Are You There, Blog? It's Me, Elizabeth

What did you read when you were eleven? I was most definitely NOT into eleven-year-old-girls doing eleven-year-old-girl things (unless they were training to be witches).

This summer, my best friend asked me if I wanted to go the see the movie Are You There, God? It's Me, Margaret (based on the classic young adult book of the same name). I had never read the book, but because we are both big into banned books, I said sure. It struck me as the sort of book she would have read as a kid, and it made me feel good that she wanted to share it with me.

We sat in the dimmed theatre as the previews ended and the title screen and date - 1970 - came up.

I leaned over and whispered, "I've never read the book." There was a pause and she whispered back, "neither have I." Turns out we both assumed, because of our banned books crusades, that the other had read the book at some point.

Are you there, God? It's me, Margaret.

It is one of the long-running repeat offenders on the banned books list. It is 53 years old. FIFTY-THREE. This is one of those books like To Kill a Mockingbird and Julie of the Wolves that every time I see it on a list of challenged titles, I roll my eyes and say, "seriously? This one again?"


Ooh, check out this piece of history (original 1970 cover).

 

One of the more recent covers. I like that it lends itself to the idea of waiting for answers.

Watching the film (and, later, reading the book as my annual personal banned book challenge) it seemed pretty innocuous.

An 11-year-old girl moves from New York City to suburban New Jersey and begins her journey to fit in with other girls her age. She is self-concious that she is still flat chested. She and her new clique discuss bras, when they'll get their periods, what boys they like... y'know, eleven-year-old girl stuff.

The girls sneak a medical reference book and a playboy magazine from various parents to examine the anatomy, wondering what they'll look like when they're older; wondering what their male classmates look like under their clothes.

In addition to being flat-chested, Margaret has also yet to get her period, which causes her much angst when members of her friend group start getting theirs. She and the other girl in her group who have yet to start "men-stroo-ating" buy pads at a drug store, mortified by being rung up by a teenage boy and, in a panic, add a couple other items to their purchase because heaven forbid they should be seen ONLY buying feminine products.

Margaret has a lot of questions. Their joke of a sex ed class consists of a presentation by a representative of a feminine products company. Rumors fly about the busty girl in class and what she may or may not be doing with older boys... Margaret's questions increase when the source of these rumors turns out to have been lying about other things.

Margaret also has questions about religion. Her mother was raised Christian; her father, Jewish. Margarets maternal grandparents disowned her mother when she married outside the faith, but her Jewish paternal grandmother is a constant in her life, and usually a source of support.

The book opens with a "prayer." Despite being non-religious, Margaret often "talks" to god, treating him as a "Dear Abby" sort of figure. At first, her quandry about religion is as simple as whether she should join the YMCA or the Jewish Community Center.

Margaret's teacher, himself new and unsure, assigns the class to each choose a topic for a year-round study. Margaret, having decided that almost-twelve is old enough to choose her own religion, decides that she will spend the year studying different religions to pick one that suits her.

(Though what Margaret considers "different religions" boils down to Jewish and three Christian denominations.)

Sounds pretty innocent, right?

Well, let's keep in mind this book was released in 1970. This was a time when discussing many of these subjects in mixed company would have been taboo, or at least recently-so. Heaven forbid we discuss bras, "busts," periods, and the like. Heaven forbid girls should talk about boys they like, what it might be like to kiss them.

Margaret's parents raising her essentially agnostic and allowing her to choose her own religion as she got older would have been seen as extremely groundbreaking.

This was also a time when there was very little discussion, both in school and the home, about what a young woman could expect when her period started. The presenter at the girls' special assembly gets flustered at the mere mention of tampons. One of the girls in Margaret's circle of friends becomes hysterical when she starts her period in a restaraunt bathroom.

Margaret narrates examining herself in the mirror, looking for signs of puberty. She stuffs three cottonballs into each side of her trainer bra and is pleased with the results. (And if there's anyone reading this who didn't do something similar as a teen or pre-teen I'd be much more shocked than I was reading either scene.) Margaret worries that she's taking too long to develop.

"I just want to be normal. Please, God," she begs.

That, for me, is really the crux of why we should let our kids read these books. "Hey, this girl is worried about x - she's just like me." "This boy is struggling with Y - he's just like me."

In 1970's, kids who couldn't get these answers turned to Playboy and medical textbooks. Now they can turn to YouTube, Tik-tok, and a rabbit's warren of porn and disinformation on the internet.

When my daughter is ten, eleven, twelve, I hope she'll turn to me when she has questions. But if she doesn't I'd rather she turn to Margaret, a book about a girl her age, than pretty much anything else.

Not-so-itty-bitty Controversy

What ever happened to telling our kids, "you can be whatever you want to be?" That's apparently a problem in Texas (but, I mean, what isn't these days?).

Recently, there was a big to-do in the Katy Independent School District. Because of concerns over one book, the entire list of new books for the library for the ‘23-’24 school year was delayed from hitting shelves. A parent complained that the book was "sexually explicit." What was the book? Was it To Kill a Mockingbird with its racially-charged rape trial? Was it I know Why the Caged Bird Sings, detailing a child's sexual assault? Was it a new sex ed book? No. It was... "Itty-Bitty Kitty-Corn," a book for the youngest elementary students. I wish I was joking.

https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2023/08/district-halts-all-new-library-books-because-of-a-sexually-suggestive-kids-book-about-a-kitten/

And, if you're wondering, no, this children's book is NOT sexually explicit. Of course it isn't. Someone apparently decided that what they veiwed as an allegory for being trans (and probably isn't intended that way anyway) was reason enough to try and remove the book from the school.

"Itty-Bitty Kitty-Corn" is an adorable little book about a pink kitten who wishes she were a unicorn. Two friends tease her, saying she'll never be a unicorn. Then a REAL unicorn shows up, and he is MAGESTIC. But as the kitten slinks away embarrassed, the unicorn reveals a secret to her. Underneath his flowing mane, he wears a pair of fluffy pink cat ears. Yes. Our unicorn wishes he were...a kitty-corn. "I knew another kitty-corn would understand," the unicorn tells the kitten.

It's a tale of friendship, and of being what you want to be. Since when has that become a problem?

Pulled From the Shelf: "All Are Welcome"

As so often happens, I see a book that has been part of a controversy and I check it out and read it. Upon doing so, I see that either the person raising the fuss hasn't read the book at all, or is egregiously blowing something innocent out of proportion.

Take for example, the Highly Offensive *sarcasm mode* picture book "All Are Welcome" by Alexandra Penfold.

Quelle scandale…

First, we will examine the complaints, because that is the order in which I came at it.

I was first made aware of this book by a former coworker who is a librarian. She posted a short video in which a teacher reads this book. Clearly posted at the begining of the video is a screen shot of someone's complaint about the book - "Why do you all want pornographic books in the hands of children? That's bizarre."

