People ban things mostly because they can't understand them or they are too close to the truth.
I think people have the rights do read what they want, if they don't like it, don't read it.
I agree with it.
I think that people should, like they do now, choose which books they want banned.
I hate banned books.
It's appalling.
I like the idea.
It's against the "First Ammendment."
I could careless... i hate books.
No comment.
I never thought of that????????.....
People ban things mostly because they can't understand them or they are too close to the truth.
It seems more like they (those who wish to ban X book(s)) are in many ways unable or unwilling to put the book(s) into a specific context. The most important being the time in which the book was originally written. When things were very different from the present time(s).
I would like to think that even a simple minded person can realize such a basic thing as context. Though after reading many of the banned book lists it seems that just isn't the case.
I can understand a willing parent who actively encourages their children to broaden their perspective as to life around them, but to have those same parents restrict a child's imagination (via literature) because they themselves are incapable of understanding that which excites the children is simply barbaric and unjust.
expectabam bona et venerunt mihi mala praestolabar lucem et eruperunt tenebrae - Job 30:26
Should the work of Holocaust deniers be "banned"? What about "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion"? There are certainly books I have chucked in the bin after reading them.
Chucking them in the trash is different than banning them.
Isn't it some sort of crime to deny the Holocaust though?
Well in some European countries it is. But there is a well known historian who has tried, for personal or political reasons - it is really hard to say which is more important to him - to revise the perception of The Holocaust. He has been vilified and threatened with legal repercussions. I only mention this to state that the banning of books is not simply a question of yes/ no. societies have laws . Different societies have different laws. Communities have standards. Different communities have different standards. Schools are a form of community within a larger community to which they must be connected. As an individual I would be angry with a school that used a depraved text in my twelve-year-old grandson's class. I noticed someone above referring to a book being removed from a school because it used the "n" word. Presumably the school had complaints. It seems reasonable for the school to take that on board. Why would a school alienate its customers , its parents?
ISchools aren't businesses. Schools exist to benefit students, not parents. Do you support the destruction of books?Originally Posted by Eiseabhal
"As an individual I would be angry with a school that used a depraved text in my twelve-year-old grandson's class."
I remember chuckling when my 11 or 12 year old daughter came home with a note saying that they were intending to study Chaucer's "Miller's Tale" in class, and asking if parents had any objection. I thought that very few parents of my age would have been allowed to know even, in their school years, that Chaucer had written such a tale of lust, adultery and the smiting of arses with red-hot irons.
(I also thought that if you wanted to engage a 12yo's interest in poetry, reading the "Miller's Tale" was probably the way to do it.)
Last edited by Whifflingpin; 12-09-2015 at 05:18 AM.
Voices mysterious far and near,
Sound of the wind and sound of the sea,
Are calling and whispering in my ear,
Whifflingpin! Why stayest thou here?
This made my day.
The burning of books? I'm not a bookalorator? If that's what you mean though f knows what you mean. If I was freezing I would definitely burn books to keep warm. Schools are part pf a community not something imposed on a community by a bunch of imperialist ****heads.
Bookalorator? Is that someone who sells books by word of mouth alone?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote