Job Discussion Forums

[mondrian]

I thought that there were US Conditutional laws against this sort of thing?


Now they have banned a dictionary!!

http://education.guardian.co.uk/schoolsworldwide/story/0,,1805001,00.html

"The author of what has been described as the definitive dictionary of slang is gobsmacked, gutted, throwing up bunches, honked, hipped and jacked like a cock-maggot in a sink-hole. A North Carolina school district has banned the dictionary under pressure from one of a growing number of conservative Christian groups using the internet to encourage school book bans across the US.
Jonathon Green, who compiled the 87,000 entries in the Cassell Dictionary of Slang, which was published last year, said that North Carolina is the only place he knows of where the book cannot be used in schools.

A Wake County school official told ABC News that five books, including the dictionary, were formally challenged. The others were listed as The Chocolate War, by Robert Cormier, Junie B Jones and Some Sneaky, Peaky Spying by Barbara Park, Reluctantly Alice by Phyllis Reynolds and In the Night Kitchen by Maurice Sendak. School officials acted after pressure from Called2Action, a local Christian activist group whose website asks people to "join our E-army today to take your place on the front lines of the battle for our children's future"...........

The ban comes a week after a children's book about Cuba was removed from Miami-Dade County school libraries because it painted too rosy a picture of life on the island."


Last week it was the banning of Mein Kampf in a school project

What next?

[ls650]

It's my observation that book-banning tends to backfire on those who want to oppress; it gives the book extra publicity and eventually invites more attention.

[ntropy]

[Gregor]

mondrian wrote:

[movinaround]

Last I heard, it's legal. Doesn't detract from it's utter stupidity though.

[Ariadne]

Right or wrong, there are words we can't use here too.

My home town has banned several books over the years and it has always created a huge (relatively speaking) demand for the books.

When I was growing up I was allowed to read whatever I wanted, but there were a few things Mom wouldn't let me take to school. My friends who didn't read much always managed to read the racy bits of selected books, but rarely read entire tomes. Books are alot like food. Give a kid a wide variety and they will usually choose a well balanced diet. It gets to be a habit.
.

[Chancellor]

They're banning a dictionary of slang? I guess kids aren't supposed to learn the meaning of the slang they're using. What's next? Banning Webster's Dictionary because it defines certain vulgar four-letter words?

[Justin Trullinger]

Censorship is often practiced in unobtrusive ways. While supposedly freedom of speech is "absolute" in many countries, school districts have a lot of room to decide what they will or will not buy to put in school libraries. Which makes sense, as decisions do have to be made, and no school library contains every book published on a given subject.

The fact that decisions of this nature almost always are made to coincide with predominant societal values in a given area never makes the news, though it is, I suppose, a form of censorship.

It only becomes news when someone, perhaps a junior librarian or a teacher with unpopular views, makes a decision to include something which later offends some segment of the population in question, some vocal advocate or organised minority. Then the protests start, and the decision to remove something that was once included starts the furor.

But remember, a district that simply decided never to include the Cassell Dictionary of Slang takes no heat whatsoever about censorship. It's only removing it once it's there that creates bad press. Many school districts are just very careful about what they buy in the first place to avoid this negative image; in a way, they censor more to avoid the image of censorship.

My philosophical question- is it always censorship to reduce availability of some material in a high school?

Personal example- I have used sections of the book "the Bell Curve," which I personally do find offensive, to teach about rhetoric and logical argument. I use this material because I feel that it presents a disprovable point of view in a very believable way. To learn how that is done is to learn a lot about presentation of arguments, and about analysis of logic. Good.
But I would be hesitant to include the same book in a school library, where students might read it and take its arguments at face value, without access to help analysing them. Certainly, there is a danger in giving students access to material that they may not be ready to interpret and analyse in a mature manner.

My university library contained both "Mein Kampf" and "Protocols of the Elders of Zion," as well as the bell curve My high school library did not, at least not in the public area. I don't really have a problem with this.

I realize that I've taken the initial topic and run off on a tangent that I find interesting, so sorry if I've 'jacked this one. I see no reason for a slang dictionary to be removed. Wish we had one around here, in fact. Would be useful for when students have questions about song lyrics that I can't answer...

Best,
Justin

[Deconstructor]

Clearly book banning is f*cking stupid and takes, in fact, a special talent in stupidity to ban one. All we can say about these banners is that maybe they didn't suck their mothers' t*ts long and hard enough; never f*cked a girl long and hard enough, perhaps wanted to be f*cked long and hard but it never happened; they spent too much time under Jesus's robe hoping to catch a glimpse of His goodies. What else can I say to them except F*CK YOU!!!!

Let's see how long it takes before this post is banned and the mod sends me an email telling me to clean my language or else.

[KiteBiker]

3 months and counting ... fascinating. I think someone's trying to make a statement here ...

as a librarian I have to chime in here. The words censorship and book-burning are often used as a pejorative by anyone who disagrees with the position of someone else objecting to the acquisition or existance of certain material - whatever they may be. It is a politically charged device which rarely contributes to good policy and proper governance.

Justin has it right - a decision not to buy is not censorship - especially in the context of a High School library.

A decision not to publish may be driven by economic factors and not necessartily ideological. A decision by certain individuals who take it upon themselves to enter a library and deface or steal objectionable material is guilty of theft and/or vandalism.

In Ontario, a book promotion program was involved in a tiff with librarians and special interest groups in which a book recommended for a young age group [grades 4, 5, and 6] had youngsters describe in their own words the Arab Isreali conflict. The idea that a young boy would have wanted to make a special breakfast for his older sister who was a suicide bomber but didn't get the chance to it made the Canadian Jewish Congress quite upset. Others within the Palestinian Cause were upset that a sympathetic focus was given to the Isreali side through the words of Israeli younsgters.

Special interest causes objected to the promotion of the book. Accusations of censorship flew far and wide.

The book was called Three Wishes and it didn't win top honors, although it is in the honorable mention section. Still available to anyone who wants it. Not censored in any way. But I suspect it's sale in the Middle East and translation into Arab will be very limited - if performed at all. Censorship or choice?