Other complaints I found came from the Westmorland County, PA school board who cited problems with the book, including not clarifying whether the (admittedly diverse) kids in the classroom pictured in the book were here legally or illegally, and the "minority" of heterosexual parents presented in the book.

Now, let's get into the book itself:

It's cute. It's cheerful. It presents a classroom in a seemingly cosmopolitan area - some children arrive by walking, another by taxi, and there are many different skin tones and types of dress. The story rhymes and the pictures are fun and colorful. It is a quick, brief tale of learning together, eating together, playing, drawing, and singing together. It depicts three children in religious head coverings, and one in a wheel chair... but also the majority of the class is able bodied, and wearing standard western clothes. In the class of 24 students, there are four blonds and a redhead. There is a set of twins. There are three children with glasses. Your child will find themself in this colorful, welcoming group, and that is lovely. At the end of the book, there is a fold out page that depicts the class's festival, attended by all parents, showing the children's science projects, lion dancers, a buffet table, and people dancing and playing basketball. It's a beautiful depiction of what a neighborhood school can be.

Now, onto the complaints:

Oh. My. God. Becky.

1. How anyone thinks this book is "pornographic" is beyond me. I'm HOPING that this person saw it on a list of books being considered for removal and just assumed that was the case. The closest thing I can find to that kind of objectionable material is at the end of the day, after having gone home, one little girl takes a bath and puts her pajamas on. In the tub she is up to her chest in water. While dressing, she already has her shirt on, pulling her pants over her barely-seen underwear.

2. Distinguishing "between legal immigration and foreign invaders."

Excuse me? It is a picture book for 2-6 year olds. It ONLY has 240 words (yes, I counted). There is a page where it shows the children pointing to a map with the words "or if you come from far away." But come on. We don't know if the kids are pointing out where they have physically come from, or where their ancestors are from. And are we really gonna write a rhyming couplet about who has a green card and who doesn't?

Somehow, I don’t think the blonde Australian is the one they have the problem with…

3. The "minority" of heterosexual parents.

Here is one of the last pictures in the book - families arriving for the festival. There are five heterosexual couples. Yes, there is a two-woman couple and a two-man couple. There is also a child arriving with what appears to be a grandmother. But just a quick glance at all the pictures in the book (no, I'm not counting again) my eye catches a majority of "standard" mom-and-dad families.

Honestly, the biggest problem I had was believing this many full families were able to take time off work to come to this school event…

My consensus:

For goodness sake people, books like this are NOT a problem. Don't you have better things to occupy your time?

Review of Grace Lin's Before the Sword

Just a quick snippet of a review here:

This book had everything I love: coming of age adventure; backstories from mythology and folklore; a misinterpreted prophesy; the hero's backstory; a villain origin story; and, of course, a kick-ass heroine.

Technically a middle-grade book, it's a good, solid story for any age, honestly. The youngest middle grade readers might be intimidated by the size, or slightly frightened by monsters and action, but middle grade, young adult, and YA readers will all find something to love here.

The book serves as a prequel to the 2020 live-action Mulan, and, therefore, has slightly different names and family dynamic than the 1998 animated film.

For more about the book and the author, you can visit Grace Lin’s website.


Enjoyed this post? Want to see more content like this? Make sure to follow me on social media!

Follow me on Facebook and Twitter for several small snippets each week.

Or, if you're looking for more professional content (less frequent, but more closely related to writing, publishing, or libraries), connect with me on LinkedIn. (I do ask that if you request a connection on LinkedIn that you mention this blog so that I know how you heard of me.)

Banned Books Week Day 4: Parents Just Don't Understand

With all respect to the Fresh Prince of Bel Aire, when it comes to book banning, it's usually the kids who don't understand.

I first observed Banned Books Week while working in the children's department of the public library. I was surprised to find Julie of the Wolves, The Summer of My German Soldier, and other books I remembered reading in late elementary and early middle school were on various banned and challenged lists for having sexual situations or being "sexually explicit." *insert confused head tilt* Really? I didn't remember anything like that...

Around that time, there was a big to-do in one of the local school systems about Z for Zachariah, claiming there was sexual assault in it. *confused head tilt again* My mom was appalled - she remembered me reading that book and asked me if it bothered me. Um... no. Well, the alleged assault didn't bother me. I didn't remember anything about a sexual assault. I remembered that the main character - a teenage girl who assumes she's the only survivor of a nuclear war until an adult male scientist? government official? shows up. At first he works with her, but later they have a physical altercation as he tries to take her away from her camp when he leaves. Was it sexual? If it was, it went WAY over my head. What upset me? The dog died.

Likewise, Julie of the Wolves - I remembered 13-year-old Julie having an argument with her fellow-teen husband (of an arranged and, at the moment, platonic marriage). His friends were teasing him because he couldn't "mate his wife." He forcibly tried to kiss her, she kicked him, they tussled, but he left declaring, "tomorrow! I can!" As as 5th grader, I had a vague idea of what mating meant and understood that he was going to try again, but to me it was "Daniel is being a jerk," not "Julie narrowly avoided getting raped." Again, what upset me more? The dog died (well, wolf in this case).

With Summer of My German Soldier, I didn't even remember there being ANYTHING physical between the main character and the titular character, romantic, violent, or otherwise. I remembered she helped hide him (a teenage German POW during WWII) after he escaped from prison, before she was subsequently arrested and tried for treason. Either on her way to trial or on her way to juvenile detention, someone spits in her hair. That is the scene I remember the most clearly, and the one that was the most bothersome to me.

Again, a lot of this comes down to 1. trusting your child and 2. being involved with your child. Should your 5th grader be reading 50 Shades of Grey? Of course not. Should your 5th grader be reading Old Yeller, The Yearling, Julie of the Wolves, or other books where "the dog dies?" Well, I mean, kids are going to read things that upset them, see things that upset them. We can't shelter them forever, as much as we want to. But, yes, as the parent of a 5th grader, I would definitely be more concerned about the dog dying than vague references to sexual situations.

There's a joke I read once, where two 11-year-old best friends - a boy and a girl - had been spending the night together for years. Now that they were in middle school, though, their parents had started to wonder if maybe that wasn't appropriate any more. Jimmy and his family happened to be over at Susie's house watching a beauty pageant when the kids asked if they could spend the night. The parents hesitated, uncertain. At that moment, the announcer called out the current contestant's measurements - 36, 24, 36. Susie's mom, thinking quickly, said, "Jimmy - do you know what those numbers are?" Jimmy thought for a moment and answered, "96?" He was allowed to spend the night.


Enjoyed this post? Want to see more content like this? Make sure to follow me on social media!

Follow me on Facebook and Twitter for several small snippets each week.

Or, if you're looking for more professional content (less frequent, but more closely related to writing, publishing, or libraries), connect with me on LinkedIn. (I do ask that if you request a connection on LinkedIn that you mention this blog so that I know how you heard of me.)

