Medford Parent wants book banned...eeeek.
I thought that the book bannings were over for the season, that Christmas was about to raise its red capped head and people would all be happy and joyous and, well, Christmassy. One big BAH HUMBUG was delivered to the writing world in Medford. Just read this article in the Burlington County Times. The Burn Journals, is a non-fiction book by Brent Runyon which relates his experiences as a suicidal 14-year-old who set himself on fire. No holds barred. A true tale told well which received a starred review from Booklist. But from John Biesz, a parent from Medford, the review was a bit more caustic: "There should be a warning on the book that says it's a piece of garbage." Now, parents are supposed to have opinions. Everyone should have an opinion! What's completely ridiculous about this story is that the school actually sent the book home with a permission slip--they did everything they could to prevent controversy and still this parent is upset and feels "This stuff should never make it into our schools." It would be terrible if people learned about the reality of being a mixed-up teen, wouldn't it? They might learn empathy or maybe understanding. Biesz wants the book removed from the school. I think there are only two words that can sum that up: Bah humbug!
Arthur Slade
Arthur Slade
posted by Unknown at 10:52 AM
23 Comments:
So the permission slip worked. This parent read the book and deemed it not suitable for his child.
But to take it upon himself to decide that no student should read this book, even if their parents say it is okay, is unfathomable.
Arthur,
I read the article you linked, not the book. Based on my reading of the article and my experiences in Public School District 126, IL, the book may be deemed "educationally unsuitable" if, and I do not know this, the school policy demands students not use the very language that appears repeatedly in the book. District 126 has such a policy.
Be clear I am addressing the language in the book that may violate school policy, if that is the case, not the ideas or behaviors as expressed by that language.
If the book violates the school's own policies as applied to the students, then the book may be deemed "educationally unsuitable." If so, then the book may be removed from the school in accordance with the law. If so, the book is not being "banned," it's just being legally removed from a place unsuitable for it in the first place.
And if all that is true, then the complaining parents are on the right track: why did it get into the school in the first place? That would be the concern here, not that it is being legally removed.
And that would be why the existence of the permission slip is irrelevant -- permission to what, to waive school policy and the law? Can I give you permission to murder?
By the way, the existence of book awards is a red herring. Book awards are given by third parties. Local parents control the schools, not third parties.
Further, Booklist is an ALA (American Library Association) entity. The ALA is giving top awards to books for 12 year olds containing explicit descriptions of oral sex. (Looking For Alaska)
If a school is using such an organization as authoritative on the matter of what books are appropriate for children, the children are sure to be sexualized. So again the parents are on the right track if they are not swayed by awards from organizations that have consistently used book awards to sexualize children.
Not allowing minor children to read certain books doesn't mean they've been banned in the US. This is ALA bs. The books can be freely purchased at any bookstore. Cuba bans books; why doesn't the ALA lash at Cuba?!
Safelibraries, I'm not sure where you get that from the article. A teacher's personal library, some of the book from which require a permission slip, and they can be banned because the books use language that students are not expected to use? I weep if such a law exists, because it coule potentially ban about 80% of all books, including classics, written since 1950. Such a law would seem to have no conception of what "literature" is--that not every word spoken by every character is endorsed or encouraged by the author: in fact, the exact opposite is the case.
THE BURN JOURNALS is case-in-point. Brent is not recommending that anyone set himself on fire and almost kill himself, as he himself did at age 14. On the contrary, the book exists to explore and diffuse the feelings that caused him to do what he did.
And for the record, please stop lying--and that's exactly what you're doing--by saying the ALA giving awards to books for 12 year-olds with profanity. They have a "YA" category that is any book written for 12-18 year olds; some of the books within that category are written for 12 year olds, and some are written for 18 year olds. No YA book spans that entire readership, since the difference between a 12 year-old and an 18 year-old is VAST. I know you know this, and you really undercut your own credibility when you use blatantly inaccurate terminilogy. In short, it casts suspicion on every other "fact" you use.
