It's Banned Books Week, and the American Library Association is a good place to go to learn more about the history of book banning in this country. Here's a list of the 100 most challenged books during the 1990s (a "challenge" is an attempt to ban):

Ý
1. Scary Stories (Series) by Alvin Schwartz
2. Daddyís Roommate by Michael Willhoite
3. I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou
4. The Chocolate War by Robert Cormier
5. The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain
6. Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck
7. Harry Potter (Series) by J.K. Rowling
8. Forever by Judy Blume
9. Bridge to Terabithia by Katherine Paterson
10. Alice (Series) by Phyllis Reynolds Naylor
11. Heather Has Two Mommies by Leslea Newman
12. My Brother Sam is Dead by James Lincoln Collier and Christopher Collier
13. The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger
14. The Giver by Lois Lowry
15. Itís Perfectly Normal by Robie Harris
16. Goosebumps (Series) by R.L. Stine
17. A Day No Pigs Would Dieby Robert Newton Peck
18. The Color Purple by Alice Walker
19. Sex by Madonna
20. Earthís Children (Series) by Jean M. Auel
21. The Great Gilly Hopkins by Katherine Paterson
22. A Wrinkle in Time by Madeleine LíEngle
23. Go Ask Alice by Anonymous
24. Fallen Angels by Walter Dean Myers
25. In the Night Kitchen by Maurice Sendak
26. The Stupids (Series) by Harry Allard
27. The Witches by Roald Dahl
28. The New Joy of Gay Sex by Charles Silverstein
29. Anastasia Krupnik (Series) by Lois Lowry
30. The Goats by Brock Cole
31. Kaffir Boy by Mark Mathabane
32. Blubber by Judy Blume
33. Killing Mr. Griffin by Lois Duncan
34. Halloween ABC by Eve Merriam
35. We All Fall Down by Robert Cormier
36. Final Exit by Derek Humphry
37. The Handmaidís Tale by Margaret Atwood
38. Julie of the Wolves by Jean Craighead George
39. The Bluest Eye by Toni Morrison
40. Whatís Happening to my Body? Book for Girls: A Growing-Up Guide for Parents & Daughters by Lynda Madaras
41. To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee
42. Beloved by Toni Morrison
43. The Outsiders by S.E. Hinton
44. The Pigman by Paul Zindel
45. Bumps in the Night by Harry Allard
46. Deenie by Judy Blume
47. Flowers for Algernon by Daniel Keyes
48. Annie on my Mind by Nancy Garden
49. The Boy Who Lost His Face by Louis Sachar
50. Cross Your Fingers, Spit in Your Hat by Alvin Schwartz
51. A Light in the Attic by Shel Silverstein
52. Brave New World by Aldous Huxley
53. Sleeping Beauty Trilogy by A.N. Roquelaure (Anne Rice)
54. Asking About Sex and Growing Up by Joanna Cole
55. Cujo by Stephen King
56. James and the Giant Peach by Roald Dahl
57. The Anarchist Cookbook by William Powell
58. Boys and Sex by Wardell Pomeroy
59. Ordinary People by Judith Guest
60. American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis
61. Whatís Happening to my Body? Book for Boys: A Growing-Up Guide for Parents & Sons by Lynda Madaras
62. Are You There, God? Itís Me, Margaret by Judy Blume
63. Crazy Lady by Jane Conly
64. Athletic Shorts by Chris Crutcher
65. Fade by Robert Cormier
66. Guess What? by Mem Fox
67. The House of Spirits by Isabel Allende
68. The Face on the Milk Carton by Caroline Cooney
69. Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut
70. Lord of the Flies by William Golding
71. Native Son by Richard Wright
72. Women on Top: How Real Life Has Changed Womenís Fantasies by Nancy Friday
73. Curses, Hexes and Spells by Daniel Cohen
74. Jack by A.M. Homes
75. Bless Me, Ultima by Rudolfo A. Anaya
76. Where Did I Come From? by Peter Mayle
77. Carrie by Stephen King
78. Tiger Eyes by Judy Blume
79. On My Honor by Marion Dane Bauer
80. Arizona Kid by Ron Koertge
81. Family Secrets by Norma Klein
82. Mommy Laid An Egg by Babette Cole
83. The Dead Zone by Stephen King
84. The Adventures of Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain
85. Song of Solomon by Toni Morrison
86. Always Running by Luis Rodriguez
87. Private Parts by Howard Stern
88. Whereís Waldo? by Martin Hanford
89. Summer of My German Soldier by Bette Greene
90. Little Black Sambo by Helen Bannerman
91. Pillars of the Earth by Ken Follett
92. Running Loose by Chris Crutcher
93. Sex Education by Jenny Davis
94. The Drowning of Stephen Jones by Bette Greene
95. Girls and Sex by Wardell Pomeroy
96. How to Eat Fried Worms by Thomas Rockwell
97. View from the Cherry Tree by Willo Davis Roberts
98. The Headless Cupid by Zilpha Keatley Snyder
99. The Terrorist by Caroline Cooney
100. Jump Ship to Freedom by James Lincoln Collier and Christopher Collier

One wonderful thing about the internet: You can't burn the material on it. Book burning remains ugly--but increasingly it's a purely symbolic act, incapable of actually destroying information for good.

