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?

Banned Books Week Day 6*: Burn, Baby, Burn

*If you feel like you're missing a day, yesterday I did a Throwback Thursday with my review of Out of Darkness.

Ray Bradbury, writing Fahrenheit 451: You shouldn't ban books.

1950's parents: Let's ban this book!

That seems to be how it goes, doesn't it?

As some of you know, last year I challenged myself to read a classic banned book that I hadn't read before, and review it for banned books week. I decided to do the same this year and, due in large part to nearly unanimous response from my readers, I read Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451. (F-451, from here on out because I'm lazy.)

I wasn't sure what to expect going into it. I read it without looking up why it had been challenged. I had attempted to read a collection of his short stories a while ago and had not been impressed.

I was very pleasantly surprised with F-451. The language was BEAUTIFUL. The book was written by someone who obviously loved words, about someone who would come to better appreciate words. I haven't read a book with language like that since The Book Thief.

The world was also very well created - it felt very Twilight Zone-y, and I mean that in the best possible way. Of course, it didn't long pre-date the show, and Bradbury's work was used in an episode (and I think also inspired others). For me, there was a very clear atmosphere and color scheme.

What struck me the most, though, was how well a story written in 1953 captured the ennui and lack of attention span of 2022. In F-451, the main character's wife has speakers called seashells that she wears in her ears constantly - they are described as being silver and thimble-sized. She is constantly listening to radio shows, constantly watching her "parlor family," the unending broadcast of TV on the three walls of a room in their house. And that's not enough - she wants to be so immersed in the fictional television world that she asks Guy to buy her a fourth TV wall, even though it would cost about a third of his annual salary.

Honestly, the above is even just a small sample of how far gone most of society has gotten. They listen to their seashells and watch their parlor families unceasingly. The neighbor girl relates how she's constantly losing friends to car crashes - in this society people are so aching for stimulation that they speed and crash as casually as my husband might play a video game.

Of course, the one way in which the population of this world is not allowed to find stimulation is through reading. Books are illegal. Possession of even one will get you arrested. Neighbors report neighbors and the firemen come to burn not only the books but the perpetrator's home.

Guy is one of these firemen, but things take a turn for him in part because of his observant young neighbor's joie de vivre and because a woman's whose book collection they were about to burn gets the jump on Guy and his colleagues and sets both the books and herself on fire in a final desperate attempt to take at least that small act from them.

Guy finally comes to understand that he no longer believes in burning books, that he hates this world he lives in where no one sees, no one feels, no one connects. He starts saving books, but of course is found out. Long story short, he escapes the city and joins a group of "hobos" - who turn out to be "retired*" professors and a minister. They promise to teach Guy a technique they developed to remember the entirety of any book they've ever read. These men are the new library; they promise to pass down their collective knowledge until the world is ready for the books to return.

*Most are strongly hinted to have been driven out of their professions.

Not finding anything too bothersome in the book, I looked up the reasons it was challenged after I was done. Of course, profanity (as always) was at the top of the list... and yeah, maybe for the 1950's it might have been a tad strong, but it wasn't constant, and I feel like there wasn't much worse in there than "damn." Violence was also a complaint, as was a description of the Bible being burnt. (But, wasn't that the point? That Bradbury was CONDEMNING violence and book burning, not condoning them?) Other complaints included mentions of both suicide and abortion. Granted, once again, these came off as very tame to my 21st century sensibilities. The attempted suicide is accompanied by blase technicians who pump the would-be victim's stomach with less interest than a mechanic repairing a car. Abortion is mentioned in passing as Guy hurls accusations of unfeelingness at his wife's friends, one of whom who has had multiple divorces and abortions. And, let's be perfectly honest - a lot of those complaints would either go over younger teens' heads, or be completely unimpressive to older teens today.

All in all though, a really great book. Try reading it instead of burning it.


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.)