My son was assigned to read "Burn Journals" in school (or rather, it was on a list of available books to choose from, for the assignment).
It riveted him, he discussed it with me, and I read part of it.
It's strong, good work.
Oh, and my son is in 8th grade!
Thanks God the pinheads didn't succeed in getting that book yanked around here!
Brent, to be more specific, I get that from this language in the story: "Biesz said he was shocked to find that profanity is used in the book 166 times, including 77 uses of the 'f-word' and sexual references to male and female genitalia."
Some schools, I do not know about this one, have something akin to speech codes where profanity is not allowed. It is possible the book violates the school's own policies. It is possible the parents do not want their children reading books that contain language that violate the school's own language codes. Neither you nor I can presume to know the answer to that.
There are people who claim children should have access to all books no matter what the law, the courts, or the communities say. To them, therefore, removing a book from a school is more important than allowing a community to think for itself and act for itself in compliance with the law, the courts, community standards, and common sense. At the same time, those people attack those in the community who stand up for the community, or those like me who bring such matters to the attention of the community in the first place.
Brent, you must be exaggerating. 80% of all books since 1950 do not contain material that violates school codes, community standards, the law, the courts, and common sense. Your claim that they do only casts doubt on your other arguments.
Regarding the specific book in question, I explicitly said I was only addressing the language, not the ideas expressed in the book.
Now Brent, you and I have spoken on a number of things and you have never once not been a gentlemen. So I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here where you call me a "liar" regarding the ALA awards.
What you are doing is playing a semantic game when you say the book award is for a range of children. That is not how children see it. Children see it as a big poster in the library announcing the award for "young adults" and the book is on the shelf next to "Star Trek" books at small kid eye level. The book comes with high praise from the ALA, and no where on the book is there any indication that oral sex and the like awaits within. The book is so highly promoted by the ALA that the book even gets sold in supermarket checkout aisles at child eye levels right next to "Bob the Builder" books, courtesy of that lovely golden seal of award from the ALA. I have pictures of all of this on my web site to prove it.
So please, Brent, the argument that the ALA does not specifically target 12 year old is really a red herring. Go into a book store into the YA section and see the asterisk on the sign advising parents that some books are inappropriate for some children. The ALA does no such thing. That is the very problem that allows the 12 year olds full access to the material even if they are not specifically targeted.
So I'll say it again. The ALA gives awards to books for 12 year olds and up that contain inappropriate sexual material. No warnings are provided to alert adults as to the contents. Thousands of children nationwide, young children, are being exposed to inappropriate sexual material without parent's or even their own knowledge beforehand. Children are being sexualized nationwide, and it may be as a direct result of the American Library Association. Your calling me a liar or your claiming the ALA awards are meant for age ranges but not 12 year olds specifically does not nullify any of this.
No, Safe, I wasn't exagerating. I honestly can think of no classic book published since 1950 that doesn't contain at least one element that would violate school codes of speech and behavior (many pre-1950's classics, including almost everything written by Shakespeare, would also violate those codes). But I'm sure there are some books that are as you describe, which is why I said 80%. My point, however, is the fact that fiction, almost by definition, contains things that we would not want children, or anyone, actually doing. The reason for this is that literature discusses the human condition; many parts are unpleasant. But I reiterate: when an author has a character say or do something unpleasant, he or she is not endorsing those actions. Usually, as is the case of Brent Runyan and THE BURN JOURNALS, the author is doing the exact opposite.
I said you are lying about the ALA, and I stand by it. You said, "The ALA is giving top awards to books for 12 year olds containing explicit descriptions of oral sex" (you lated amended it to "12 and up," I see). LOOKING FOR ALASKA is not a book for 12 year-olds, nor has the ALA ever said that it is. It simply falls in the category of YA fiction, which every teacher and every other person I've ever met in the field of kids' lit, except you, knows includes some books for 12 year-olds, and some books for 18 year-olds. Not all the books for 18year-olds are appropriate for 12 year olds. Again, everyone teacher and librarian I've ever met understands this, and I think you do too, even though you're pretending not to.