Little Black Sambo is still out there? Wow.

I don't know how the ALA came up with this list, but from my observation the word "ban" may mean removing a book from the library, or it may mean removing it from a required reading list. I don't find the second meaning particularly threatening.

The ALA classifies parents raising a question about the "age approrpiateness" of a book as a "challenge/censorship" issue. That is intellectually dishonest.

They also classify a decision to require students receive parental permission to check out a particular book as successful censorship.

Check out SwanBlog at swanblog.blogspot.com for my take on this whole issue. Oh well, happy Banned Books Week!

The ALA classes any 'challenged' book as a "banned" book. This is patently silly, and is a simple reflection of ALA political bias. For a real taste of censorship, see Jeff Jacoby's examples of librarian's refusing to carry books, hiding books, and refusing to talk to Conservative publishing houses.

See Jeff Jacoby's excellent Op-Ed on the whole ALA Banned Book thing here:

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/jeff/jacoby092801.asp

Kyle Stedman
kyle_st@lyscos.com

Jeff Jacoby's piece is simple-minded. There's a world of difference between a bookstore choosing what to sell and a parent or school district determining what a child can or cannot read. With conservatives ruling every branch of the American government and owning the majority of the U.S. television and radio news services, it seems a bit paranoid to construct conservatives as victims (which is how so many cultural cons like to see themselves).

If there is large demand for Spence's publications, then the bookstores which refuse to stock them are simply shooting themselves in the foot. But that's their *choice*, and they are free to make it.

But parents who want to keep books -- *any* book -- out of the hands of their children are wrongheaded. I'm sure the majority of the complaints about the Harry Potter books are filed by parents who see any talk of "magic" as sacrilegious. Having been sent to the school psychologist in 8th grade for reading *Lolita*, I resent any adult interference in the intellectual development of children.

Treating children like moral idiots is the hallmark of literacy education in the U.S. The first novel I was assigned in school was the terrifyingly dull *The Good Earth*. The first play was *Julius Caesar*. So, I suppose the assumption is that a child should be able to understand Shakespearean poetry with no background in theater, should enjoy reading about the intense political power struggles of Romans, while a book with naughty words or sex scenes will simply reduce that child to being a sexual deviant -- or even worse, a potty-mouth. Perhaps it's bull-pucky like this that keeps children from finding the books that truly interest them, and so from becoming lovers of reading. I know *The Good Earth* did everything it could to keep me from ever wanting to read another "serious" novel. Luckily, I was allowed free-reign in the library at an early age, and so could find books, like *Portnoy's Complaint* and *The Stranger* and *Cat's Cradle*, which weren't allowed to be taught in my school but which spoke to me in junior high.

Maybe the ALA is misifiring, but I'm glad they are focusing attention on these barriers to children creating the kinds of selves they themselves want to create.

But parents who want to keep books -- *any* book -- out of the hands of their children are wrongheaded.

As a twelve year old that is exactly how I felt about "The Joy of Fisting."

Gargh. I still wish I'd missed that one. Or http://tubgirl.com/

I think there are some things that don't belong in the hands of younger children.

Sorry.

To quote Chun the Unavoidable, "I wonder if Professor O'Connor ever thinks of Fantasia when reading her comments section."
(http://www.erinoconnor.org/archives/000955.html)

"But parents who want to keep books -- *any* book -- out of the hands of their children are wrongheaded."

And I guess parents who want to prevent their children from watching *any* movie or listening to *any* music.

Come to think of it, who needs parents anyway?

Laura writes, "And I guess parents who want to prevent their children from watching *any* movie or listening to *any* music [are wrong]."

Well, actually, yes. If a parent can't engage in a rational discussion with a child old enough to procure his own books, music, and films, then no, I don't think parents should simply forbid the child from reading/listening/viewing. Denial, know-nothing-ness, V-Chips, warning labels, internet "protection," etc. are no substitute for conversation. Again, children aren't moral idiots. They don't need Tipper and Al Gore -- or their parents -- to keep Prince LPs away from them. And if a parent can't construct a rational and convincing argument concerning the supposed damage that Prince LP is going to do to the child, then I say, let them have Prince. As anyone who's ever been a child knows, being forbidden to do something without being given good reason not to do something will generally result in a clandestine attempt to do something.

I think this is especially true given the types of complaints most parents have with books, films, and music: sex, violence, naughty language. As if there's no difference between *Die Hard 42* and *Blue Velvet*, between Judy Blume and Ron Jeremy, between Prince and Too Short. Though Ron Jeremy apparently has a Masters degree in special ed. No joke. But his films do offer a "special ed" far different from Judy's.

