Banned Books discussion

So recently, 6 Dr. Seuss books are currently not being published due to racist and insensitive imagery. These books include:

1. And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street
2. If I Ran the Zoo
3. McElligot's Pool
4. On Beyond Zebra!
5. Scrambled Eggs Super!
6. The Cat's Quizzer

What do you think about all this? Is this still banning books or is it for the good of the book community?

As a white person, I have little to add to the issue that is racism. That being said, I wouldn't mind a collection, maybe, of these books, with a prelude including why they are not published as books anymore, and explaining that these are outdated views that no longer represent the brand. Kinda like WB does before showing all holiday cartoons with racist imagery.

reprint them, but without the racist parts. not hard to do.

Reprint them. If we can be the thought police for this subject, someone else is also allowed to censor our reading in any way they see fit. No one has chosen the publishers as our thought police either. Once we change public opinion, the books will no longer be in demand and disappear. As long as that does not happen, it is not time yet. Books should reflect society, society should not repress books. Book burning and book banning has a bad rep, for a good reason.

This is banning books and it is even harder to fight since it has been done by the publishers. It is easier to complain about a special interest group than about a publisher acting censorious.

@Manybooks: in this instance not by the publisher but by the author's estate. which doesn't make it any better.

Ria wrote: "reprint them, but without the racist parts. not hard to do."

That would be even worse in my opinion. Leave the racist parts and have a footnote explaining that these words and images are no longer politically correct.

Ria wrote: "@Manybooks: in this instance not by the publisher but by the author's estate. which doesn't make it any better."

Which makes it even worse!

@Manybooks: yes, it does make it worse that the estate complied. in the old days, the state might censor a book (not that doesn't happen). then publishers started doing it. then the authors themselves comply. or in this case, the estate.

Ria wrote: "@Manybooks: yes, it does make it worse that the estate complied. in the old days, the state might censor a book (not that doesn't happen). then publishers started doing it. then the authors themsel..."

Or an author is bullied. German children’s author Otfried Preussler was at the end of his life forced by both his publisher and his family to agree to have some of his most famous (but written in the fifties and sixties) middle grade novels “sanitized” because ONE recent immigrant to Germany raised a stink and wrote nasty letters.

I just found this:

https://www.reddit.com/r/stupidpol/co...

the post shows the offending images.

I have a theory as to why the books have gotten cancelled, not revised: Geisel (a.k.a. Dr. Seuss) or his widow Audrey put in a clause mandating that his stories books remain unaltered. that seems to me the most plausible explanation.

A publisher deciding to no longer print books is far from a ban. These books are still available in stores and libraries. No one should be required to continue printing material they find morally objectionable or commercially unviable.

If this move bothers you, please consider reading Caste by Wilkerson. So eye opening when we consider the mechanisms under which we operate and it really illuminates those underlying feelings white people have when things nudge us out of what we've always held as truths, or even sacred literature. I'd be very interested to come back to such a discussion filtered through the lens of caste and examining the texts along side with others curious to peel back layers that feel like skin.

Heather wrote: "If this move bothers you, please consider reading Caste by Wilkerson. So eye opening when we consider the mechanisms under which we operate and it really illuminates those underlying feelings white..."

There are a lot of books out there (especially set in WWI and WWII) that are viciously anti German and sometimes even gratuitously so. As someone of German background, while this bothers me, I would never consider wanting to see these types of books banned, censored or to no longer be published.

@Danielle: if the Dr. Seuss books had fallen into the public domain, then I would agree with you. they haven't. (therefore, THE ADVENTURES OF HUCKLEBERRY FINN, for example, can't face cancelation. fortunately.)

copies of these particular books already trade for hundreds of dollars on eBay. that makes them pretty unaffordable to the majority of the population.

bookstores will run out of copies. probably have already, given the number of people who will want to get them before they can't get them.

I don't know if libraries have started to remove the books from shelves, but it wouldn't surprise me. they would also make a tempting items for book thieves.

as for commercially unviable, I don't think you can make reasonably make that argument. not for this author.