Finally, you also say that there are people who claim that kids should have access to all book in defiance of the law. There may be such people, but none of them are in AS IF!, or the ALA. I'm using red herrings? Honestly, can we at least be honest about what this debate is about? The question is, should one parent, or one group of parents, be able to decide, over the objections of all other parents and that school's educational professionals, what books are appropriate in a curriculum or library collection. Now maybe that's a complicated question that we can debate. But this IS the question, not the red herring you assert that all books should be available to all kids at all times.
Brent,
It is NOT a question. It has already been asked and answered by, for example, the US Supreme Court in Board of Education v. Pico. Books that are pervasively vulgar may be removed from public schools forthwith. No claims of censorship or slippery slopes or who's to judge or objections of only a single parent are relevant. It's over and done with. Pervasively vulgar books are out.
"The Burn Journals," the article tells us, has at least 77 uses of the "f-word," let alone dozens or other similar words. To me, that is pervasively vulgar. But who cares what I think. It's up to the community. If the community decides it is pervasively vulgar, it should be removed from the school.
So who is the interloper here? Me, who says the community should become knowledgeable about and avail itself of the powers it has to direct its own future, or the ALA, who says the community needs to allow all content no matter how pervasively vulgar because it's censorship, it's book banning, it's a slippery slope, who's to decide, and the people who raise the alarm in the first place are right wing Christian conservatives.
The ALA is the interloper here, purposefully and knowingly misleading communities nationwide, giving awards to x-rated books for children as young as twelve, getting directly involved to squelch any attempt by locals to countermand ALA directives being carried out by local acolytes, and using ad hominem argument to attack those parents who speak up and say a book with hundreds of curse words is pervasively vulgar.
So I'm saying the community should decide for itself if hundreds of curse words are pervasively vulgar, and the ALA is saying it's book banning by conservative Christians to remove any books so the community should do as the ALA says.
Me? Free choice based on full and complete information. ALA? Don't ban books and ignore the very institutions that would allow you to do that where they are pervasively vulgar.
Me? I have a very limited audience. The ALA? Awards given to books for 12 year olds and up that contain oral sex and more are spread nationwide with nary a word about the true content.
I agree with almost everything else you said.
Safe, you've done it again, just as you did this past May in the Judy Blume blog entry here. Because you misapplied the PICO case there, too, I am just pasting my old reply in again here:
---------------------
Safe, the PICO argument is extremely disingenuous. Advocates of school censorship always tout PICO as a victory, while in reality, PICO is anything BUT a victory for censorship.
NONE of the books written by Judy Blume, and NONE of the books we've ever discussed at AS IF, have ever come close to being "pervasively vulgar". That's why Judy Blume is in the right 100%.
"Pervasively vulgar" sets a very high threshold: a book would have to have obscene sex acts on nearly every page, and NO redeeming literary value, in order to meet the "pervasively vulgar" test. And then, of course, AS IF wouldn't want that book used in schools.
That's your opinion, Jordan. Thanks for contributing. The people in the community will decide for themselves if hundreds of swear words in violation of school speech codes and multiple sexual references may be considered pervasively vulgar. I do, you don't, but it's up to the community to decide, not us.
Folks who happen to visit here, know that this is a really interesting blog because the people writing here, Arthur, Lisa, Brent, Jordan, are all children's book authors! Go out and buy their books!
I read this book a while back. I don't specifically remember the language issue but I do remember reference to adolescent sexuality. I personally thought we need more books like this that speak out about mental illness in young people. It might be too disturbing for some kids but that is not a reason for banning. That is a reason for parents to stay involved and talk about the themes in a book with their kids. I hope people like safelibraries never get to tell my kids what they can read, at home or at school.