Dragonwings: A Superior Book

I feel like Dragonwings, by Laurence Yep is something that I should have read as a kid and for whatever reason it was never on the agenda. I feel like it's the sort of thing I would/should have read in my American Girl/Laura Ingalls Wilder/Julie of the Wolves phase. It was put back on my radar due to this article.

Dragonwings is a book about Moon Shadow, a young Chinese boy who's father, Windrider, has been working in San Francisco since just before he was born, at the beginning of the 20th century. At the age of eight, Moon Shadow is sent to join his father and several other male relatives in their laundry company. He has grown up hearing both tales about the wonders and opportunities of the land of the Golden Mountain (what the US was referred to as by the Chinese during this period), as well as the dangers and cruelties perpetuated on the Tang people (what the Chinese referred to themselves as) by the American "white demons*."

*It should be noted that "demon" in the context is not a great translation from the Mandarin. It means something like spirit or ghost. It's a supernatural being that can be evil, but can just as easily be benevolent. Like the Fae of European tradition - some will kill you as soon as look at you, but some will help you.

As I always do when I see that a book has been challenged or banned, I like to look at the reasons why in addition to reading the book for myself. Per the article, reasons for banning the boom include:

-"Use of the terms such as 'white demon,' curse words, violence, drug use and prostitution in describing the experience of an 8-year-old boy and his family in San Francisco in the early 1900s."

-“'prohibited concepts' in instruction, such as that one race or sex is inherently superior to another"

-"This book is not appropriate for any American student"

-'If a line is not drawn in the sand, 'We’re going to continue down the woke CRT agenda.'”

Let's examine these, shall we?

"Demon"

Yes, even though Moon Shadow consistently refers to all Americans as "demons," he learns over the course of the book from the age of 8 to 15, that just because a person is American doesn't make them evil... just as, sadly, he finds that not all Tang men are good (more on that later). He originally decided to "educate" his landlady, Miss Whitlaw, on the "true" nature of dragons. In Eastern mythology, they are wise and benevolent creatures of water, and he is appalled to find that she only knows tales of evil, fire-breathing Western dragons. Later, as they bond, Miss Whitlaw suggests that perhaps the true nature of dragons is somewhere in between - neither wholely good nor wholely evil.

As an adult reader, of course I understand that the dragon is a metaphor for humans. A middle school student might need guidance to come to this conclusion, but the point of the book is clear: all humans are flawed, and capable of both good and evil.

I should also point out that this broad prejudice of one culture vs. another is pretty period-accurate for both sides. I recently reread my blog post about a Victorian Arctic explorer who conistently runs up against the problem that his native crew is almost universally untrusted by his fellow Europeans. Everyone assumes that they just lie all the time. This book takes that "these other guys are all, and always, bad" mentality, looks at it through the perspective of a child, and slowly, inevitably shows this boy learning that that is not the case.


Curse words

Fifteen-year-old Moon Shadow says "bastard" and "son of a bitch." Once. After having been attacked and robbed at knifepoint. Oh, my god, Becky. Look at those curse words. They are so vile.

Violence

Yes. There is no getting around the fact that there was violence in American history. To deny that is disengenuous, and does a terrible disservice to those who suffered it. Yes, there is violence in the book. Multiple characters discuss the lynching of their fellows. Though this, happening "off screen," is so mild as to almost pass over the heads of younger readers.

Windrider tells Moon Shadow that his grandfather was hanged by his hair from a lamp post. If I had read that as a 6th grader, myself having hip-length hair, I would not have realized it was lethal and would have understood it as bad bullying, not as murder.

Moon Shadow punches a neighbor boy in the nose after months of having been tormented by him and his friends.

Much of the violence, though, revolves around Moon Shadow's cousin, Black Dog. As an opium adict, he disappears for months at a time, usually resurfacing either when he has to be pulled out of an opium den, or when he attacks someone for money to feed his addiction. In the end, Black Dog ends up being just as bad as the worst "demons."

Then of course, there's the 1906 San Francisco earthquake. While most of the destruction is handled with tact, Moon Shadow sees the building next door collapse - one minute the scared faces of his neighbors are there, the next there is just a pile of rubble. As he and his father help dig for survivors later in the day, they occasionally see an arm or a leg sticking out at an odd angle. But even then, the horrible injuries there must have been on both the dead and the survivors are never really described.


Drug use

Yes. You can't fully understand the San Francisco of the time - nor the reasons the Chinese were seeking work in America because of the Opium Wars - without touching on the drug trade... and the consequences thereof. Additionally, the drug use is absolutely not glamorized. Those who use opium are showed either in a filthy stupor, or having resorted to robbery and attempted murder to fuel their addiction. Any middle schooler reading this is going to say, "ew, opium. That'll mess you up."

Prostitution

Prostitutes are mentioned maybe twice. Barely. They are mentioned as one of many, many people who work in the Tang section of town. They are never defined as to what they actually do. They might as well be fishmongers or haberdashers for as much description as they are given and as much as young teen might understand the word.


"Prohibited concepts" in instruction, such as that one race or sex is inherently superior to another

In some cases, Moon Shadow is justified in his fear of the "demons" - they lynched his grandfather simply for refusing to cut his hair. But as time goes on, Moon Shadow discovers that there are good demons as well as bad. Yes, there are racist, antagonistic Americans who shout slurs at him, white boys who threaten to beat him up... but his father is offered a job by a wealthy white man who recongnizes Windrider's skill with repairing engines. They start renting from Miss Whitlaw, a sympathetic white woman who is interested in the Tang culture (she adores the decoration on the box of tea that the Lees give her in thanks when they first move in). Miss Whitlaw and her neice, Robin, encourange Moon Shadow's growing English and reading skills and bond over books. Moon Shadow has such an affinity with Miss Whitlaw that he is certain she was a Tang empress in a previous life.

When the 1906 San Francisco earthquake strikes, Miss Whitmore's house is the only one for blocks left standing. She and the Lees immediately jump into helping the survivors. We see Chinese immigrants helping evacuate, white people refusing to help, but other whites helping. When fire sweeps through the reckage, all the survivors - Tang and American - flee to the Golden Gate park. Moon Shadow's elderly uncle hosts Miss Whitlaw for dinner in his tent; Windrider refers to her as a superior woman, borrowing his uncle's phrase of highest praise.

Shortly after, though, all the Chinese are forcibly removed from the camp by soldiers. Miss Whitlaw protests and very nearly comes to blows with the soldiers over the removal of her neighbors. But even here, Moon Shadow notes that there are good soldiers and bad: some soldiers helped set up the surviviors - of all races - with tents and food, and warned them of the spreading fires; others are shooting anyone seen near the wreckage on sight. There are even soldiers who fall in between - outwardly polite, but who begin looting as soon as they think the survivors can't see them.

If anything, the book ultimately presents both sides as nothing more than human - some good, some bad, but most of them a mix. The book is about overcoming prejudices - from both sides. Most Tangs are distrustful of the "demons." But Moon Shadow's father has no problem writing to the Wright brothers for information on how to build his own flying machine. They write back promptly, seemingly unphased by the foreign names at the bottom of the letter, saying that there are so few aeronauts that they consider them to all be part of one small brotherhood.