Banned Books Week Day 1: Rules and Regulations

In previous years, I've often started Banned Books Week with a quick little anecdote about a friend being surprised that "they still do that?" Sadly, in the last year, we've see a big uptick in the news about parents pushing for schools and libraries to ban books.

But what does "banning" a book mean, exactly?

You may be picturing book burnings, people keeping books secreted away in hidey holes to prevent the government from seizing them. Those images are exaggerations... usually.

Per the American Library Association, "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." This will be on the test ; ) (I'm kidding. But I will referred to both banned and challenged books this week and may not revisit the definition each time.)

For example, if a parent complains at a school board meeting about This Book, and asks it to be removed from the school library, that is a challenge. If the school board agrees and removes This Book from the curriculum or the library - or even makes it harder for students to obtain that book, such as requiring a permission slip - that is a successful ban. A ban doesn't have to be large-scale to count (and I'll revisit that this week, too).

Additionally, the most common reasons for books to be banned or challenged is that an adult feels that a books is inappropriate for students of a certain age group. This can be due to language, sexual situations, or social issues such as race or "alternative" lifestyles. This can be anything from claiming high schoolers aren't ready for graphic sex and violence, to feeling that elementary aged students shouldn't be learning about families with same-sex parents.

For an example, here is the list of the top 10 most challenged books from 2021 (2022's will be released sometime next year). How many have you read? I'm sad to say I've only read one, but it may also be the most well-known at the moment, given the videos about it that went viral last year.

Come back tomorrow for another blog topic, and visit my social media for Meme Monday!


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.)

Upstairs, Downstairs

Yesterday, I did something I don't normally do. I started a new book while I was still reading another one. I don't mean that I decided not to finish the book. I checked out a new book from the library and I'm reading one upstairs at bed, and the other in quick snatches downstairs. I haven't done this - have an "upstairs" book and a "downstairs" book - since Elianna was a baby (and by that I mean a "wake her up to feed her every 2.5 hours" baby).

Why did I do it? The short answer is that the book I put on hold at the library came in.

The long answer is a little more complex.

As you might have seen me post on Facebook or Twitter earlier, another book has been removed from the curriculum in another Tennessee school system.

I've never read Dragonwings, but I like historical fiction and grew up on tales of plucky immigrant homesteaders, so between that and the fact that I'm making it a point to read books I see in the news being banned or challenged in schools, this was a no-brainer. This one came in quickly (as opposed to Maus, which I'm still waiting on, though I have read Maus at least once before...) I also happened to see a book Friday evening detailing George Takei's family's experience in the Japanese-American internment camps of WWII. Having requested that one, Dragonwings coming in, and now being first in line for Maus, I figured I was going to have to shift things a little a multitask if I'm going to get these books read before they're due back. (Fortunately, the other book I'm currently reading, Fangirl, is my own copy, so there's no rush on that one...)

Another reason why I decided to read both at the same time instead of simply set Fangirl aside for a while (aside from the fact that I'm really enjoying it) is that Fangirl and Dragonwings are different enough that I'm not going to have a problem switching back and forth. (Imagine if I were reading The Mists of Avalon and Half Sick of Shadows at the same time - yikes!)

In any case, now you know what's going on if I suddenly start posting more "currently reading" posts the next few days.


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.)

Review: Out of Darkness by Ashley Hope Perez

As some of you know, this book was put on my radar because a mom at a school board meeting in Texas pitched a fit about the reference to anal sex on "page 39." The book was pulled from two middle school libraries in the district shortly after that. I don't know how many more other schools may have pulled it at this point, because the video from the school board meeting has spread like wildfire.

I had initially posted a news story about the board meeting on my Facebook page, but after Banned Books Week, I was contacted by the author's publicist to ask if I was interested in writing a blog post about Ashley's response (which you can read here).

As I often do when someone makes a stink about a book being inappropriate, I got curious and decided to read it. (That's what I do, y'all - banning a book just makes me want to read it more.)