@Ria I don't know what libraries you frequent, but the public libraries where I have worked and visited would never remove a book because it's no longer being published or has questionable content. Far from it. Libraries are often the only place you can find material from many viewpoints and sides of an argument, and often books that have become out of print become protected copies you must read in the library rather than borrow, in order to prevent theft or damage.

When this is no longer a hot topic, because conversations like this often fall in and out of favor, the prices will most likely go down on ebay. Out of print children's books don't often stay at as high a price as adult children's books, and the titles no longer being published are some of the least read Dr. Seuss books out there.

@Hannah: I don't know about what sort of library (or library system) you have, but I had to argue with a librarian (and put, by her own admission) a good argument in order for her to order Unmasked, (an exposé of Antifa) currently then one of the one or two top-selling books on Amazon.com despite it a) not having gotten published yet and b) also the writer's first book.

when it did enter the network catalog, it got put in a category for books on conspiracy theories, so in other words, editorializing as to the content.

this library has also had a Social Justice story hour for children 4 to 8 which I find horrific for the same reason that I would a Christian story hour or a Republican story hour horrific. (or even atheist story hour.)

I probably sound defensive. I feel defensive.

my library also has a policy about throwing away books that haven't gotten checked out in X amount of time. some rare and beautiful books, including first editions and limited editions from small presses, have gotten thrown out that way.

(why the library didn't just hold book sales, I just don't know.)

(more)

the library also co-sponsored Critical Social Justice 101 talks (as if the adult present did not know it already) and a presentation by Robin DiAngelo about her White Fragility.

I don't object to libraries sponsoring controversial speakers, but when they make it clear that they only support one side, then I mind.

with all that said, no, I don't expect the books to get removed form libraries yet, but censorship has gotten incrementally worse, so I won't it won't happen.

in 2016, the idea of Social Justice Story Hour would have sounded mad.

Well at least the Hamilton Public Library is NOT removing the books but Hamilton school board (like typical cowards) are.

@Manybook: Hamilton as in where?

@Manybooks I get it. I descend from Jews and I do not want our history to be forgotten. Many books fall out of print and are pulled from publication all the time. I think this is being used as a way to rally the troops so to speak. It is unfortunate, but I'm ok with kids not having their noses rubbed in a society's perceptions that they are inferior.

Ria wrote: "@Manybook: Hamilton as in where?"

Southern Ontario, near Toronto and Niagara Falls!

Also there's a huge difference between having anti-(insert your background here) sentiment if you exist in the dominant group/caste. The daily erosions to people in other groups though are pretty consistent in film, lit, advertising, politics, medicine...I hope we can get better as people and the group that has control over these publishing rights certainly are acting within those rights. I would be more prone to disagreeing with this if it were a decision the government was making, but it isn't. Private people and corporations are allowed to make decisions about their own property.

@Heather: every human dies. not every human has their lives taken by other humans.

books go out of print all the time. the vast majority will never come back again. these books have not fallen out of print. they got forced out of print.

glad that people have taken notice, have, in your words made a rallying cry. I don't want to live in a wold where J. K. Rowling goes out of print (even though I haven't read any of her books) or H. P. Lovecraft or Salman Rushdie or...

(more)

and I also don't want to live in a world where new writers have any more encouragement to self-censor and therefore create neutered works.

@Heather: censors throughout history have most often used the argument that they needed to protect a group of people from harm. I think you can best improve culture not by taking away art that already exists but by creating new art that makes the culture richer and more varied.

building up, not tearing down.

@Heather: censors throughout history have most often used the argument that they needed to protect a group of people from harm. I think you can best improve culture not by taking away art that already exists but by creating new art that makes the culture richer and more varied.

building up, not tearing down.

Ah well, no one changes hearts and minds on the internet, but I can't recommend Caste enough. It unveils a lot about why we cling to certain things.

@Ria this isn't censorship. This is about who owns those rights and the people who own the rights say no. It's like not having to sell your second home even if you're not living in it. We don't have a right to anything anyone else has written that we do not own.