Ah, that's the point, sarala. I'm not ordering people around, I'm just advising them of their options. On the other hand, the ALA is ordering people around, ordering them to read absolutely everything, even giving oral sex books awards for kids as young as twelve.
You have been successfully propagandized, sarala. Think carefully for yourself. I provide balance; the ALA provides misinformation and oral sex awards for children. The US Supreme Court says, "The interest in protecting young library users from material inappropriate for minors is legitimate, and even compelling, as all Members of the Court appear to agree," while the ALA says despite what the US Supreme Court says, ALA policy remains unchanged, and it is still age discrimination to keep anything from children.
Common sense says the US Supreme Court is correct and the ALA is really out of its league. But there are those so interested in sexualizing children that even the US Supreme Court will not stand in the way.
You don't know how happy I am to be on the side of those who follow the US Supreme Court in protecting children from inappropriate material. You are welcome to claim SafeLibraries is telling people what to read and what not to read, but that does not mean it's based on reality. It only means attacking the messenger is your only defense for allowing children access to inappropriate material despite the facts and the law.
It seems to me that the people in this community, many of them, DID decide that THE BURN JOURNALS was not "pervasively vulgar," which is why many parents signed the permission slip to allow their kids to read it. I find this whole argument somewhat ludicrous because, in this case, every single child who read the book did so with parently approval. So it goes back to: one group of parents wants to decide what another group of parents wants their kids to be reading.
Safe, you really undercut your argument and your credibility, if not destroy it completely, by saying you know THE BURN JOURNALS is pervasively vulgar, despite the fact that you haven't read it. I have read it, and seen the author speak. I honestly have a hard time imagining anyone coming to the conclusion that the book is pervasively vulgar. The swear words, of course, exist in an all-important context.
The reason why I'm coming across as less patient that before, Safe, is that I've spent the last two years fighting these battles, and I see the same disingenuous arguments again and again. And they pain me because, while I applaud any citizen getting involved in his or her local schools, the biggest problem I see in schools today isn't books with swear words; it's shell-shocked teachers and curriculums full of pablum that is designed to avoid offending no one and, therefore, says nothing. Too often, the fiction is bland and irrelevant to lives of actual teens, and teens respond in kind. Why do kids gravitate to HALO and other computer games? Why are reading scores and rates plunging? This, in fact, is why, IMHO.
Ah, SafeL, you've got far too much time on your hands. I think you've just proved Brent's point about out of context.
I just provided a link to Susan Juby's article about book banning on the latest blog post above, I think you'll get a kick out of it.
Click right here, eh?
Thanks for recommending our books to readers. Though I assume you don't mean to recommend the ones with swear words and sex in them.
I provided context. The context shows that a certain amount of that language might be appropriate, considering the circumstances. And I agreed with Brent on that in a general comment I made, in part on this point.
But at some point it just becomes too much. And the community is to decide that, not me, not you, and not the ALA. The ALA would force it on them by using propaganda to claim no book is ever inappropriate for children. And when I point out the ALA is doing this, I'm the bad guy.
I'll look at your other article soon. There sure are a lot of wacky things out there.
As to recommending your books, parents should check some of them out first, but I'm not the judge or censor people claim I am so as to defend the ALA's propaganda. I do know you authors are genuinely interested in writing interesting and relevant material, and that is yet another reason why it is so interesting to have this conversation with you.
KL Going's book, "Fat Kid Rules the World," for example. I would not give that book to my kid, but certain children are really reached by that book, and parents will know if the book is right for their children. But it should not be shotgunned out on all children without warning by public institutions. I think even KL Going believes that, and I have corresponded with her on this. It's on her own web blog. She, like the rest of you, is a really fine author reaching out to many children. None of this would even be happening if you folks weren't writing good books. Keep it up.
My head hurts.
THE BURN JOURNALS is the story of an extremely disturbed, suicidal 14-year old boy. Trying to kill himself, he sets himself on fire, and spends the book trying to figure out why he did it. In that context, does it make sense that this character (a real person, since this is a memoir) would say and do disburbing things?