So I checked out a copy from the library. I actually don't check out books for myself from the library that often, because I really only get a short window of time at night to read and I'm always concerned I'm going to run out of time and that someone else will be waiting for the book, so I won't be able to renew it. I was even more concerned when I picked up the copy I'd requested. I was not expecting a 400 page tome. But I shouldn't have worried - I ploughed through the book quickly, often staying up well past when I should have gone to bed, especially as I neared the end.

What follow are, first, a basic review, and then, secondly, my thoughts on the offensive phrase that got the book pulled as compared to other content in the book.

Review, with minor spoliers

Out of Darkness is the story of Naomi and Wash. In New London, TX, in 1937, a Black boy befriends a Mexican girl who has recently moved to town with her stepfather and her half siblings. Her stepfather is white, and the twins (Beto and Cari), though mixed, pass for white, especially since their father enrolls them in school as Robbie and Carrie Smith. Naomi, however, is dark enough that Wash first mistakes her for Black and wonders how he could have missed a new girl in "Egypt Town," the Black Quarter.

Naomi has many struggles. Her stepfather, Henry, works long hours in the oil fields and is often away, leaving her to care for her younger siblings, run the household (cleaning, mending, cooking, shopping) while also attending high school full time.

Naomi is quiet and keeps to herself. The boys at school think she's exotic and alluring, despite being aloof. The girls at school have nasty things to say about her. (Well, the boys do, too, but it's a different kind of nasty.) But with Wash's genuine attention to and friendship with Cari and Beto, she begins to open up and find some enjoyment in her new life.

But, alas, no one's going to read a 400 page book about Wash and Naomi and their Happy, No-Conflict, Idyllic Life. This is Texas. In the 30's. A Black boy and a Mexican girl can't be friends. A Black boy and "white" children can't be friends. And most of the kids at the otherwise all white school look down on Naomi. Those would be enough problems to deal with without Henry's long hours, alcholholism, possesive nature and his... history with Naomi and her mother. That would be enough to deal with without the school using raw natural gas for heat rather than safer, refined gas or oil from the oil company. That would be enough to deal with without falling in love with the "wrong" person. And that would be enough without the literal powder keg of the school exploding, and the figurative powder keg that goes off when a black boy carries the body of a dead white girl out of the rubble.

The author, Ashley Hope Perez, skillfully layers in foreshadowing until you know, YOU KNOW, something terrible is about to happen. But, with that said, it was still beautiful, even the dark parts. (Even the many, many dark parts.) It is an amazingly well-written tale of love, friendship, family, hope, despair, possession, toxic relationships, abuse, racism, and disaster. It is fantastic.


There are better reasons to ban a book - warning for spoilers and potential triggers

I am so aggravated that the book has been pulled from school bookshelves because of a line where highschool boys fantasize about Naomi, and suggest "put it in her cornhole." That's worth pulling the book? Wash and Naomi are both called the "n" word. But that's OK - at least it's not "cornhole."

Another phrase that upset the mother at the school board meeting was "pussy, or the idea of pussy," again, brought to us by the fantasizing of the boys in Naomi's class. That's worth pulling the book? The book opens with an explosion - a true, historical event that still stands as one of the worst three disasters in Texas history. There are details about the rescue workers collecting small body parts and putting them in baskets, while parents had to identify their children by clothing or birthmarks because their faces weren't recognizable. But that's OK because at least those bodyparts weren't a "pussy."

As the book goes on, we learn more about Henry and Naomi's relationship. Henry started making her touch him when she was seven. He tries to force himself on her in the kitchen as a teenager when he comes home drunk and mistakes her for her (long-deceased) mother. But that's OK - it's not "cornhole."

Naomi's mother had a history of miscarriages - and young Naomi was present for at least two of them, and remembers them in great detail. But that's OK because it's not "pussy."

Henry makes Beto go hunting with him to "make a man out of him." He forces him to shoot a bird even when it becomes clear that the boy doesn't want to. Henry bullies him so badly that eight-year-old Beto wets his pants.

There are also beautiful, tender, intimate moments between Naomi and Wash, serving to offset Henry's force and lack of concern about consent.

