fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3035 ]

[ SECRET POST #3035 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3035 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

__________________________________________________

14.

__________________________________________________

15.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 081 secrets from Secret Submission Post #434.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

So this is a somewhat uncomfortable topic for me to talk about (because boy does it make me look bad) but I was wondering if I could get some opinions here.

I am of the opinion that children's access to literature should be somewhat censored by schools. I know that probably seems rather horrible to a lot of you but let me explain why I feel this way.

When I was 12, I picked up a copy of Gone with the Wind from my school library. And I loved it. I loved how ruthless Scarlett was and I loved how it gave the perspective of the Civil War from the South (as I grew up in the Northern US, this was the perspective that I learned in history class).

And...well...after reading that book, I came out of it with some rather misguided ideas. I remember thinking how awful the North was to the South and how it was understandable that they formed the KKK given that the situation was so chaotic.

It wasn't until later that I learned how wrong I'd been. I'm of the opinion that that book should have been accompanied by a companion guide to explain the historical context. If not, I really don't think it should have been in the library.

Now, you might say that it's a parent's job to address this but neither of my parents were born in the US. They knew even less about US history than I did.

I don't know...it seems like it's anathema to be pro-censorship (and maybe I was just a particularly stupid kid) but it worries me that I actually believed the KKK was justified and no one corrected me on that.

That doesn't sound pro-censorship to me at all. It sounds more to me like you want people to be better informed of context, not remove access at all. More context cannot be a bad thing.

Yes, but I do think that if schools can't provide context then they really should remove the book -- and in that case, it can't be anything but censorship.

To be fair, school libraries have a responsibility to maintain a collection of books appropriate to their readership. In other words, it's probably not a good idea to have a book with a lot of sexual themes in a library for middle schoolers, for example.

Nobody can stop you from going to a public library and checking out something intended for older readers, and nobody should, but I do believe that schools, as ostensibly centers of learning, should reserve books like Gone With The Wind and similar works for older students who would be better informed about the context of those books.

I remember reading Elie Weisel's Night long before I had any real sense of the Holocaust. I was like, 12 maybe? Nightmares for a month.

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

siofrabunnies - 2015-04-26 21:44 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

blitzwing - 2015-04-27 02:37 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

siofrabunnies - 2015-04-27 03:16 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

blitzwing - 2015-04-27 03:44 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

(Anonymous) - 2015-04-26 21:51 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

diet_poison - 2015-04-27 01:25 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

lb_lee - 2015-04-27 02:28 (UTC) - Expand

That's not censorship.

This is my objection to Banned Book Week (at least in the US). Removing a book from a school library doesn't mean it's banned. It may be stupid, but it's not the same as banning a fucking book.

If a school district does not allow a book to be on the school library shelves, that book is banned in that district. That is still banned, it doesn't matter if it's on a local level or country wide.

In my province, the book "To Kill A Mockingbird" is no longer allowed on school library shelves nor is it allowed to be taught in the classroom; it used to be part of the grade 10 curriculum. I know. I had to read that boring fucker. Would you consider that book banned, or just removed?

Can you go to a store and purchase it? Yes? Will you get punished for owning it? No?

Then it's not fucking banned, is it?

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

(Anonymous) - 2015-04-26 22:58 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

(Anonymous) - 2015-04-26 23:22 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

blitzwing - 2015-04-26 23:33 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

(Anonymous) - 2015-04-26 23:41 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

blitzwing - 2015-04-26 23:56 (UTC) - Expand

well, you know, banned in a school district =/= banned everywhere, and I think the latter is what people are meaning when they say "banned"

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

(Anonymous) - 2015-04-27 01:56 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

diet_poison - 2015-04-27 03:55 (UTC) - Expand

Like you said, I don't think the solution is to censor things but rather to supply more information and background along with the books children have access to. Those are two different things

Right but it's just that I think that this could be such a burden on schools that it would simply lead to a lot of schools removing books altogether (if, for example, they had to find a nonfiction book to pair with every novel I do think they would simply remove the novel). And in that sense, I do think it can be seen as censorship.

But even then, I'd rather they just removed the book altogether. Do you see what I mean?

I think there's places where it wouldn't even be possible to point out the historical fact that the Civil War was launched by the South in an attempt to maintain the institution of slavery despite the fact that the North wasn't attempting to abolish it, or whatever other historical element you're talking about. There's a lot of Lost Cause revisionism out there.

So it's a nice ideal, but there are some practical difficulties in trying to educate your way out of it. And the same in a lot of other areas.

The problem is... any book, piece of media, or anything a child absorbs can be taken the wrong way if there is no context given to the child. I wouldn't say just your parents are at fault but also your teachers and any other adults in your life.