@HMS: I have always thought of the American idea of "race" as something more like caste, so the title of the book alone intrigues me.

as to your point about censorship, imagine a dictatorship. a writer (or more than one writer) mocks the leader. the leader does not ban the writer or imprisonment the writer but booksellers stop selling the writer's books. the publisher rips up the contract for future books. mobs threaten the author. the writer can never get published again.

now substitute "the leader" for "public opinion" or, better yet, "perceived public opinion".

(more)

if you deny this, how about a thought experiment: how would you determine if a) the estate/publishers withdrew the books because they wanted to or b) they felt scared not to?

I don't believe, under the current climate, you could ever find out the answer. do you?

and if we couldn't give that answer, what do you think that says about our society right now?

Now that these books are no longer able to create profit for the publisher and the heirs, by their own wishes, shouldn't that mean:

a) I can send you all my digital copies for free. (Not harming anyone commercially anymore)

b) these books de facto become part of the public domain, as de publisher denounces them.

I suspect legally this is not so in many countries. But shouldn't it be? If I put an old chair by the road side for garbage collecting, I do not mind it when a passerby appropriates it.

@Emma: "I suspect legally this is not so in many countries." you can look into that.

in legal terms, they haven't put out an old chair out for anyone to take. they've locked the old chair in a storeroom where no one can get at it (except for themselves, if they choose, but evidently they don't).

as a matter of fact, the Seuss estate appears to have a zealous approach to copyright.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/21/bu...

they pursued this case for four years.

yes, anyone can (and probably does) pirate these books, but you can say the same of any books which have a wide audience.

Ria wrote: "@Emma: "I suspect legally this is not so in many countries." you can look into that.

in legal terms, they haven't put an old chair out for anyone to take. in they've locked the old chair in a sto..."

I just hope the estate will not try to make these six books also not be available used or to try to force public libraries to remove them.

Manybooks wrote: "Ria wrote: "@Emma: "I suspect legally this is not so in many countries." you can look into that.

in legal terms, they haven't put an old chair out for anyone to take. in they've locked the old ch..."

I hope the estate doesn't do that either. That would be taking things too far and it would be like they are saying that these racist sentiments didn't exist back then.

legally, and practically, I don't think that they could stop sellers of used books and libraries from distributing the books. as far as new bookstores, go... they must have sold out already.

Ria wrote: "legally, and practically, I don't think that they could stop sellers of used books and libraries from distributing the books. as far as new bookstores, go... they must have sold out already."

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that it's really up to the libraries and the bookstores to decide if they still want to sell these books to the public.

@Ria I'm sorry that you feel defensive about your library's policies. It sounds like your library has a more biased approach to things than mine. That being said, I don't see anything wrong with social justice storytimes and discussions, since social justice is not an inherently biased topic. Obviously this depends somewhat on who's leading and participating in those programs. But I can understand why you feel like they're censoring what you read and hear if they seem only to listen to one side. I hope you have an Interlibrary Loan service where you can borrow books not available locally. As to throwing out the books, sometimes that's the choice of the library, and sometimes it depends on how they bought the books. Most libraries where I've lived have book sales when they withdraw books, but one was legally obligated to throw them away if not in use because of the language in a grant with which they purchased the books. Funding can be tricky for public and private libraries, and there's usually a lot of things happening behind the scenes that aren't easy to explain.

I can understand the general frustration with these books not being as easily accessible. But in response to the anger over books becoming out of print: Books will fall out of favor one way or another over time. There is a limited number of people on this earth but hundreds of books being published every week. It stands to reason that some of them will no longer be read and no longer published for various reasons. If there were no books with fun imagery and just as meaningful storylines other than these Dr. Seuss books, I would be upset. But I've never been able to find print copies of Baroness Orczy's Scarlet Pimpernel series (except the first book), and no one's yelling about that in the streets, including me, even though it would be nice to finish them.

@Hannah: not social justice (uncapitalized). I mean Social Justice (with capitalization added).

justice (which I don't like to call social justice, since justice inevitably has a social component) occurs and has occurred in all human cultures, everywhere.