Henry drinks. He sleeps around. He sees a man catch on fire and burn to death at an oil rig. He has a tin of condoms in his drawer (referred to exclusively by brand names like "Romeos)... but when a doctor told him his wife couldn't survive another pregnancy, he protests, "she's my wife - a man's got a right." Naomi remembers lying awake at night before the twins were born listening to the mattress squeak while her mother cried. But that's OK because no one says "pussy" or "cornhole."

Cari, Beto's twin, dies in the explosion. Her face is smashed. So many children die that Henry decides to make a coffin rather than wait for one. Meanwhile, Cari lies on the kitchen table while Beto mourns underneath.

The white men of town (it was the whites-only school that exploded) decide someone needs to be held responsible. They focus on Wash, who was nearby (because he worked on the property), mostly because he had the audacity to touch a dead white girl. His family are terrorized and beaten. Their house is burned. Henry forces Beto to throw a rock through the window of his friend's house. Henry forces his son to watch his friend be beaten by an angry mob.

I wanted so badly, SO BADLY for this book to have a happy ending. But Naomi and Beto both survive the explosion - a miracle. Wash narrowly avoids a lynching - another miracle. So when Wash and Naomi reunite and attempt to run with Beto, and Henry catches up to them, you know that three miracles was too much to hope for.

Hnery, by now very far gone, and showing his true colors, forces Beto - at gunpoint - to tie Wash to a tree so Henry can beat the already-injured teenager more. He forces both boys to watch while he rapes Naomi. He gives Beto a sadistic choice - shoot your friend, or watch me shoot your sister. Beto makes a third choice, but too late to protect Wash and Naomi. But please, by all means, protect us from the words "cornhole" and "pussy."

And yes, that all sounds horrible... but I still loved the book. It's still worth the read. Sometimes you need to read things that bother you.


I am not, of course, suggesting that the book should be banned for ANY reason. Is the book for everyone? No. Is it appropriate for middle schoolers? For most of them, no, but then again, I am not the mother of every middle schooler in Texas, so I shouldn't be the one to make that call.

What Do You Know About Collection Development?

As many of you know, I worked in libraries for a long time. I am not a librarian, in that I don't have a Masters of Library Science degree. However, despite this, in some of my positions, I was somewhat involved in collection development, under the supervision of a librarian.

First, what is collection development? For sake of a quick and easy answer, it's how libraries decide which books to add to their collection. There is a LOT that goes into it, including patrons' demand and quality of the literature in question.

My first stint at collection development was when I worked part-time in the Cobb Library's genealogy and special collection room. We got a lot of donations. A LOT. Sometimes those books were great; a local genealogist had researched, confirmed, and compiled his family's history going back multiple generations, and offered us a copy of the completed book. Great! Someone else gave us a moldy copy of a county history we already had multiple copies of. Not great.

Moldy books aside, one of the things I did with the donations were to confirm that they were pertinent to our collection - genealogical resources, local (Georgia or Southeastern US) history resources, Georgia authors, etc. Once that was done, I looked them up in an international database to see if another library had catalogued it. If so, I printed this information and left the book for the department's head librarian to confirm as a candidate to add to the collection. Of course, she had additional criteria and made the final call, but in the time that I worked in this department, I helped add over 1,000 books and periodicals to our collection in that way.

When I worked at an academic library at a local university, my CD duties got stepped up a notch. By this time I had been working full time in the children's department at a busy library for a few years, and had much more donation processing experience under my belt, in addition to more understanding of how a healthy library collection grows. I was assigned to a new and recently funded project - creating a "popular browsing" collection for the smaller of the two campus libraries.

I was very excited. The campus I was on housed many of the STEM courses, as well as some niche creative majors like video game design and fashion technology. We had a very diverse population - more international students and non-traditional (23 years and older) undergrad students than our larger sister campus. We had a lot of requests for Sci-Fi, fantasy, anime, and YA books, as well as trendy authors such as George R R Martin (this was during the hey-dey of the Game of Thrones TV series).

