Thursday, February 23 2006 - 08:19 AM
THE EVIL OF BOOKS
Okay, as some of you who listen to the Russ & Bob show may know, I’m extremely upset at the Wilsona School District for the board of trustees’ decision to ban, yes BAN, 23 books from their library simply because of “subjective” content (which, if the trustees actually read the books, they’d realize how harmless it is).

The board is blatantly holding the children back. There is absolutely no doubt about this. It’s fact. By not reading everything they can, the students at Vista San Gabriel Elementary School library will not be learning all that they can.

The board of trustees decision to ban 23 books from a list of parent-approved books, 63 titles in length, is WRONG.

QUOTE: “I’m not happy because I approved some of the books.” – Danielle Sweeney, a parent.

Even the school librarian was upset by the trustees’ decision! Jackie Livingstone said that she thinks the students should have as much variety they can in reading choices. This is the first time in the entire five years Livingstone has been a libarian that the board rejected ANY books.

I agree with Livingstone. I believe that the students themselves should decide what they read, NOT SOME BOARD OF SHELTERED, PRETENTIOUS PRUDES.

I have something very, very important to say about this:

This is why older students hate reading. This is why students grades go down in high school. This is the whole reason that the general IQ and performance in students is DECLINING.

The students are TOLD to read something that they may not want to read. They are limited in their CHOICE to read, kept from what actually interests them. Therefore, after years of being told what to read and after years of adults not nurturing that curiosity and interest in reading…they become angry and hateful toward reading. THIS IS TRUE.

Many, many high school students do not like to read. Hell, a large number probably can’t read at all. I can tell you, without a doubt, that most older kids who read today, have been reading since a very young age…and were supported in their desire to read and absorb all that knowledge.

Let’s break this down a bit….

I have not seen a complete list of all 23 books that have been rejected, so forgive me if I’m missing something important, but what I say here will probably stand with those books as well.

There is one book I agree with. Yes, I do have some apprehension with young kids, mainly between the ages of five and seven, with the latest Harry Potter book. “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince” is violent, I agree. It’s a very dark book that involves evil characters whose sole ambition is gaining power over the wizarding community. I can understand the board’s choice in keeping that book out of the elementary school library. However, “Clifford the Big Red Dog” is entirely appropriate for second, third and even fourth graders.

Okay, so the board’s reasoning for the Clifford books they rejected is because it is bilingual. What, so we’re against teaching Spanish now? Oh, no I see…the board feels that Spanish isn’t part of their curriculum and they don’t want the children to become confused when they try to read the book. Because we all know that when children who speak English open a bilingual book, they’re gonna try their damnedest to read that Spanish that they don’t know.

Rapunzel was rejected. I’m not sure what version of the story it is, but isn’t Rapunzel the princess with the long who was rescued by a knight who had to climb her hair up the tower? Is the board scared that this’ll teach boys to climb some girl’s hair? Or that they’ll go out behind the school and try fight that dragon back there, thinking they’ll be a hero? We wouldn’t want our kids to out and try to fight dragons…that’s just not a good idea. I hear they breathe fire.

Artemis Fowl, two books in the series, were rejected. The series is centered around a boy-genius of the title name who is described in reviews as a criminal mastermind. I have read a bit of the first book, and I agree that Artemis is a fairly sadistic and cruel individual. And his goal in the first installment is to reclaim his family’s lost fortune…in other words, self-gratification and possibly greed. I can see where the board is coming from with this decision. Here’s a short excerpt from chapter one of Artemis Fowl :

“You are wearing handmade loafers, a silk shirt, and three gold signet rings. Your English has a tinge of Oxford about it, and your nails have the soft sheen of the recently manicured. You are not a waiter. You are our contact Nguyen Xuan, and you have adopted this pathetic disguise to discreetly check for weaponry.”

Nguyen’s shoulders sagged. “It is true. Amazing.”

“Hardly. A ragged apron does not a waiter make.”

Nguyen sat, pouring some mint tea into a tiny china cup.

“Let me fill you in on the weapons status,” continued Artemis. “I am unarmed. But Butler here, my . . . ah . . . butler, has a Sig Sauer in his shoulder holster, two shrike- throwing knives in his boots, a derringer two-shot up his sleeve, garrotte wire in his watch, and three stun grenades concealed in various pockets. Anything else, Butler?”

“The cosh, sir.”

“Oh, yes. A good old ball bearing cosh stuffed down his shirt.”

