entirely new book? Because that’s all the Harry Potter series is, the same plots circling one another. Oh, yeah, there are WITCHES in the books and films, and we all know that witchcraft leads to the devil and evil and we can’t let our children near something that advocates being the pawns of the devil, now can we?
Let me warn the unsuspecting–never, never mention that Wiccans who are considered witches, don’t believe in the devil, and when asked why you know this, don’t reply ‘because I’m interested in the Wiccan religion’ to a fanatical religious person. It’s sort of like someone saying in the 50s, ‘I’m interested in learning about Communism’–which means to me–I’m interested in finding out more, learning how it works, what philosophies they hold, not that I want to join the Communist party. That’s not how fanatics see things–their world is black and white, and your’e viewpoint usually falls under black.
So, the usual suspect, Harry Potter is challenged. What other heinous work will undermine the world order? ”
“The Waiting Dog, a picture book by Carolyn and Andrea Beck published in 2003, violence; offensive language; age inappropriate; obscene content, language and pictures.”
I looked it up on that paragon of virtue, amazon, and holy moly cannoli, the reactions by the ridiculous abounds. First, let me explain the book. I find the concept hilarious, for many reasons. It is a picture book of a dog’s daydream about tearing apart the mailman, lol. In very nice graphic rhyme and a little, not much, but a little gruesome illustrations. From what I saw, it was just down right funny, and kids understand the humor–the gruesomeness is no more than what they would probably witness on Halloween, and yet, and yet. Sigh.
From the book: “I dream of you every day in my spot by the slot. I sit and wait and salivate”
“When I got a peek / at that/ spewing spitting hissing fissure/ your phlegm-hacking/ up-chacking (mmmmmmm)/ lip-smacking kisser”
“Gums, eardrums,/two droopy eyelids./Pusses and sores,/crusted or plain.” It also yearns to “suck a sinus, chomp a cheek.”
“gorgeous gallbladder,” “succulent spleen,” and “lovely liver,”
“Picking Away
A chip of your hip
a snip of your chin
a nip of your lip
a strip of your shin
and the eyeball!!
SQUIRT!”
After all the dreaming, he understands that all he can do is sit and salivate.
If anyone has had a dog who is obsessed with the mailman, this book will crack you up!! My dog, Louie, is a tubby, small, maltese/bichon mix from a rescue, and he’s adorable. Kisses,
belly rubbings, the works, he is a little angel. He hears the slightest sound indicating the mailman is about, he goes bonkers, I mean, crazed insanity bonkers. If we are outside when the mailman comes, I need to hold on to his leash with all my might–he lunges as far as his collar will let him, without choking to death. I KNOW for a fact that if he ever connected, teeth marks and blood would flow, and then Louie would return to the house for more belly rubs and kisses!
Glancing at the reviews, I found this one, and my heart sank for those who live around the town where this library is.
“As a director of a small-town library, this is one of the worst children’s books I’ve ever come across. It is very well illustrated, but the content is abhorrent, which makes it more unfortunate. Had this book been a little less graphic, it would have been a great children’s book. As is, it will encourage children predisposed to violence while sickening the others. Children who enjoy this type of book bear close scrutiny. Recommended only for bondage clubs in San Francisco and prison death rows.”
“Children who enjoy this type of book bear close scrutiny.” Dammit. Every time I think I’ve read the most absurd statement regarding the restrictions of books, someone comes up with a new one. I NEVER respond to reviews, but as with anything, never is a long time, and I responded to this one.
Me: I hope you don’t run a library near me. Your assessment of this book is beyond paranoid, it’s ridiculous. Sure, Yeah, right, books influence kids to violence, especially books from the point of view of a dog, daydreaming. Potential serial killers as kids will be urged on by the silly rhymes, not by the abuse at the hands of parents or others, all it takes is a little book to turn a perfectly normal kid into, bondage??? I’m hoping against hope that Banned Books Week paid your library a visit.
But she wasn’t the only one who was outraged.
“I came across this book in our school library and immediately alerted the librarian. She had no idea why it was in the shelf. I can’t believe this book was ever published. It is horrific and gruesome. It can be potentially very frightening for younger children. It also sends a horrible message about dogs! The dog in the story has a possessed demonic look on his face as he tears a mailman apart. The pictures show this in great detail. It looks like pictures from a crime scene. If this book is in your library, GET RID OF IT! If i could give zero stars I would have. ”
This one is almost worse, because not only does she force the librarian to remove the book, she’s advocating other libraries do the same, and by getting ‘rid of it’ I take to mean, destroy.
Me: You are not the arbiter of what sits on a library shelf, nor should your librarian remove it because YOU decide it is a horrible book. My child, my neighbor’s kids, the entire town should be able to decide for themselves whether your assessment is correct. For you to recommend the destruction of a book, any book, makes you incapable of understanding intellectual freedom. Kids are not stupid. They understand far more than most grownups what is really being said in a silly wacky account of a dog’s fantasy. Do you own a dog? If so, it’s probably so small it fits into a shoe. My dog would do more than the dog in the book, to the mailman, and he’s the most loving creature on earth. He’s a DOG for goodness sake, it’s a piece of fantasy fiction, not a how to book! I am so tired of all the ‘good doers’ supposedly looking out for the rest of us, without our permission or need. I can decide for myself what is appropriate, and I should have the right to the book on the shelves in the library, in order to do so. I feel sorry for you, and for those around you who will catch this self righteous fever you seem to have.