As always it makes me wonder if those deciding on the ban even read the book in question. I strongly suspect they did not.


"This book is not appropriate for any American student," one member of the school board that chose to pull the book claims.

Excuse me? How? It's a good, solid middle school text. I read both To Kill a Mockingbird and Jurrasic Park as required reading in middle school and both make this one look extremely tame. Seriously, though, unless you've been so carefully monitoring your child that they're only watching Word Party on TV or online, your child has already seen and read worse - and usually not with a literature teacher to guide their reading and discuss how it makes them feel.


Coleman said if a line is not drawn in the sand, 'We’re going to continue down the woke CRT agenda.'

Wow. Just... WOW. This book was written in 1975. For those of you who, like me, perpetually feel like the year 2000 was just a few years ago, let me break down the math for you. This book is almost FIFTY years old. It is no more woke than Julie of the Wolves or To Kill a Mockingbird.

Some people like to throw "CRT" around as the new scary buzzword. Most people don't even know what it is. In all honesty, do you want your child to grow up thinking (falsely) that Ameican history was just an episode of Leave it To Beaver? Children in pre-school and kindergarten are taught to share. They aren't taught, "You can play with Janie and Jaxson - but don't share your toys with Yue Ying. He's different."

Human history, when you get down to it, is in, large part, people being nasty to each other. It isn't just "white people are mean to non-white people." The British persecuted the Scots and the Irish for various long swaths of their history. Mongols invaded China. Japan invaded Korea. We all know what's currently happening in Ukraine. There's an old joke that goes something along the line of "a billion years from now when the planet is hurtling toward the sun, there will be microbes in the Middle East who hate each other."


Another point I'd like to bring up: when I originally posted that I planned to read this book due to the banning in Tennessee, one of my readers commented "to consider a book 'banned' because a school board dropped it from the curriculum as required reading after a parent complained ... seems like a hyperbolic use of the term."

I should clarify that I use the term "banned" more loosely that the American Library Association . I used "banned" rather than "banned or challenged" simply because it's one quick easy word that gets the point across. However, per the ALA, "A challenge is an attempt to remove or restrict materials, based upon the objections of a person or group. A banning is the removal of those materials." In this case as another article clarifies, the book was indeed taken from the students mid-reading:

"Kahla Williams said her daughter was on Chapter 10 when the school made the decision to move to the next learning module.

'The book was just taken from them. They didn't get to finish it. They're not testing on it,' she said."

In this case, my use of the term "banned" is appropriate - students who previously had access to a book no longer have access to it. That is banning.

And, yes, as an avid reader and former children's library worker, I have a different view on what's appropriate for a 6th grader than some. But to be perfectly honest, I would have no problem giving this book to Elianna YOUNGER than 6th grade.


Enjoyed this post? Want to see more content like this? Make sure to follow me on social media!

Follow me on Facebook and Twitter for several small snippets each week.

Or, if you're looking for more professional content (less frequent, but more closely related to writing, publishing, or libraries), connect with me on LinkedIn. (I do ask that if you request a connection on LinkedIn that you mention this blog so that I know how you heard of me.)

A Comedically-Malfunctioning Vacuum Cleaner

What constitutes "age appropriate?" It's different for each kid, isn't it?

Take Elianna, for example. She's almost 2 1/2. She loves dinosaurs. She watched the last season of Camp Cretaceous with us and was never bothered by snarling dinosaurs ("Whatchu DOIN', dinosaur?!") or by antagonistic robots ("robot dinosaur!"). She occasionally sees snatches of Jason's video games; once, recently, having the bad timing to walk into the room as one character hit another and knocked him out. ("Guy fall down?" "Yes, a mean man hit him and he fell down. That's why we don't hit." "We don't hit. Guy fall down, take a nap.") But we were watching a different show with a comedically-malfunctioning vacuum cleaner and she started screaming.

Or, take, for example, the fact that when I was eight or so, the Giant Mouse of Minsk from An American Tale gave me nightmares. When I was ten, I had three months of rabies-based nightmares and paranoia (I would NOT sit with my back to an open door for fear a rabid rodent would creep in and bite me) after reading Old Yeller... but only one year later I was watching Jaws (and Shark Week) and reading Jurassic park without issue.

Every kid is different and, moreover, what bothers every kid is going to be different. A young child may be scared by something innocuous, but not bothered by what you would expect. A middle schooler may completely miss a reference to sex or violence, but be traumatized when the dog dies.

When I worked in the children's department at a local library, one of my favorite patrons was an 11-year-old who reminded me a lot of myself, both in the volume of books read and in genre choices. She'd come in every other week and make a beeline for me, asking, "What's new? What's good?" She had burned through most of the juvenile-level books and was mostly out in the Young Adult section. She could have asked our adult reference librarians, who were technically over YA.

I don't know if it was just because we had developed a rapport, or because I was the youngest full-timer there (I was 30, and looked younger, and I'm also quite short), or if it was simply because we had the same interests - fantasy and adventure, with an occasional dash of history or sci-fi. She was very mature as far as reading level and vocabulary, and she, like I, loved doorstopper tomes. She hauled a huge black vinyl bag with her to stuff all her books into (she often checked out close to a dozen and, yes, did read most of them in two weeks). It became harder and harder to find things that would interest and/or challenge her that would also be "age appropriate." After we had been doing this for a while, I started to ask her, "are you OK with this, are you OK with that?" As young as she was, I still tried to avoid things I knew to have more sexual content. I recall one time I weighed the pros and cons of giving her a book I'd just finished that I had really enjoyed.

"It's kind of dark," I cautioned. "The main character gets put on trial for witchcraft." I paused, sizing up this even-shorter-than-me bookworm. "Would torture bother you?"

"I think I would be OK," she answered confidently.

"Would it bother your parents?"

She shrugged. "I don't think so. If I got upset, they'd be upset, but I think I'll be OK." Still not entirely sure, I gave it to her anyway. Two weeks later she came back for the sequel.

I bring up these stories because recently there have been more and more school boards and school districts being pressured, or even making rules, to allow parents - one single parent, in some cases - to remove books they don't like from the library. While I do agree that certain books don't belong in school libraries - 50 Shades of Grey springs to mind - I also think that a parent's dislike, mistrust, or even misguided rumor-fueled opinion of a book should not outweigh the expertise of teachers and librarians whose area of study is choosing developmentally appropriate books for a certain age group.

Should I go to Elianna's preschool and demand that they remove any books with vacuum cleaners in them? Of course not. Should my mom have gone to our local library or Blockbuster and demand that no one be allowed to watch An American Tale or Old Yeller? Of course not. One parent, one individual, even a vocal minority of annoyed or misinformed people should not be able to make snap decisions on what books hundreds or thousands of students have access to.