Social Justice (again, notice the capitalization) does not occur in every culture.

Hannah wrote: "I can understand the general frustration with these books not being as easily accessible. But in response to the anger over books becoming out of print: Books will fall out of favor one way or anot..."

I tend to buy a lot of books that are not being published right now or are out of print. Those books tend to be more interesting to me because I'm always curious about why these books are out of print. So, in the case of these Dr. Seuss books no longer being published, I can see people still trying to find ways to buy these books, even if the publishers themselves are not publishing the books anymore.

Well for anyone saying that this is not deliberate censorship, in my opinion it is. Many libraries and school boards are removing the six books and since online used book prices are so high that many simply would not be able to afford them, well, in my opinion, this is totally being censorious and the fact that far too many so called progressives (regressives) think that this kind of censorship and manipulation is warranted and that anyone opposed must somehow be a bigot (have read a lot of online comments and “opinion” pieces stating this), well, this certainly makes me frustrated, angry and above all sad.

@Manybooks: I wanted to verify this for myself, and found two stories in a quick internet search.

https://nypost.com/2021/03/09/chicago...

so, the library system of the third largest city in the US has canceled these books.

also:

https://www.denverpost.com/2021/03/10...

this last article talks about library systems not removing those books from circulation, but as it says, once the copies wear out (or if they don't get returned), the libraries won't have any means to replace them, since the publisher won't reprint them.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dr-seuss...

Ria wrote: "@Manybooks: I wanted to verify this for myself, and found two stories in a quick internet search.

https://nypost.com/2021/03/09/chicago...

htt..."

According to a GR friend some public libraries are actually pulling the books but there are also many that are keeping them on the shelves.

@Manybools: as the news stories I posted would indicate.

as a rule, I advise against trusting hearsay. I like to do my own research rather than rely on faith. particularly now, with so many agendas getting pushed from all sides.

@Ronyell That's a good point. I didn't mean certain books were no longer read by anyone, just not in enough demand to keep them in print. I obviously seek out of print books myself sometimes, so I understand that.

@Manybooks I think what we meant is that an action isn't generally considered censorship if the estate chooses not to continue publishing the books themselves. The Seuss Estate has the clout to find another publisher and the money to publish the books themselves from here on out. The books will in time fall out of public view due to lack of access, but it doesn't appear to be direct censorship.

@Ria I'm not sure I understand the difference in your definitions. As you say, justice is inherently social. But the term "social justice" implies a direct discussion of specific topics under the justice purview. I'm not sure exactly what you mean by Social Justice (capitalized) that would be different. That being said, I'm not sure we should delve more into this discussion here. It's not the topic of this thread, and I suspect from the tone of your responses that it's a very emotionally-charged political topic for you. I'm not trying to upset you or have an argument here, so I'm sorry if I've done that.

@Hannah: yes, as you inferred, these issues do touch me on a deep level emotionally.

by Social Justice, I mean critical social justice, or rather the ideology derived from same.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critica...

if you go to the discussion section of this page, you will find calls to remove the page from Wikipedia. adherents to Social Justice do not like the rules of the game spelled out. also, they do not like having SJ identified as just another belief system, comparable to the many religious and political ideologies circulating in the world.

the more that the term "critical social justice" gets made a household name, the less they can hide. also, they'll have to come up with a different name than Social Justice.

about censorship... refer to the story I put up earlier about the hypothetical leader. censorship has traditionally meant top-down bans from government or religious authorities. however, control of media can take any form.

perhaps none of the print shops in town will print your diatribe calling out a crime boss or corrupt politician, out of fear of the crime boss or politician. or perhaps the print shop owners will find out that they printed a document which contained a forbidden word or a picture of a certain body part.

some have speculated that the ban took place because of the publication of a paper entitled "The Cat is Out of the Bag: Orientalism, Anti-Blackness, and White Supremacy in Dr. Seuss's Children's Books", which you can read here. I won't say it did, only that it have. the paper came out in 2019.

https://sophia.stkate.edu/cgi/viewcon...