As someone who also enjoys Sci-fi, fantasy, YA, and George R R Martin, this was right up my alley. Does that mean that I just ordered my "to read" list and have done with it? Oh, no.

I did a lot of research. I checked best seller lists and looked for announcements of the winners of awards (Pulitzer, Printz, Georgia Book Award, Nebula, and Hugo to name a few). I looked at reviews - not on Amazon, but in resources like Publisher's Weekly and Library Journal - publications intended to help librarians choose which materials to spend their limited resources on.

I made a color-coded excel chart (because, as anyone who has worked with me in the past ten years knows, of course I did). I had so much fun... but I also took it very seriously. I had a small budget, all things considered, and was constantly asking myself, is it worth the eight, fourteen, or twenty dollars to buy this book? Will our patrons read it?"

The opposite of collection development is what is often called "weeding." This means deciding what books to remove from a collection. What? Remove books? No, say it ain't so! Well, I know it sounds shocking (especially if you've read my Banned Books posts), but just as a healthy collection needs to have books added regularly, it also needs to be trimmed occasionally. Think of it as cutting your toenails. Or better yet, like pruning a tree or weeding a garden (which is why I like the term "weeding").

If you have a teenager looking for a book to read and they pick up a copy of a book with a super 80's-tastic cover, as opposed to something trendy and "lit" (am I using that right, you hip groovy cats?) they probably aren't going to read it. A water-damaged copy of a best-selling author is going to sit on the shelf untouched. A computer science student isn't going to get much help from "Computers and You: 1982 Edition." Your collection has to stay interesting. It has to stay in good repair. It has to stay relevant.

In my time at Cobb Libraries, I also helped with weeding which, once I got past the scandal of "you mean we might GET RID of some of these books?!" I found very interesting and even satisfying. Again, I was doing this under the supervision of a librarian. I had certain criteria and certain steps. Sometimes I was given a list of specific titles to pull to look into further. These were either older (potentially outdated) non-fiction, or books that hadn't checked out in a given period of time - usually five years, though sometimes shorter if it was pulling specific copies of books we would have had a lot of. When Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban first came out, the library got dozens of copies due to high demand. But if you have five copies out of 50 that haven't checked out in several years, maybe it's time to consider pulling some.

Of course, the first thing we checked was number of titles at each branch. If a small branch has three or four copies of the same book and there are larger branches that don't have one, you send it to another branch where it might get some new, interested patrons looking at it.

Damage was another consideration. If I pulled a book that was falling apart, missing pages, water damaged beyond minor staining, etc., I checked how many copies we had and usually set it on a pile for the librarian to confirm removing from the system. The exception was if it was the last copy of the book, or if it was a high-demand book (say, To Kill a Mockingbird) and we were concerned about not having enough copies.

And as for outdated, well, let's just say that if Indiana Jones would pick up the book and say, "This belongs in a museum," it should probably be weeded...

Also, weeding doesn't mean "throwing away." Books that we removed that were in good condition were sent to the book sale. Books in bad condition were sent to recycling. Irrelevant material (like bound copies of tech periodicals from the 30's that were available on the library's online database) were sold to film companies to use for props. I know some libraries even use weeded books as craft supplies.

Of course, as you would expect at a public library, sometimes public opinion tries to get involved in collection development - "why won't you add my self-published memoir to the collection?" "when are you going to get some copies of 50 Shades of Grey?" "When are you going to REMOVE 50 Shades of Grey?" This is why many libraries have a collection development team, a collection development policy (often available on the website, or, if not, in print upon request), and a weeding/request for removal policy. This is so when your lowly part-time shelver starts getting these questions thrown at him, he has a group and a policy to refer people to.

Recently I've been seeing more in the news about parents and politicians getting involved in trying to pull certain books from libraries, or bar others from being added. And while, to a certain extent, I do believe that parents should be involved in what their children read, pitching a fit and demanding that a book be removed when you've only read page 39 is not the way to go about it. What do you know about collection development? Where did you get your MLS degree?