Then again, Europeans can see boobies in ads and on television, and we know what a crime-ridden, violent, and nasty culture France, England, and Germany have.

And to answer Laura's final, ironic question -- "who needs parents anyway?" -- I can only say that parenting is more than bossing children around. Leading by example, exhibiting virtuous lives, modeling discernment and taste, being in constant dialogue about a child's experiences: those sound better to me than "You can't listen to Eminem . . . because I said so."

I noticed that there were five books by Judy Blume on the list. She's still controversial?

Luther, did you see an age limit on the parental control thing? I didn't. The way you describe a parent dealing with those issues is the way I deal with them regarding my 17-year-old. It's not the way I dealt with them when she was 7.

Hard to know what to make of this in the wake of WV pamphleteering on Bible-banning liberals -- and then there's Wal-Mart.

Again: if a seven-year-old is able to procure her own books, music, and films, I don't see why rational conversation is not an option. My father let my brother and me listen to his Richard Pryor and George Carlin and Lenny Bruce records when we were quite young. And he didn't even need to explain to us, despite our youth and innocence and simplicity as tiny noble savages, that the point of Richard Pryor's stand-up acts was never vulgarity for its own sake. Then again, I think Carlin's bit on the words not allowed on radio and television should be required listening for young folk. I certainly learned more about language, racism, and politics from Richard Pryor then I did from K-12 education. Plus I learned the dangers of freebasing. And what a conversation between a junky and a wino would sound like.

Not all books deserve a permament place in the sun - as some of you pointed out. The Howard Stern book will probably never make my short list.

He's certainly free to publish it, and those who are entertained by such things are free to buy it.

But the purpose of education is (or should be) to lead us toward the Good (as Plato would put it), and there are a heck of a lot of things that take precedence over Howard Stern. And I suggest that it's the role of teachers (especially of English, writing and literature) to separate the wheat from the chaff.

(I've no idea why "James and the Giant Peach" was challenged. That's what got me to read Dahl's short stories - about a far a cry from "James" as it's possible to imagine.)

WT?? Where's Waldo? challenged? For what age group and why? Same question, The Wrinkle in Time? Information is hard to come by. I haven't been able to chase down a reference for either book being banned or restricted from a public library.

Is "not purchasing" a book for a school library the same as censorship? Certainly not, or every school library--even your local k-5-- would be the size of, of, well, bigger than the New York Public Library Main Branch. Bigger than the Library of Congress.

Should children--those under 18--be allowed unsupervised access to all library materials? I don't think so. As a parent, I really would rather my children not view sexually graphic materials (meaning, intercourse and sex play, not the sort of graphics one would see in "Our Bodies Ourselves"). I would rather that my pre-adolescent children not have access to any sexual material at all, thank you. I'd like a little more control over their information.

Liz, don't you know: A Wrinkle in Time is (subversively) Christian. Can't have that...

Ah, you just don't see that the giant peach is a metaphor for discrimination based on body size, and the two aunts are a evil white male pig attempt to promote discrimination against female homosexuals.

Personally, I think the fact that Harry Potter is the most challenged book this year is sad. I've grown up reading it. And I've enjoyed it. Damn christians and their control over our society. I hate the fact that our society truly believes that us children are mindless impreesionable slaves to whatever we hear, read, or see, so we have to be protected from anything with even a minute amount of questionable content. What are we, so weak-mined that we cannot make smart decisions on our own? Do you adults really think that way of us, regard us as robots that will record and do anything we are told? And have you ever heard of actually talking, no, speaking, no, really sitting down and having a family conversation with your kids. I hate people who blame everything that goes wrong on music, games, movies, television shows, and nothing on the parents that neglect their damned kids everyday. Where does the parents' blame go, huh?

Do you know where I can find or buy Hutton Gibson's (Mel Gibson's father) two books. They are titled 'Is the Pope Catholic' and 'The Enemy is Here'.

Book banning are the acts of mindelss, idiotic, stupid parents nation wide. This is a free country for crying out loud! If you do not want your children to read a certain book, fine, but by all means, do not impose your limits on other children. Many of the books on the list are not only good literature, but teach values and Christianity. Examples: The face on the milk Carton, all Mark Twain (they're classics, for crying out loud!), Animal farm, Are You There God, it's me, Margaret, To Kill a Mockingbird, Animal Farm, Chocolate War, Bridge to Terabethia, Harry Potter, Summer of My German Soldier, Goosebumps, The Giver, A Day No Pigs Would die, Blubber, Anastasia Krupnik series(they're so funny), Julie of the wolves(it too, is a classic), A Wrinkle in Time and many, many more. Keeping books from children is keepig knowledge form children. And don't we strive to make our children knowledgeable? Parents, if you are reading this, I don't really care if you keep certain books from your child. I'm perfectly okay with that. But please don't keep books from my child.

Oh, and please do not insult Christians. I am a Christian, and you should know my opinion on book banning by now.

ejmukk poiuyt http://ghjklegwzitsdevy/