The reason I am hesitant about censorship is because it often isn't about protecting kids from having problematic opinions, it's about GIVING them problematic opinions. A lot of schools are run by racist, sexist, homophobic and prejudiced people. And they are more likely to throw out the educational book written by a black man then the piece of shit written by a white racists.

Also to me the response to ignorance is not less education, it's MORE. The problem for you was not that you read that book, it was that you needed more information to understand what you were reading.

This is why I have so much difficulty with the topic because I recognize that my proposed solution is so easy to abuse. Not just in terms of history.

But say creationists require that an "intelligent design textbook" be paired with the biology textbook -- which is something I really don't want.

But at the same time, SO MUCH classic literature is very much a product of its time and I feel like it's the type of stuff that tends to go unchallenged.

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

(Anonymous) - 2015-04-26 21:46 (UTC) - Expand

I agree. Any teacher worth their salt would use the book as a teachable moment.

This. The problem is, well, who decides what the correct opinion is? There are quite a few people who'd agree that the North was horrible to the South and that the KKK was justified. Those people could just as easily end up providing the guidelines for what messages you should take from Gone With the Wind.

This is at the heart of the issue for why censorship like this doesn't work. I'd much, much rather let kids read what they like, encourage them to ask questions about things they don't understand and let them develop their own opinions, good or bad.

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

(Anonymous) - 2015-04-26 23:33 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

(Anonymous) - 2015-04-26 23:54 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

(Anonymous) - 2015-04-27 03:21 (UTC) - Expand

Yeah, as everyone is saying, it's not censorship you need, just context. And frankly, I think a kid reading Gone with the Wind without a "companion guide" is still better than not reading it at all. Kids learn, people learn, it's part of life. you don't have to think the "right" way the first time.

But if you're really asking do I think some books should not be in school libraries, sure. Explicit stuff, flat out pornography, etc. I don't really consider that "censorship" so much as simply not putting certain books in a school library. And schools spending money on certain books, and not certain other books.

"you don't have to think the "right" way the first time."

Part of it is just how horrified I am now of how much I LOVED that book. I adored it wholeheartedly. And I was so proud of reading it and expanding my horizons (haha what a joke). It was literally my favorite book for over a year.

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

(Anonymous) - 2015-04-26 21:58 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

siofrabunnies - 2015-04-26 21:59 (UTC) - Expand

nayrt

(Anonymous) - 2015-04-27 01:31 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

(Anonymous) - 2015-04-27 03:26 (UTC) - Expand

Well, it's regrettable when people take away the wrong ideas from a book, but that happens at every age, not just to children. I just don't think it's practical to try and control people like that, because you cannot make sure that everyone only interprets a book in the "right" way. At some point, you have to trust and hope for the best, but realize that there will always be people who get bad ideas or wrongheaded concepts from the source material.

To me, it makes more sense to be pro-talking-about-books rather than pro-censorship, even if that censorship is well meant.

I'm a library tech at the elementary level with almost two decades of experience. I would never put a copy of GWTW in my schools. It is not age appropriate. (Kindergarten to grade 5 is the range at my school; kids start as young as 4 years old up to 9/10 yoa). I probably wouldn't have it in a middle school library either.

There's a difference between having age and reading level appropriate materials and censoring it. And tbh, with a budget of less than 8$/student? I'm fairly choosey about what I'll buy--I've seen this called censorship. *shrug* But when you consider that I have to spend a good portion of my budget on books and materials that support the curriculum--which is the main focus of the school library, not providing all books for all people...it makes it easier to make those decisions and exclude things.

Also, I'm pretty sure most schools in Can/US have provincial/state guidelines wrt to what can or cannot be in the school library and what we're expected to provide.

For instance, I have grade 5 kids coming in and asking for the Hunger Games. I have not and will never buy them for my elementary schools, not even as a behind the counter thing. The language and topics in the books are not age appropriate (Never mind scholastic book clubs putting them in the flyers for the grade 5s, but Scholastic is a different rant.) One of my grade 5 teachers read the story to his class last year--with a lot of editing, I'm hoping. I've read all three books. Not. Appropriate. Sure I might have a handful of 10 year olds who'd have the skills to actual read and comprehend it, but I'm not sure they're mature enough to deal with it. But you know what? I have other books which will challenge them and that deal with appropriate topics for 10 year olds.

If parents want to buy those books and let their kids read them or let them borrow them from the public library? I have no problem with that. I can't justify them in my library. I understand them wanting to read it--after all I was sneak-reading VC Andrews at 11 and was plain out reading Stephen King by 13.