Obviously this is not a book for everyone. But it's a book for some, which is what literature is all about. Holden Caufield says extremely disturbing things, as does Malcoln X in the THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF MALCOLM X, as do the main characters in Ellison's INVISIBLE MAN and Baldwin's GIOVANNI'S ROOM and Angelu's IN KNOW WHY THE CAGED BIRD SINGS. Heck, even the main character in A SEPARATE PEACE wants to maim his best friend!
But, of course, these extremely disturbing things all make perfect sense in the context of these characters and these fantastic, life-changing (for me) pieces of literature. (THE BURN JOURNALS didn't change my life, but I know it did for a lot of kids; I've talked to them.)
Anyway, again, in this case, the community DID decide, some of them, to let their kids read this book. They signed permission slips! Safe, you're saying that the rights of these parents and the educational professional who kept this book in his personal library should be restricted.
I don't get it, I really don't. This doesn't even seem like a grey area to me.
Brent,
I'm not saying rights should be restricted. Further, there is no right for public schools to distribute pervasively vulgar material.
I see your point that the parents who signed the permission slips did approve of the book. And that's part of what I agreed with you on earlier.
The issue goes deeper though, but I did not address that issue then.
In general, as with the ALA awarded books, parents are not fully informed as to the contents of books and what can be done about them. Perhaps a parent just assumes any book a school provides must be okay and signs the slip. Perhaps a parent is a little shocked at the content but doesn't want to embarrass the kid by making waves. Perhaps a parent has bought into the ALA's myth that book "banning" is wrong. Perhaps a parent believes the twin myth that it is "censorship" to keep any book whatsoever from any child. Perhaps the parent is totally unaware of Board of Education v. Pico.
So the issue which respect to your point is, is the consent given by the parents informed consent? A patient can give a doctor consent but if it is not informed consent, then the doctor is in trouble. Similarly, a parent can give consent but if it is not informed consent, then that's not right.
I do not know one way or another, but I suspect the cloud of misinformation from the ALA is so thick that the consent given is not informed consent. I suspect the consent form said, "Do you allow Johnny to read this book." Naturally, most parents will say yes. Informed consent would have required more than that. "Do you allow Johnny to read this book given 1) some might consider it to be pervasively vulgar because it uses hundreds of f and s words [whatever], 2) etc., 3) etc., etc."
If parents signed informed consent forms, that's fine by me and likely the community. But if parents are signing forms that do not fully inform the parents of the contents of the book, then the community may deem that to be a serious problem.
I would like to see or to know the wording of an actual consent form. That should clear up the "grey area."
It's the role of the school librarian to guide children to books that are appropriate for them, and to help them learn to make sensible choices for themselves. Permission slips for parents are pointless, unless the parents have actually read the book themselves. Otherwise, how can they make an informed judgement? They can't. The permission slips are merely an abdication of responsibility by the school because the librarian is failing to monitor and advise pupils.
Parents need to make wise choices for their children, so that they don't wind up ~ MIXED UP~ to begin with. But I do believe there are way to many parents out there that can't even get their own priorities straight.I see alot of them here giving their own ignorant, immoral answers.It is obvious the majority of parents here don't mind if their kids read this junk because they have no respect for themselves, their kids or others. How cunning, the authors of these books sure know how to target easy prey, and make billions from the demise of morality.
An anonymous poster wants to make a comment on everyone else's morals. How ironic. I'll go back to reading my banned book now, and continue to ruin my own morals. Thanks though!
It seems to be only adults who have commented, so....
As a 10th grade student I can safely say that every bad word quoted from this book as well as dozens of others have all been used in my hearing at school at least once. Words like shit are tossed around like the word the. We do have rules against vulgar language, but they don't work, and anybody who thinks they will is naive. You can't stop people from saying what they want.