field filled with daisies with naught a care in the world. I want books banned that feature any illustration that doesn’t pass my gagging reflex test. I want overly perfect people, whipped off shelves, discarded. With apologies to my wonderful sister in law–I want Precious Moments books banned from the universe. So many want books banned because of their ‘dark’ content, why can’t those of us who are offended by the overly adorable, cute, sweet, yes, again, preciousness in kid’s literature submit a challenge? And if someone did, I wonder how they would handle it? If they didn’t immediately remove the title that offended me, I may need to go to the town council, or the press, I mean, I’m only looking out for the children! What will become of the children!!! They’ll all become diabetic, reading so much sweets. Their viewpoint of what to expect in life will be covered in clover. What will happen to them when they finally walk out the door and hit the dog, uh, poo? Oh, the humanity! Stop the overcuteness now! Before our children succumb to The Little Mary Sunshine disease! You don’t want to know the symptoms.“The vast majority of both resource and policy challenges, more than 80%, occurred in public libraries, and all but one of the other challenges took place in school libraries. By far the majority of concerns were initiated by patrons in general (65%) or by parents and guardians (24%). Two challenges each were initiated by grandparents, library administrators, and library staff members, and one challenge each by a school student, a school administrator, an educational assistant, a chief librarian, a chief and council, and an elected official.
In all but two of the 87 challenges to library resources, targeted items remained on library shelves. Three-quarters of retained materials were unchanged in status. However, 16% resulted in restricted access and 9% in relocation or reclassification. Most challenges were resolved quickly, within a month, but a few took six months or longer.”
Hat’s off to Canada. Even though 16% were reclassified or moved–that still left all the rest on the shelves, available for those who prefer to think for themselves.
footnote: Here’s a couple of my favorite titles that were challanged:
See Inside Pirate Ships, by Rob Lloyd Jones
The Muppets Wizard of Oz
Outside Over There, by Maurice Sendak
Finally, you really know there is something wrong with an individual who challenges this :
The Great Mouse Detective (Disney)
Disney is the king of watered down everything!
Disney’s ‘Great Mouse Detective’? Yeah – I’d ban that. I don’t have any Disney books in my store’s Kid’s Section.
When Princeton University published a study showing that the Baby Einstein videos were at best useless and possibly of negative value, Disney didn’t ask how to improve them, they tried to get Princeton to withdraw the study.
I guess what really bugs me about Disney is that they have been so successful at convincing people that Disney is good for children.
And the ‘Waiting Dog’? I thought that was a combination of pretty gross and poorly written – the parts you quoted. I would have been surprised that it got published except that I have noticed that many kids’ books seem to be written and published on the basis that you can sell almost anything to parents for kids.
I agree with you about Disney, and naturally, as you read, disagree about The Waiting Dog. But would you really try to have Disney books and The Waiting Dog taken from library shelves? Naturally, you are the arbiter of your how shop, and whatever you want to stock is your business–but denying other people the right to read a book from the library, is censorship, I wouldn’t think you’d be for that. Am I right, in this idea of where you are coming from?
Diane
The big problem with censorship, of course, is who makes the decisions – the kind of people who would remove Darwin and Mark Twain, or the right-minded people like me (lol) who would limit Disney?
I wsn’t proposing to censor The Waiting Dog, I just didn’t think it was very good. OTOH, I thought ‘Walter the Farting Dog’ (based on a true story) was hilarious.
I read a piece once that suggested that it was foolish to teach people to read but not to teach them to think and question and reason – thus exposing them to all kinds of garbage with no means to evaluate it.
It seems that most governments and large businesses that own them don’t really want a large population of people who are inclined to think, reason and question, and they have solved the problem by not teaching reading skills much beyond what’s needed to be a good consumer.
But that’s an entirely different rant…
Bob
“But that’s an entirely different rant…”
I didn’t think what you wrote was a rant–because I agreed with practically every word, lol.
Oh yes, we need to be able to read whatever we want, to be able to figure out what is drivel and what is sublime.
My question always has been ‘what are you afraid of’. What is it that the people who need to censor books are so terrified of–and I think you have the answer–the ability for others to think and reason, because so many of them can’t do those simple tasks. And if their children are involved, they certainly don’t want them exposed to all sorts of different philosophies.
Your last part about governments not wanting people to think–ha! Just what I wrote about in my most recent post!
I winced a bit at your deciphering of LGBTQ. It’s one thing to not understand it (though surprising for a well-read person), but making light of it made me uncomfortable.
Also, ‘Queer’ IS used within the gay community, but it’s one of those words that, while partially reclaimed, still carries a lot of potential to hurt –much like the N-word, which yes, you can hear blacks use within their community, but you certainly don’t want to hurl at someone or make a joke of.
‘Between two queers’ came off in a very mocking way. (Imagine if you’d deciphered NAACP with the N-word.) If you’re not very knowledgeable about the gay community, you might want to reconsider tossing around the Q-word.
I enjoy your blog often. This post just made me queasy and I thought you should know.
I’m sorry you feel that way Kelly. I have no disrespect for any group, especially the gay community. But I’m not comfortable with words being off limits for some, but perfectly alright for others. I’ve never hurled that word at anyone. And I don’t think the way I was playing around with the words was in a derogatory manner, and I apologize if you took it that way. My intent was mocking not the gay community, but those who felt the need to ban or censor a children’s book because of its theme.
Even so, there is a point sometimes, where the oversensitivity to words and stereotypes become so acute, that people become incapable of speaking or writing, without offending or upsetting some one.
As for not being knowledgable about the gay community–I’m not exactly sure what that means. No, I honestly didn’t know what the initials stood for, however I don’t equate that with knowledge about the gay community. And I don’t ‘toss’ around the word. I used it to make a point. One that obviously you missed because instead of understanding my mocking of the people who think this way, you decided that I must think that way, or I have no understanding of what the word means.
All of a sudden I feel like having to defend myself with the joke, “some of my best friends are gay.” which although cliched, happens to be true. LOL.