By all means, be involved in your child's education. But be aware that just because YOU don't like the book doesn't mean that no one should read it. The book you hated may be the book that finally gets a reluctant reader interested in reading, or may be the book that helps a struggling teen realize they aren't alone, or that helps a child understand an important lesson about the world. Let them read. Or, to quote Finding Nemo:

"I promised I'd never let anything happen to him."

"Well, that's a funny thing to promise - then nothing'll ever happen to him. Not much fun for little Harpo."


Enjoyed this post? Want to see more content like this? Make sure to follow me on social media!

Follow me on Facebook and Twitter for several small snippets each week.

Or, if you're looking for more professional content (less frequent, but more closely related to writing, publishing, or libraries), connect with me on LinkedIn. (I do ask that if you request a connection on LinkedIn that you mention this blog so that I know how you heard of me.)

Out of Darkness, Out of the Library

I posted a brief little tidbit about this on my Facebook page a week or two before Banned Books Week. There was a school board meeting in Texas (because they always seem to be in Texas) where a mom went on and on about Out of Darkness, a book in the school library that had a reference to anal sex. The rant went viral, and multiple schools in the district ended up pulling the book off shelves. (For those of you keeping track at home, that means the book was successfully banned.)

It is worth noting that, like many controversial Young Adult Books, Out of Darkness is a Printz Honor book.

Recently, I was contacted by the publicist for Ashley Hope Perez, the author of Out of Darkness, asking if I'd be willing to write a blog post about Perez's response to the controversy. She sent me a YouTube video and I have to say, I love the author's attitude - a perfect blend of snark and passion.

Having watched the video and looked into the book a little more, I now plan to read it. Who's with me?

See more about Ashley and her works here.

Personal Challenge: Speak

This year, I reached out to friends and family this year for ideas for Banned Books Week posts. A friend suggested “banned books that are also classics or fantasies that might be outside your usual reading type.”

For this challenge, I considered Gone With the Wind, Lolita, and I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings. But all of them are decently long, and I was concerned that as close to BBW as I’d had the idea that I wouldn’t be able to finish one of them before Banned Books Week started. (Let’s be honest – I’d have had to started Gone With the Wind six months ago to finish in time…)

I had also been curious about Speak for a while, in part because I write Young Adult fiction, in part because it’s a relatively new addition to the Banned Books Lists, and also in part because I saw it a lot on the Young Adult holds list when I worked in the children’s department at a library.

I was never a big fan of the “slice of life” high school books, even when I was in high school. I almost passed on it for this challenge – for the idea of reading a “classic” you might not normally read - until I checked the publication date and saw that it was published in 1999, when I was in high school. It’s older than the high school students it’s being assigned to now. I decided that qualified. It’s also only 200 pages long, giving me a much better chance of finishing in the two weeks I had from when I decided to start the challenge to the first day of Banned Books Week.

Speak is about Melinda, a ninth grader struggling to find her way in high school. Over the summer, she called the police at a party and most of the school has not forgiven her for that. Melinda becomes more and more withdrawn, to the point that she is in danger of failing and nearly stops speaking altogether.

I’m glad I chose it. I really enjoyed it. I ploughed through it much more quickly than the much shorter H.P. Lovecraft novella that I put aside in favor of getting this one done for my blog. I can’t put my finger on what made me keep reading – it’s not suspenseful or action packed. Maybe it’s because I knew a little about the storyline and that made me curious. In any case, I loved it and, not only do I see no reason to ban or challenge it, I also do agree that it should be read and discussed in schools.

Let’s speak more about that…

Speak has appeared on the following Banned and Challenged lists, per the American Library Association:

Top 100 Banned/Challenged Books: 2000-2009 (#60) – You’ll recall it was published in 1999.

Top 100 Most Banned and Challenged Books: 2010-2019 (#25)

Top 10 Most Challenged Books of 2020 (#4) – For reasons of: “it was thought to contain a political viewpoint and it was claimed to be biased against male students, and for the novel’s inclusion of rape and profanity.”

Frequently Challenged Young Adult Books

Additionally, Wikipedia notes that Speak has been challenged for "exposing children to immorality," being "classified as soft pornography," glorification of drinking, cursing, and premarital sex."

Examination of some of these reasons behind this cut due to spoilers.

“Political viewpoint” – As best I can tell, this refers to either the nearly-satirical saga of the school board continually changing the school mascot so as not to tread on the toes of any cultural groups, or to the debate started and then abruptly stopped in Melinda’s social studies class.

In said “debate,” her teacher goes off on an anti-immigration rant; half the class disagrees with him, while half agree. That seems to me to be less a political viewpoint and more, “hey, half the class is pro-immigrant and half is anti” – y’know, kind of like a real-world split. The teacher’s point of view isn’t even presented as wrong. Melinda is a very neutral narrator of the scene as far as politics goes; what she takes exception to is the teacher shutting down the discussion once it starts going against him, rather than letting the students continue to debate.

“Biased against male students” – Not at all. There are plenty of male students. Most are presented in a neutral light, aside from the fact that many of them are annoyed with Melinda for calling the police at a party over the summer. Indeed, the girls in the book are presented much more harshly than most of the boys. Melinda’s male lab partner is presented as a character of admiration – he is willing to stand up and speak his mind. The only male student presented in a negative light is a student she refers to as “IT” until she finds out his name. Melinda is right to see him in a negative light, as she finally reveals that the reason she called the police at that party is that “IT” raped her.

Profanity – There’s really not that much. I just flipped through the book looking for some bad words. I found “sucks.” After quite a bit more flipping I found “bitch” and “bastard.” Oh dear. Heavens to Betsy. I finally found “bullshit.” My, oh, my such a dirty book that I had to flip through most of the book to find that.

Rape, immorality, softcore pornography, and glorifying premarital sex: Rape. Yes, OK, you got me there. That’s the whole point. Melinda goes to a party over the summer between 8th and 9th grade. Yes, there is alcohol. Yes, she drinks some. Yes, she gets drunk. And, yes, she is raped. We don’t find this out (though it's hinted at) until halfway through the book. She is THIRTEEN when it happens: a handsome older boy compliments her, kisses her. She thinks she’s going to start high school with a boyfriend. She is A CHILD. She doesn’t understand what is happening to her until it’s too late. Even then, she barely describes it. He pushes her shirt down and her shorts up. “I’m not really here,” she thinks desperately before declaring “he hurts me he hurts me he hurts me and gets up.” That’s it. He could just as well be punching her in the face. Immorality. Are we calling the rapist immoral? Then hell yeah, I’m all about that. Are we calling a 13-year-old immoral for a bad decision? If so, that’s stupid. What I find more immoral is the lack of support and understanding this girl gets from her parents and guidance counselor. Softcore pornography. You gotta be kidding me. Was the passage I just quoted sexy or titillating? Reading it as an adult you barely understand what happened to her. The “hurts me” line just happened to be the last line of the page in my edition. I read it. Turned the page. Turned it back to double check. Yeah, that just happened. But it is most definitely not explicit and in no way pornographic. Glorifying premarital sex. Excuse me? EXCUSE ME? Did we just read the same book? I am certain that the people claiming this have most definitely not read the book. Glorifying getting raped at a party and not even really understanding what happened to you? Glorifying being so traumatized by your first sexual experience that you tank your grades and stop speaking? This book glorifies nothing – except maybe the need for approachable adults who might have been able to help this poor girl.

