Top 100 Challenged Books 1990-2000

[pontalba]

OMG! How terrible! A woman's bathing suit might be undone at the top. Call the beach police! Oh brother. Or is that Big Brother.
If parents don't teach their children about sex, they are going to learn somewhere else. Somewhere that probably will lead them to wrong answers, and misconceptions that in turn will lead to unwanted pregnancy, horrible diseases. How stupid and shortsighted is that?

Our bodies are nothing to be ashamed of, neither is sex. If it wasn't for sex, none of us would be here...........although maybe that wouldn't be such a bad thing, but thats another forum thread.

I have never and will never understand why its not ok to show the human body, but its just fine to show/depict warfare, bombs going off and disintergrating the same human body. Grrrr.

OK, the rant is over.

For the moment.

 

[Dogmatix]

I was delivered by a stork

 

[Peder]

.....

 

[Gem]

It's called Where's Wally? over here (or at least it was when i was a young'un). Perhaps he's on the banned list because of his atrocious fashion sense
Anyone able to find him in under a minute HERE?

I have no idea why most of those books are on that list, education and discussion is easily differentiable (if this word doesn't exist, I claim it) from titilation.

 

[tartan_skirt]

It's called Where's Wally? over here (or at least it was when i was a young'un). Perhaps he's on the banned list because of his atrocious fashion sense
Anyone able to find him in under a minute HERE?

Thats mean. Did anyone else notice the naked clown on a pojo stick in that picture? Well, it's probably just a skin coloured costume, but that was disturbing for a second there... Anyway, it's "Where's Wally" in the UK and in France it's know as "Où est Charlie?". Where exactly did Charlie come from??

I'm confused as to why James and the Giant Peach is on the list. Am I missing the part where James gets drunk and kills his aunts?

 

[Gem]

tartan_skirt, I didn't find Wally, but I spotted the naked clown straight away.

I remember reading somewhere that James & the Giant Peach was on the list because it encouraged children not to listen to people in authority or something like that.

 

[tartan_skirt]

I remember reading somewhere that James & the Giant Peach was on the list because it encouraged children not to listen to people in authority or something like that.

A quick look on Amazon.co.uk tells me this:

An interesting fact about the book is that it has been censored in some parts of the US. It was challenged at the Deep Creek Elementary School in Charlotte Harbor, Fla. (1991) because it is "not appropriate reading material for young children", and at the Pederson Elementary School in Altoona, Wis. (1991) because the book contains the word "ass" and "promotes" the use of drugs and whiskey.

I definately missed something...

 

[Gem]

Drugs and Whiskey? Wasn't it magic crystals that made the peach grow? Perhaps we did read it wrong, the magic crystals were really drugs and the entire adventure was a drug induced hallucination?

 

[MonkeyCatcher]

Drugs and Whiskey? Wasn't it magic crystals that made the peach grow? Perhaps we did read it wrong, the magic crystals were really drugs and the entire adventure was a drug induced hallucination?

I think that one of the insects may have gotten drunk during the journey, and I don't know about you, but I think that every single little kid reading that will want to pick up a bottle of whiskey because of it - and I don't even need to point out the fact that when a kid gets hooked on whiskey, drugs comes naturally. The fact that drugs wasn't even mentioned in the book doesn't matter - it was implied by the presence of the spider; a black widow is a type of spider and the black mary jane is slang for dope, so therefore this book is obviously amied at getting kids to smoke dope.

Obviously

 

[Gem]

Obviously

Like totally.
(I still like my drug hallucination theory though )

 

[Peder]

I knew there was someone who could explain it!

 

[Gem]

Peder! The Invisible Man - you come and go so quietly.

Roald Dahl played a huge part in forming my slightly strange imagination, so perhaps his work being on the list is understandable .

What I don't understand is, how on earth are these books supposed to be damaging?

 

[pontalba]

What I don't understand is, how on earth are these books supposed to be damaging?

Seems to me that the people that banned the books are more damaged/dangerous than anything else. But wdik?

 

[Peder]

Peder! The Invisible Man - you come and go so quietly.

Yep, Gem,
I checked the little box some time ago and wondered how long it might be before someone noticed I was unnoticeable.
You're the first,
Peder

 

[FrodoLIVES]

Not to change the subject, but does anyone know why Julie of the Wolves was banned? I loved that book as a kid and still hold it in high regard. I don't recall anything in that book that would make it suitable for being banned....
::waves:: Nice to meet you all. I just discoverd this forum.

 

[abecedarian]

Not to change the subject, but does anyone know why Julie of the Wolves was banned? I loved that book as a kid and still hold it in high regard. I don't recall anything in that book that would make it suitable for being banned....
::waves:: Nice to meet you all. I just discoverd this forum.

I imagine it has to do with the fact that the main character is forced into an early marriage with the village imbecile..literaly. To be fair, the author did not elaborate on the physical aspects of that marriage, but I would not hand the book to a kid younger than mid teens without discussing this with them first. I don't think the book deserved banning; its a beautifully written novel. It can be used well with a little care.

 

[Peder]

Not to change the subject,

You're not changing the topic by any means, so please join in, and welcome.
My remarks were directed toward how much wider the range of written content may be than we think, and also how much wider the range of tolerance than we might think.
From what I have read, the trend is toward "mature" topics moving down into younger grade level books, and the topics being discussed are which mature topics, and to what grade levels. And we see the reaction to some of that in the list of challenged books.
Peder

 

[PhilW]

In keeping with the theme for September's Banned Books Voting here is a list from the American Library Association

(snip long list of books)

I would suggest that the American Library Association's list is unworthy of our attention. Since when were they moral arbiters? I find it bizarre that a country like the USA can still be home to reactionaries who claim that Darwin was wrong and that the world really was created in seven days by God - or by a god. Or that it can put 'To Kill a Mockingbird' on some list when it still, in some states, has a questionable attitude towards civil rights.

But then I'm English. The English have a long, bloody and often politically-incorrect history - not to mention a lot of gloriously politically-incorrect literature. It makes for wonderful reading! I just finished Treasure Island - did the revenue man care one jot when he rode down and trampled to death Blind Pew? Of course he didn't. And why the heck should he? Long may it be so too.

Was Treasure Island on that list? Perhaps the ALA will get around to it one day

 

[Stewart]

I would suggest that the American Library Association's list is unworthy of our attention. Since when were they moral arbiters?

PhilW, I think you may have misread. The American Library Association is not acting as a moral arbiter here of what books should and should not be deemed of interest. It's their list of the books that are most challenged by the American populace for their content. You know, those books that get written without the author ever taking a minute to think about the children.

 

[PhilW]

PhilW, I think you may have misread. The American Library Association is not acting as a moral arbiter here of what books should and should not be deemed of interest. It's their list of the books that are most challenged by the American populace for their content. You know, those books that get written without the author ever taking a minute to think about the children.

Ah...I see. My mistake. But if a book is challenged, and the ALA deems the challenge unworthy, why do they still publish the list? Can't they just tell the challenger(s) to, er...go forth?

Or maybe the list is a good thing - if it exposes narrow-minded reactionaries for what they are!