Now, like I said, I'm not a full librarian. There are many library professionals out there who were far more qualified than I to choose books to add to a collection. But I like to think I gave it a good, well-educated, unbiased attempt. I even added books, or kept potential weeding candidates that I personally didn't want to read, or had read and hadn't liked. Just because I don't like it doesn't mean you shouldn't read it.

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.

High-Stakes Secrets

Psst... Can you keep a secret?

Recently I've been consuming media about secrets - what a character will do to keep a secret, what happens when a secret gets out...

Jason and I recently watched There's Someone Inside Your House. It's a horror movie about a killer making his way through high school students with secrets. At one point, one of the characters throws what he calls a "secret" party. The attendees are encouraged to share their secrets, the idea being that if your secret is out, the killer no longer has a hold over you. These being high schoolers, the secrets range from crushes to miscarriages. Though as you might expect, not everyone confesses the Real Secret, the Big Secret, the High-Stakes Secret, and people keep dying.

I also recently finished reading Speak, a book about a high schooler keeping a secret that takes such a toll on her that she pretty much stops speaking all-together. Read more about that here.

It made me start thinking about my stories. What secrets do my characters have? What secrets do they consider to be high-stakes? When I was in high school my Big Secret was who I had a crush on, which seems so stupid now. But it's a matter of perspective. Sometimes it's a matter of culture or your place in society, too. A secret that is a big deal for a character in one story, in one world, may be laughable to worry about in another story and world.

I have neglected my characters' secrets. I don't even know what secrets some of my characters have. I need to go through my stories (and especially Brinyor, now that I've decided to workshop it some) and figure out what people's secrets are.

I Challenge You!

I wanted to start this post with “every day, a book is challenged,” or “X number of books are removed from library shelves each year,” but I couldn’t find an exact statistic.  What I DO know is that despite the surprise demonstrated by someone I know each year when I start explaining banned books week, I stumbled up two separate news stories just in the past couple weeks about multiple books being removed in one school system, and one book being removed in another.  That was without me going looking for stories about book banning – just things that showed up in my everyday internet use.

Additionally, when I started looking at reviews for just a single book I was reading for this blog series, I found calls to have it removed from school libraries.  I think challenges happen a lot more frequently that we realize.  I think removals (a successful ban) also happen more often than we realize… but I also think one plus side to social media over the past several years is that it has become easier to share when these challenges and bans happen.  The multiple-book ban I mentioned above?  It was rescinded a couple weeks later due in part to very vocal students on social media.

So, I have a challenge for you – listen up and speak out:

  • If you hear of a book being challenged or banned, check it out.  Look into it.  Don’t let it lie.  Even if you don’t like the book personally, there’s a big difference between “I don’t like this book” and “no one should read this book.” I hated Beloved, but I will stand shoulder to shoulder with you and defend your right to read it.

  • Check out that challenged book.  Read it.  Write a review for your library, or for Goodreads, or both.  If you think you’re going to like it, or you just want a challenged book to grace your bookshelf, buy it.  Write a review on amazon, or wherever you bought it. 

  • Step it up a notch.  Get involved with your local school board.  If you hear about a book being challenged or banned, write to them.  Make a stink on social media.  Go to school board meetings.

  • Or, if you’re not outgoing, not outspoken, don’t have the energy for that kind of fight or attention, simply check the book out.  Libraries keep statistics on how often a book circulates (checks out) – the more frequently it’s checked out, the less likely it is to be removed from the collection.

So pick up the gauntlet – and pick up a banned book.

Panic! At the Library

As I mentioned in Wednesday’s post, I reached out to family and friends for ideas for this Year’s Banned Books Week. 