In fact, Melinda’s biology class highlights the very fact that premarital sex is NOT glorified… or even mentioned. Bored, Melinda flips through the textbook – “Nothing about sex. We aren’t scheduled to learn about that until eleventh grade.” Maybe if someone had bothered teaching these kids about sex earlier Melinda would have had a better understanding of what was happening to her.

.....


This is the story of a girl – a CHILD – who wants to be mature and wants to fit in, and wants to understand who she is, and what has happened to her.  This is a story of high school: the story of being forced to go to pep rallies you don’t care about, deal with the minutiae of what each social clique wants from you, of dealing with the whole school demonizing you for doing what was right in a bad situation.  It’s about dealing with unobservant parents, unhelpful guidance counselors, and unevenly enforced school rules (Melinda frequently bemoans her need for hall passes while popular senior jock Andy waltzes off and back onto campus with fast food takeout).  And that’s on top of classes, homework, and, in Melinda’s case, trauma.

And as much as I disliked most of high school, I loved it.

One-Star Nudity

(Since this is a very long post, I’ve done some cutaways below. Click on the bold wording to open or close.)

My mom (who is 72, twice a mother, and twice a grandmother) came over the day that I checked out It’s Not the Stork from the library.  It’s a large, colorful picture book. 

“Oh, another book for Elianna?” she asked.  (Elianna* is my two-year-old daughter.)

“No, not yet,” I responded.  I told her about this project – that I was working on a blog about “inappropriate” potty training and kids’ sex education books.  I flipped through the book and pointed out a cartoon drawing of a boy and a girl standing side by side, naked, various parts of their anatomy pointed out and labeled. 

“This is why it’s banned,” I said.  She rolled her eyes.

(*Addendum, while potty training, my husband and I decided to show Elianna a couple illustrations from the book to show her the difference between what naked boys and naked girls look like.)

A few weeks prior, as I prepared my afore-mentioned two-year-old to begin potty training, we had checked out a book called “Once Upon a Potty.”  The little girl in the book stands naked at one point while her mother points out that the little girl has “a pee-pee for making wee-wee.”  My mom didn’t bat an eye when she came over and read the book to Elianna.

I’ve said it in posts before, usually in the context of bare butts for comedic purposes – nudity (no matter how minor or silly) is a really quick way to land your book on the Banned Books List.

My husband listens to a podcast called Is We Dumb?  In one consistently amusing segment of the show, they go through and read one-star reviews on Amazon.  This inspired me to do this with a few banned books.

I honestly expected “Once Upon a Potty” to be on a banned list somewhere, due to the nudity, and was surprised to find that it’s not.  Still, for sake of comparison across age ranges, I thought I would do a one-star review survey of it, as well as It’s Not the Stork! and It’s Perfectly Normal!

(Also, I will be quoting the reviews without correcting for grammar or spelling, which makes me cringe, but sometimes that makes the review funnier.)

Once Upon a Potty – Boy

Vital Statistics:

  • For potty-training-aged children (so, approximately two-three year olds)

  • 5% 1-star reviews

"Caution shows a cartoon bum hole.” Title of a Four-Star Review

“The drawings are antomically correct and uses baby words to describe male genitals. They also felt the need to show a details drawing of the boys bottom when he bends over. There is no way I'm reading thia book to me kid, it feels just plan wrong.”

“This book is WAY too graphic for a child's book! I had to draw underwear w a sharpie on the little boy on several pages.”

“The illustrations are at best unattractive and at worst completely crass. I initiated a refund after getting to page two where little Joshua is bent over, staring at you between his legs with three "eyes".

Admittedly, some one-star reviews were for the cutesie names rather anatomically proper ones, which brings us to…

.....


Once Upon a Potty - Girl

Vital statistics:

  • Also for potty-training aged children

  • 3% one-star reviews

For the girl’s version of the book, there was a lower percentage of 1-star reviews and they were less vehement.  Most of them were complaining about the terms being cute rather than anatomical, but there were a couple who said things like:

“I found this book to be inappropriate. Just be warned that there are pictures of little girl parts. Does there really need to be a pic of her showing us her poo hole?”


It’s Not the Stork!

Vital Statistics:

  • For 4 and up

  • 2% one-star reviews

Interestingly enough, most of the one-star reviews don’t go into as much detail as either of the other books mentioned here.  Some were bothered by the amount of detail and thought it was inappropriate for four-year-olds; others were bothered that there was not more LGBTQ+ inclusion. Myself, I would argue that a book for late preschool and early elementary children specifically meant to be about pregnancy doesn’t need in-depth info on the spectrum of sexualities.  There is a brief mention at the end of the book that there are all kind of families, including families with two dads or two moms.

Really, this one is the only negative review worth quoting:

“Not for children under 10-12 Very inappropriate for small children. Showed the difference between an uncircumcised penis and circumcised, with photos. I thought I saw this was rated 4 and up.” Not photos. Cartoony drawings. It aggravates me when people’s reviews are either inaccurate to the product, such as this one, or in the case of “Once Upon a Potty – Girl” where people, annoyed at the euphemisms for body parts, said that the word “vagina” and “urine” should be used instead of “pee-pee” and “wee-wee” – except that the vagina is NOT where urine comes out. (Hmm, maybe that’s why we shouldn’t be banning books on anatomy…?)

Oddly enough, there was a glowing one-star review by a self-described “conservative Christian” sexual abuse prevention specialist. She praised the book for being just enough, and rated it one-star because “more people read the one star reviews.” Good job, ma’am – way to be genre savvy.

Additionally, while I don’t know if I would say that this passage is appropriate for the youngest kids, I think it was a great way of explaining how babies are made without going into a lot of detail: “When grownups want to make a baby, most often a woman and a man have a special kind of loving called ‘making love’—‘having sex’—or ‘sex.’ This kind of loving happens when the woman and the man get so close to each other that the man’s penis goes inside the woman’s vagina.

Children are much too young to do the special kind of loving—called ‘sex’—that grownups do.”

This passage is accompanied by two pictures: -a man and a woman in a bed, covered by a blanket except for faces, arms, and feet, smiling at each other while little hearts float around their heads. -the bird and bee cartoon characters that provide commentary on most pages making faces and stating “Whew! I’m glad I’m too young for that!”

.....


It’s Perfectly Normal!

Vital Statistics:

  • Rated 10 and up

  • 28% One-star reviews

“It’s Perfectly Normal has been a trusted resource on sexuality for more than twenty-five years.” – From Amazon description

"Porn total porn and grooming of child for sexual assult. Engire book groom tool for pedifiles. No one should be exposed to this book.” Posted, ironically, by a user calling themselves “Sassy”

"Teachers teach your kid to whack off."