That is an example of Artemis’ character…at age 12. I agree, he’s a sadistic bastard and not a very nice character for elementary school children to identify with. Perhaps this book should wait for middle school.

Let me get something out of the way…. I agree and support the board’s right and privelage to deny books. It’s their job to make sure the students don’t read things like Stephen King or any other inappropriate book. What I disagree with is their choice in titles they have rejected and their bass-ackwards reasoning behind it.

If the board of trustees said they banned Harry Potter from the bookshelf because it’s violent and they disagree with how dark it is and how the hero is tormented throughout almost the entire book and that that might provoke feelings and thoughts that the district does not wish to expose their students to…if they said that…I would completely support their decision in rejecting it. HOWEVER…that is not the case.

One of the board members, Marlene Olivarez, actually said that they banned “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince” because it is FANTASY.

GOD FORBID OUR CHILDREN READ FANTASTIC STORIES. No, extraordinary worlds filled with magic and amazing species and mysteries beyond that of this world and, yes, even a hint of danger…those are horrible, evil, EVIL stories that have NO PLACE in the hands of a child.

Children thrive on creativity and imagination, unless you’re one of those horrible parents who do everything in your power to supress that and squeeze the very life out of that inner child. Yes, I said it. Got a problem? Children need that amazing world with the magic and the stories that expand their mind and excercise that imagination…it allows them to grow in body, mind and character.

Here’s what gets me…. The board says that the main reason behind their purge of books is that they are trying to stick to a “Character Counts” curriculum. But…here’s the clincher, how are the kids supposed to know which kind of character counts more when they aren’t exposed to which character they shouldn’t emulate? You can’t have good without bad, because without bad…good doesn’t exist for a lack of something to be good compared to.
(Yes, that was worded weird. Read it a couple of times and you’ll get it)
Guess what, board of trustees…ALL kinds of character count. Even bad, or (gasp!) evil characters! For without them, how are the kids supposed to know who the good character is?

You can’t shelter them based on what YOU are familiar with. One trustee, Patricia Greene, says “I don’t know if it’s upholding ‘Character Counts.’ I want to be sure it’s promoting what we are upholding. I approved books that I’m familiar with the content.”

THEN GET FAMILIAR!

You know what this means? THEY DIDN’T READ THE BOOKS THEY REJECTED!
They don’t even know if they’re appropriate or not because they didn’t read them! THEY DIDN’T READ THEM!

This BLOWS my mind!! I cannot believe that they have the AUDACITY to reject books based on CONJECTURE! Whatever happened to that old saying, “Don’t judge a book by its cover”? The parents read and approved ALL 68 of the books on the list submitted to the board.

QUOTE: “I don’t understand why they don’t think they are appropriate. I read them with my fifth-grade daughter and didn’t find anything inappropriate to read with her.” – Danielle Sweeney, parent.

Perhaps it’s a religious issue. Yes, I’m going to bring this up, because it needs to be known.

Many people aren’t comfortable with the whole witchcraft and wizardry thing, thinking it unholy or blasphemous or what-have-you. Perhaps some people believe that reading Harry Potter or other “witchy” books will lead children into a world of occultism and sacrificial rituals to an ungodly deity.

Perhaps some people are out of their freaking minds.

It’s fiction. Let’s get this straight…. Fiction. There is no such thing as wizards and casting spells and the devil and all that stuff. You can’t cast a spell on someone to get them to do what you want. Stirring potions in couldrons won’t bring you anything! It’s all superstitial fiction! The Harry Potter books have been written for the enjoyment of kids and adults alike, as most books are. I understand that, if the students still want to read these books, they can go to the local public library and check them out there.

Well, how about this:

We eliminate the middle man and drop some of our more ridiculous moral barriers. First of all, the board of trustees (whether it’s their right to reject books or not) should have read each and every one of those books on the list. That is a fact. It was WRONG to just plain ban the 23 books on the sole basis of what the title or what reviews suggest the book is about.

I’m wrapping this up here, so try to stick with me. I know it’s gone on for some time, but this needs to be said.

Limiting our children in what they read will prove detrimental to their growing and learning. Not all children are interested in reading the same thing as you think they are. You are somewhat responsible for what they get ahold of to read…but you are not responsible for what they are interested in, or wish to read. That is their choice, and their choice alone. Like I said before, if you force a selection upon children for long enough, they will become bitter and uninterested in reading altogether.

Is that what you want for your children? To never read with joy and excitement again? Well, if it happens, one group of people you can point to for blame (and there are more) is the board of trustees.

Would you like to comment on this blog post? Login to talk back!