I could give you several examples, but there's a lot that has to be taken into consideration in school libraries. And I agree with you that context is important, but at a certain point, if the book is that problematic, it shouldn't be on the shelves. That's why I don't have the Little House on the Prairies series on my shelves; in it, Wilder talks about Native Americans very negatively (and fails to mention that her father and several others were squatting on what was supposed to be Native Am. lands...). I don't want a First Nations kid reading that and internalizing that it's okay for someone to treat them that way...anymore than I want white kids reading it and thinking it's okay to treat FN peoples that way. I carry other books which are similar in theme to the LH books, which ARE fiction--we don't shelve those in the 973s. Sure it was LIW's experience but as the OP said, the context isn't there for a child reading it on their own (and my kids? are NOT going to read supplemental materials explaining that context). I'm not advocating banning the books, but I'll spend my budget money on better, more inclusive resources.

It really is a balancing act and I don't think it's wrong to be concerned with how kids will interpret something in a book.

DA. To be fair OP said they were a bit older then the kids you are dealing with and middle school is when a lot of critical thinking starts to develop and you can start introducing kids to more mature themes without them taking away just the surface level of what they're reading.

I mean sure, you still need to be careful about making sure they understand the context of what they are reading. But I recall middle school as being the time when I really started to question and think for myself, and I was able to handle most adult books.

I actually think kids in general are more intelligent and can handle more then we give them credit for, but PARENTS are a huge issue in that they want a lot censored and arguing with them about something being educational is not worth the battle half the time.

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

(Anonymous) - 2015-04-26 22:41 (UTC) - Expand

I certainly get what you mean, and frankly, I'd just think there would not be enough elementary school age kids who COULD read (and enjoy) Gone with the Wind, let WOULD read it.

But I don't know, man. Some books just get kids into reading. Hunger Games is ultra violent, I agree. But it's also a YA book, and fifth and sixth graders are totally equipped to handle that. I don't think reading a violent book is the same as even watching a violent show or playing a violent game, it's its own experience. More than that, I think as a librarian you should want to hook kids on reading, and they want to read stuff that's enjoyable, or that they can be passionate about, or even become fans of.

I mean, in third grade I was reading Animorphs. Looking back, that was way violent and as an adult I could say "no, not appropriate". But it was exciting to me, it hooked me on reading, it made me passionate about books.

Obviously there is a line, but I'd think young adult books, especially pop culture YA books, are certainly not bad to have in an elementary library. Especially since YA books will almost indefinitely conclude with some kind of moral lesson about being good, and characters wanting to be good. I mean it isn't Fight Club or something. reading the Hunger Games with any kind of understanding of the plot isn't teaching anyone that violence is good. Since it's treated as a bad thing, I guess I think there's even less of a dilemma.

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

slashgirl - 2015-04-27 00:11 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

meredith44 - 2015-04-27 05:44 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Being Pro-Censorship

(Anonymous) - 2015-04-27 09:15 (UTC) - Expand

well, in a sense that just means that the POV of the South was "censored" enough in your history class that you got critical of it. They should have tried to teach you why people acted the way they did, not sympathetically, but emphatically.

It probably strengthened your critical thinking to be wrong about it, too.

Try being a very small child who is told how terrible and evil the South is... and then realizing you are from the South! I was devastated and not of an age to properly disassociate myself from the past, and no one was there to help me process either. You can try your best to make sure children consume only the "right" information, but something can always go awry. The best way to deal with it is to cultivate a learning environment where questions and discussions are always welcome on any subject. Censorship is always bad, for reasons other people have already stated. The first things to go are usually the most necessary, like books explaining biology and pubescence.

And also, the North fucking brutalized the South. The actions of the KKK were and are not justified. Those can both be true at the same time.

Part of it is just how horrified I am now of how much I LOVED that book.

Oh my god. Go self-flagellate somewhere else. Tumblr seems to be popular for wailing about how your fave is problematic and how you're terrible for liking it. I'd like to sympathize with you but really, you're being ridiculous.

And I was so proud of reading it and expanding my horizons (haha what a joke).

What a joke? Why, "What a joke"? I'm pretty sure the book did expand your horizons, since it made you think about something in a new way.

I'm of the opinion that that book should have been accompanied by a companion guide to explain the historical context. If not, I really don't think it should have been in the library.

How generous of you to want to deprive other students of a book because you failed to place the book in context. I read that book at the same age and wasn't swayed over to some pro-Confederacy pro-KKK views. Jesus.

I can support a companion guide, or even a teacher's assistance in understanding the book, but to say it shouldn't be in a library at all? Ridiculous. What's next, we should take the Harry Potter books out of school because some kids (myself included) really believed they were going to get a letter from Hogwarts? (I wept. Guess a librarian should have protected me from disappointment, at the expense of all the kids who realized they loved reading because of Harry Potter.)

Maybe I'm just particularly stupid -- I'll fully admit that -- but it really does bother me that after reading that book, I thought Southerners were justified in forming the KKK.

I know other kids are probably smarter than me and likely would have recognized the bias but I didn't. And I wish that I had had help in putting that book into context and recognizing that the author was giving one person's fictional and very biased portrayal of that period in time.