“When it’s time for the “talk”, give your kid an experience like “Passport to Purity” rather than this disgusting book bent on grooming your child into a suicidal victim of today’s degenerate culture.”

“This book is nothing more than a way to groom your children. I can’t believe some schools are teaching from this book for sex Ed! Time to Homeschool! If I could I would have given zero stars!! 🤬Absolutely sucking!” More ironic word choice.

“ Call the cops if this is given to your kids ….make sure your child's school doesn't have this in their library.”
This one – the call to make sure it’s not at the library – is advocating the banning of a book, for those of you keeping track at home.

A lot of these reviews talk about leftist agenda, a “confused generation,” and CRT (critical race theory – I have no idea what that has to do with late elementary, middle or high school sex ed). One review quoted three different Bible passages, in addition to suggesting the audience read the entirety of the Book of Romans.

I totally get it if you think your 10 year old is not ready for this book – or, not for the whole thing, as might be the case for a young child and It’s Not the Stork. But that doesn’t mean that 1. It’s a terrible book that deserves a 1-star review and 2. That NO ONE should read it.

Also, having checked out and perused the book myself, I personally see no issues with it. My husband and I discussed whether it was appropriate for a 10-year-old. Myself, I erred on the side of “maybe not,” but I also allowed that if a child is asking about how sex works, what “gay” means, what any number of slang terms for sex or masturbation are, that they deserve an age-appropriate answer.

I am most certainly not saying that you should chuck this book at your kid (especially a younger kid) without explanation or discussion. But, honestly, how would you rather your child find out about sex? Look through a child-geared illustrated book with you or a teacher or other trusted adult guiding them, or to rely on locker room jokes and internet porn to find out about sex and sexuality?

And, as with It’s Not the Stork, It’s Perfectly Normal doesn’t suggest you just jump in bed willy-nilly. It has a page with a line of illustrations of new or expectant parents each saying why they thought they wouldn’t or couldn’t get pregnant, but did anyway. It encourages safe sex and discusses pregnancy and STD’s. I’d rather have my daughter know about these things a little earlier than I might think is appropriate than have her stumble into a situation where she doesn’t understand what’s happening and get hurt, get an STD, get pregnant, get raped, etc. (More on that idea when I discuss Speak in a day or two.)

.....


I totally get it if you think your 10 year old is not ready for this book – or, not for the whole thing, as might be the case for a young child and It’s Not the Stork. But that doesn’t mean that 1. It’s a terrible book that deserves a 1-star review and 2. That NO ONE should read it.

Also, having checked out and perused the book myself, I personally see no issues with it. My husband and I discussed whether it was appropriate for a 10-year-old. Myself, I erred on the side of “maybe not,” but I also allowed that if a child is asking about how sex works, what “gay” means, what any number of slang terms for sex or masturbation are, that they deserve an age-appropriate answer.

I am most certainly not saying that you should chuck this book at your kid (especially a younger kid) without explanation or discussion. But, honestly, how would you rather your child find out about sex? Look through a child-geared illustrated book with you or a teacher or other trusted adult guiding them, or to rely on locker room jokes and internet porn to find out about sex and sexuality?

And, as with It’s Not the Stork, It’s Perfectly Normal doesn’t suggest you just jump in bed willy-nilly. It has a page with a line of illustrations of new or expectant parents each saying why they thought they wouldn’t or couldn’t get pregnant, but did anyway. It encourages safe sex and discusses pregnancy and STD’s. I’d rather have my daughter know about these things a little earlier than I might think is appropriate than have her stumble into a situation where she doesn’t understand what’s happening and get hurt, get an STD, get pregnant, get raped, etc. (More on that idea when I discuss Speak in a day or two.)

Back to discussing all of these books as a whole: many reviews, especially for It’s Perfectly Normal included statements such as, “I heard about this, so I bought it.”  Why?  There’s a thing called a library. 

Seriously, though.  If you are concerned about a book your child’s school is using or you’re hearing about a book that other parents think is inappropriate, check it out.  Read it for yourself.  If you don’t like it, don’t give it to your child.  If it’s assigned reading, talk to your child’s teacher.  Calmly.  Ask if your child can read an alternate text – and have a pertinent alternative in mind.  Or, if that isn’t possible, talk to your child about BOTH your thoughts and their thoughts on the book.  I’ve read an AWFUL lot of books as a kid that I then re-read as an adult and realize I REALLY didn’t catch on to some things.  You may be reading and understanding an implied thought at an adult level that goes completely over your child’s head.

Dr. Seuss II: Scandalous Boogaloo!

Ok, so everyone knows Dr. Seuss drew weird pictures.  The people didn’t look real.  The animals didn’t look real (has he ever SEEN a horse?  His horses are terrifying…).  He has all kind of made-up animals, and people that look like maybe they’re animals.

 

Dr. Seuss occasionally shows up on banned and challenged lists because people decided that some of his books (“Hop on Pop” and “The Cat in the Hat”) promote misbehavior in children.  (Though, if you’ve read either Pop or Cat, you know Pop tells his kids “you must never hop on Pop” and the fish turns out to be right about not letting the Cat into the house while Mother is out.)

 

A few months ago, though, Dr. Seuss came under fire not for encouraging misbehavior, but for “racist” depictions in some of his books. Word came out that some of his early books would no longer be published.

 

At first there was a hue and cry about cancel culture… but it turns out that Dr. Seuss’s estate chose to pull six books from publication, rather than an announcement coming from a school system that they would no longer use ANY Dr. Seuss books.

 

Curious, I checked out “If I Ran the Zoo” from our library.  I had a vague recollection from my time as a children’s librarian that this one had some Asian caricatures in it.  And upon re-reading it, it turns out it does – as well as “Persian,” Russian, and African.  The African ones, to my eye, are the ones that immediately jump out as the most bothersome, followed by the Asian ones.  But, with that said, 1. I was looking for them (I think it’s possible small children might not be as aware as, again, all Seuss’s illustrations are funky-looking people), and 2. It was first published in 1950. 

 

And while, yes, I agree that illustrations from 1950 that were considered fine then can be considered bothersome or racist now, but, y’all, it was 71 years ago.  (Oh my god, y’all, 1950 was 71 years ago…)  We’ve moved on.  We’ve improved.  Dr. Seuss’s estate has moved on – in recognizing that these illustrations are no longer appropriate and in deciding to cease publication, they are stepping in and saying, “OK, we’re better than this.”

 

They aren’t telling you not to read it. They’re saying “we feel weird continuing to publish these.” And that’s OK.

For Kids

"Ugh, but that's a kids' show..." "Ugh, but that's a kids' book..." Have you ever found yourself saying that? Have you ever found yourself saying, "wow, this is really good even though it's 'just for kids.'?"