My husband doesn’t read as much as I do, and never has, but as a teenager he listened to Heavy Metal, played games like Dungeons and Dragons and Magic the Gathering, and played video games.  So many times, he found that people who didn’t know anything about these media or genres labeled them as evil or Satanic.  He said he would be interested in hearing more about that idea – about the “Satanic Panic” of the ‘80’s and ‘90’s* – the books and leisure activities that got slapped with that “Satanic” label by people that had no idea what they were really about.

Peer into my crystal ball…

The American Library Association keeps track of the reasons why books are challenged or banned.  Since the ALSA has been keeping track, many books have been challenged for “magic and witchcraft,” “occult/Satanism,” and similar reasons. Some of these include:

The Harry Potter series (for obvious reasons)

Bless Me, Ultima by Rudolfo Anaya

The Bridge to Terabithia by Katherine Paterson

The Witches by Roald Dahl (again, obviously)

A Wrinkle in Time by Madeline L’Engle (for witches)

Halloween ABC by Eve Merriam (for “Satanic references and cult symbols”)

Curses, Hexes, and Spells by Daniel Cohen (for “perceived advocacy of magic and witchcraft”)

            Cohen also has other books on supernatural subjects banned for similar reasons.

The Goosebumps series (for “depicting occult or demonic themes”)

The Lord of the Rings

The Satanic Verses by Salman Rushdie

And I’m sure there are more that I’ve missed.  While the ALA has multiple lists of multiple categories of books, not all of those lists state why books have been challenged.  Those I listed above are the ones that I knew – or, strongly suspected and looked up elsewhere to confirm.

*Unfortunately, the ALA has only been keeping statistics on banned and challenged books since 1990, and has only been keeping track of the reasons for challenges for an even shorter time so, disappointingly, I can’t answer Jason’s exact question about which specific titles and authors were involved in that 80’s/90’s Satanic Panic period (aside from the big granddaddy of “occult-promoting books,” Harry Potter – but even Harry only dates to the late ‘90’s).

Additionally, while they are not on any of the official banned books lists on the ALA website, I do know that often roleplaying books such as Dungeons and Dragons and Vampire: The Masquerade have been challenged due to the perceived notion that kids who play these games will be drawn into dark magic rituals or the occult. But as with many other pass-times (movies, video games…rock ‘n’ roll anyone?) parents and other adults are often quick to jump on This New Thing The Kids Are Doing and label it as “evil”… despite the fact that most evil thing a lot of D&Ders are doing is drinking way too much Mountain Dew.

Full-Circle Censorship

Harry Potter has been on the Banned Books list since the beginning – since its publication in the late 90’s, which was also the first decade for which the ALA has been keeping lists of which books were most challenged by decade and why.

 

Of course, the original reasons for being challenged were because it was thought to promote witchcraft and/or satanism, some saw it as anti-Christian, etc.  Of course, if you’ve read the books – even just the first – you know that’s not the case.  Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry is closed for the Christmas and Easter holidays (and those holidays are referred to by name).  There is a lot of Christian allegory in the books.  In the last book, it’s revealed that Harry’s parent are buried in a church cemetery.

 

But the books also deal with (fantasy) racism, classism, and segregation, leading many to applaud the series for addressing these themes.

 

You may recall late in the filming of the series, J. K. Rowling came out with the information that she intended Dumbledore to be gay.  This of course caused a hue and cry from some conservative sectors, while receiving praise from those looking for more inclusivity in books.  In fact, many had already seen Remus Lupin’s condition of and shunning for being a werewolf as an allegory for the HIV and AIDS victims who had been ostracized in the later decades of the 20th century.

 

And now… if you’ve been following Twitter and media trends in the past year or so, you have probably heard that Rowling has come under fire for transphobic tweets.  Those who just a few years ago lauded and hailed her as a paragon of inclusivity and acceptance are now shying away, telling people not to support her as an author, not to buy her books.

 

It's very strange to me.  A series that has been so on fire, so popular, so integral in the development and culture of my generation and those who came after… Its fire of controversy blazed, waned,  blazes again…

 

What will we think of Harry Potter next year?  In 10 years?  In 100?