I fail to see why poeple get so worked up about books. The same people who want to ban books in my community also go home and watch soap operas where the main character can't even figure out if the father of her kid is her husband or step-son. What??? It seems to me that people need to tackle these issues and leave books alone.
What's most impressive to me is that you are interested in these issues, you read about them, then you comment. Bravo, LadyBrooke.
看房子,買房子,建商自售,自售,台北新成屋,台北豪宅,新成屋,豪宅,美髮儀器,美髮,儀器,髮型,EMBA,MBA,學位,EMBA,專業認證,認證課程,博士學位,DBA,PHD,在職進修,碩士學位,推廣教育,DBA,進修課程,碩士學位,網路廣告,關鍵字廣告,關鍵字,課程介紹,學分班,文憑,牛樟芝,段木,牛樟菇,日式料理, 台北居酒屋,日本料理,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,台北結婚,場地,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,造型系列,學位,SEO,婚宴,捷運,學區,美髮,儀器,髮型,看房子,買房子,建商自售,自售,房子,捷運,學區,台北新成屋,台北豪宅,新成屋,豪宅,學位,碩士學位,進修,在職進修, 課程,教育,學位,證照,mba,文憑,學分班,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,婚宴,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,婚宴,台北住宿,國內訂房,台北HOTEL,台北婚宴,飯店優惠,住宿,訂房,HOTEL,飯店,婚宴,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北結婚,場地,結婚,場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北結婚,婚宴場地,結婚,婚宴場地,推車飲茶,港式點心,尾牙春酒,台北結婚,場地,居酒屋,燒烤,美髮,儀器,髮型,美髮,儀器,髮型,美髮,儀器,髮型,美髮,儀器,髮型,小套房,小套房,進修,在職進修,留學,證照,MBA,EMBA,留學,MBA,EMBA,留學,進修,在職進修,牛樟芝,段木,牛樟菇,關鍵字排名,網路行銷,PMP,在職專班,研究所在職專班,碩士在職專班,PMP,證照,在職專班,研究所在職專班,碩士在職專班,SEO,廣告,關鍵字,關鍵字排名,網路行銷,網頁設計,網站設計,網站排名,搜尋引擎,網路廣告,SEO,廣告,關鍵字,關鍵字排名,網路行銷,網頁設計,網站設計,網站排名,搜尋引擎,網路廣告,SEO,廣告,關鍵字,關鍵字排名,網路行銷,網頁設計,網站設計,網站排名,搜尋引擎,網路廣告,SEO,廣告,關鍵字,關鍵字排名,網路行銷,網頁設計,網站設計,網站排名,搜尋引擎,網路廣告,EMBA,MBA,PMP
,在職進修,專案管理,出國留學,EMBA,MBA,PMP
,在職進修,專案管理,出國留學,EMBA,MBA,PMP,在職進修,專案管理,出國留學,婚宴,婚宴,婚宴,婚宴,漢高資訊,漢高資訊,比利時,比利時聯合商學院,宜蘭民宿,台東民宿,澎湖民宿,墾丁民宿,花蓮民宿,SEO,找工作
住宿,民宿,飯宿,住宿,民宿,美容,美髮,整形,造型,美容,室內設計,室內設計,室內設計,室內設計,室內設計,漢高資訊,在職進修,漢高資訊,在職進修,漢高資訊,在職進修,漢高資訊,在職進修,漢高資訊,在職進修,住宿,民宿,飯店,旅遊,美容,美髮,整形,造型,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,進修,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,羅志祥,周杰倫,五月天,蔡依林,林志玲,羅志祥,周杰倫,五月天,蔡依林,林志玲,羅志祥,羅志祥,周杰倫,五月天,蔡依林,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,住宿,民宿,飯宿,旅遊,美髮,整形,造型,美容,美髮,整形,造型,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,設計,室內設計,裝潢,房地產,比利時聯合商學院,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,比利時聯合商學院,在職進修,MBA,EMBA,漢高資訊
Post a Comment
<< Home