How did we get that way, thinking that children's media has to be "bad" or "boring" or in some other way not on par with adult media? "You don't have to play dumb to them, just play them," Robin Williams's character says in Mrs. Doubtfire. "If it's something you'd enjoy, it's something they'd enjoy."

I do think this is true - very true, even. Many of my favorite books are Middle Grade or Young Adult books. Many of my favorite TV shows and movies are "kids'" shows. In fact, many of my favorite shows and movies are animated. But, that doesn't mean I don't enjoy well-written entertainment... because honestly, some of them are really damn well-written and plotted. Gargoyles (at least the first 2 seasons) - references Shakespeare and Celtic mythology all over the place, as well as quietly slipping in gun control and race relations. (That show was SO ahead of its time it's not even funny.) The Dragon Prince. Avatar: the Last Airbender, and The Legend of Korra. She-Ra and the Princesses of Power. So many of them are not only well-written, but also address important issues of inclusion, destiny vs. free will, (fantasy) racism, philosophy...

Jason and I are currently watching Camp Cretaceous, an animated show in the Jurassic Park universe. We had initially added it to our streaming list just as a filler, a time killer, a show to watch while we waited for other shows to come back from summer break. Y'all, it's fantastic.

The first season takes place concurrently with the events of the first Jurassic World film. Six teens are given an exclusive premier visit to the new Camp Cretaceous, a summer camp on Isla Nublar. Of course, as it goes in a Jurassic Park story, things very soon break down. But in addition to Teenage Hijinks With Dinosaurs (TM) the show actually visits some rather dark material and ideas (death of a parent, abandonment, being forced to go against your ethics to help your family), and handles them well. I now find myself eager to watch the next episode of our "filler" show and see what new twist is going to be thrown at our teens.

And honestly, I can't wait until Elianna is just a little bit older so that we can introduce her to some of those favorites I listed off above.

Future Tense

When I was in middle school and high school, I went on a medical thriller binge.  I think it started because of how much I liked Jurassic Park.  I read all of Michael Crichton's other books, and then started looking for similar authors.  Robin Cook was another one I read a lot of.

I had gotten it into my head that these were Science Fiction.  Some of them - Jurassic Park, and a Robin Cook novel about an alien invasion, definitely count.  I wouldn't understand that what I was looking for was more accurately a science/medical thriller until I was actually working in a library.

Aside from Jurassic Park, the only book I read from this period that stands out in my memory is The Plague Tales, by Ann Benson.  (Below is the review I wrote for it rereading it as an adult for my library's quarterly genre review.)

Plague Tales review.png

One interesting thing about this book, which took place in part in the then-future of 2005, was that the world was recovering from a global epidemic.  Air travel had been restricted - those “lucky” enough to be allowed to fly were subjected to full-body latex suits, diagnostic tests involving the drawing of blood upon landing, and, if resisting the latter, arrest.

I actually hadn't really given the "future" setting of this book much thought until I saw an article yesterday entitled "I Just Flew and it Was Worse Than I Thought," accompanied by a picture of two airline passengers in full respirator masks (for what it's worth, the article is from early May* and the accompanying photo was somewhat misleading).

*And who would have ever thought “I’m not gonna bother reading this 5-month-old, out-of-date article?”

But it also made me think about some of the assumptions made.  It seems that 20+ years ago we had more faith in how we would handle a pandemic - and specifically how willing people would be to comply with fairly stringent restrictions.  It's some food for thought.

Banned Books Week Day 6: Too Young for Discussion?

While looking over the list of most challenged books of 2019, I saw that one book was on the list for the reason that "schools and libraries should not ‘put books in a child’s hand that require discussion.’”

But if we’re not allowing discussion, what’s the point of school?

When is a child too young to discuss troubling, disturbing, or even just “different” subject matter?

Read more of my thoughts on the subject here:

https://www.iveyink.com/blog/2018/9/28/unsuited-to-age-group

#BannedBooksWeek2020

Banned Books Week Day 5: You Can't...

As some of you have gathered from some of the posts I've made here, I really enjoyed making displays for the libraries I've worked for.  Banned Books week was kind of like Christmas - we started planning Banned Books Weeks displays months out.

The first year that I worked at Kennesaw State University, we were doing a "caution tape" them (common for Banned Books Week) with "graffiti" in the student computer lab.  Being relatively new in that position, I hadn't been sure what my role would be in helping with or planning that display, so I sort of followed some of the ideas that had been done the previous year, when we got to actually implementing. 

One of the new things I did do that year was to put together some "you can't" reading lists.  We printed them out on brightly-colored paper and put them on a table at the entrance to the computer lab.  These lists included "You can't write that" (frequently challenged authors), "You can't read that" (frequently challenged classics), and "You can't say that" (books frequently challenged due to language - profanity, racist, and/or sexual language).  "You can't read that" was our most popular list, with almost twice as many copies taken as the other two lists combined.

You can see the lists and some of our "graffiti" below.

you can't read that.jpg
mockingbird mockingjay.jpg
you can't say that.jpg
mockingbird mockingjay.jpg
you can't write that.jpg
GWTW.jpg
giver.jpg

#BannedBooksWeek2020

Banned Books Week Day 4: Of Seuss and Silverstein

Dr. Seuss and Shel Silverstein. Two of the great poets of childhood. Most of us can recite parts of our favorite Dr. Seuss books or a handful of Silverstein verses.

A few days ago, I changed my profile picture on Facebook to a photo of my toddler holding a book by a frequently-challenged author, with the caption “Mommy lets me read banned books!”

Banned.jpg

“Why is ‘Hop on Pop’ banned?” a friend asked in the comments. Why, indeed.

“Hop on Pop” and “The Cat in the Hat” both have come up against challenges - because they apparently encourage children to misbehave. Likewise, there are similar reasons for challenging Shel Silverstein’s poems - you can read about those here: https://www.iveyink.com/blog/2017/9/29/life-aint-easy-for-a-boy-named-shel

#BannedBooksWeek2020

Reading the Rainbow When the Rainbow is Banned

Another quick way to get your book on the Banned Book List is to write about alternative sexualities or genders.

http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/teaching_now/2019/09/banned_books_week.html?fbclid=IwAR31KYXxioB9Xvjptqzhmc8X7NXXCBHC7pnpM6NQxscIkSN5D2MttPw_DMw

These two didn’t make the list this year, but here are two children’s books I love that are frequently on the most challenged books list: https://www.iveyink.com/blog/2017/9/28/banned-books-week-day-4-of-penguins-and-guinea-pigs

Not For Children's Eyes!

Not only is it Banned Books Week, it is also the 100th anniversary of Children’s Books Week:

https://bit.ly/34ZVdp9

In honor of this great conjunction of events, I’m re-posting one of my blogs from last year’s Banned Books Week about books that are challenged for reason of “unsuited to age group.”

https://www.iveyink.com/blog/2018/9/28/unsuited-to-age-group

More Banned Books Week fun to come tomorrow!