Reading the 20th Century discussion

I had no idea about this until reading this interesting article...



The authors whose books are being banned in US schools

From Art Spiegelman to Margaret Atwood, books are disappearing from the shelves of American schools. What’s behind the rise in censorship?

https://www.theguardian.com/books/202...

You do know that some Americans have either banned or tried to ban the Harry Potter books because magic is 'unchristian'?

This is the list of most challenged books in America in 2021:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/04/bo...

I know. My daughter would be bereft - I think she knows every word....

Before I moved to the UK, I had a job assignment that required us to live for 2 years in an Iowa "city" where my Christian neighbors wanted nothing to do with the Jews who had just moved in from from NY ("we don't think our children should be playing together" -- my son was 2), where many doctors refused to accept us as patients, and where, unsurprisingly, one of the local churches sponsored a book burning that was well attended and well covered in the local newspaper, without criticism. I don't recall all of the books that went up in smoke, but Kurt Vonnegut, Eldridge Cleaver and Judy Bloom were some of the authors on the list. This was the early 90's, before the Harry Potter books were written.

Sadly, banning books is well within American traditions

Ben wrote: "Before I moved to the UK, I had a job assignment that required us to live for 2 years in an Iowa "city" where my Christian neighbors wanted nothing to do with the Jews who had just moved in from fr..."

Wow! I am speechless...

Mind you, I did watch an interview with am American woman this morning who said she missed Trump as, 'he is so honest,' and she then cried. Perhaps that says everything.

Susan wrote: "Ben wrote: "Before I moved to the UK, I had a job assignment that required us to live for 2 years in an Iowa "city" where my Christian neighbors wanted nothing to do with the Jews"

Speechless here too (and you know it takes a lot to shut me up!)

I remember laughing when I read the Harry Potter story as parents were concerned that the books are the work of satanists (all those magic spells) but however absurd, it's not really funny at all.

An oft-told story in my family ....

My company had sent my wife and me to the area on a house hunting trip before our move. We stayed in the nice motel and came down for our buffet breakfast. The friendly looking couple at the table next to us gave us a smile and we said good morning. The husband leaned over to us and in a good-natured way said.

"Hey, Buddy. Did you hear the one about the Amish girl and the Jewboy?"

Frozen look on my face and my wife's. Perhaps unnoticed by our new friends.

"Well, he drove her buggy! Get it? Drove her buggy!"

But we just assumed this was an anomaly. We had this romantic idea of the inherent virtues of small town America. And nothing like that happened again until we moved in and introduced ourselves to our new neighbors, who apparently already knew all about us.

If we had known ....

I loved Judy Bloom as a teenager too. What on Earth could you object to in those?!

Ben wrote: "We had this romantic idea of the inherent virtues of small town America."

Ha, as a born and bred Londoner, I have an in-built horror of small towns everywhere which I equate, perhaps unfairly? with small mindedness and a general fear/dislike of anyone 'not like us'. Cosmopolitan cities are my neighbourhood.

Susan wrote: "I loved Judy Bloom as a teenager too. What on Earth could you object to in those?!"

I only read one Bloom as an adult but I'd imagine girls thinking about boys, sex, contraception etc. would be enough to get them banned, no?

I am also born and bred in London. The country is beautiful but not for me.

I get your point about Bloom, but as a teenage girl, presumably I wanted to know about those things in a gentle, fun way. Thank you Judy Bloom for writing those books. Thank you JK Rowling for Harry Potter, which made my daughter a reader.

Ben, I am mortified. I hope you have found the UK more welcoming?

Susan wrote: "I am also born and bred in London. The country is beautiful but not for me. "

The 'gay-free zone' stickers were in London, not out in the country. You get bigots in cities, small towns and villages.

True. Still, I am more comfortable around concrete.

Susan wrote:


"Ben, I am mortified. I hope you have found the UK more welcoming?"

Me too. On both counts.

I know the UK is far from perfect but that story has shocked me to the core.

Roman Clodia wrote: "Ha, as a born and bred Londoner, I have an in-built horror of small towns everywhere which I equate, perhaps unfairly? with small mindedness and a general fear/dislike of anyone 'not like us'. Cosmopolitan cities are my neighbourhood."

And mine! We learned a lot in those two years and came away with dozens of stories. We met many good people there too, but it was an incredible eye-opener.

It makes understanding the current political climate much easier.

Susan wrote: "I get your point about Bloom, but as a teenage girl, presumably I wanted to know about those things in a gentle, fun way."

Of course, we all did - I fear too much of my romantic education came from Jilly Cooper novels which we passed around the class!

But that's the insidious nature of book banning, erasing anything that implies there is a life outside a white, heterosexual, christian patriarchy which enshrines virginity in girls till marriage. Shocking, really, that in 2022 this is still an issue.

There are good and bad people everywhere, but if that behaviour did not raise comment then that's really the issue.

The fact that a book burning(!) happened and was reported in a local paper without criticism is shocking.

Susan wrote:

"Ben, I am mortified. I hope you have found the UK more welcoming?"

On the whole, yes. My children struggled at times with some surprising bigotry in London schools, and I had some "odd" conversations at work, but mostly no worse than anyone who stands out in some way may experience. Life isn't always smooth, but I can't compare what I've experienced here with the BAME experience. If I have any choice in the matter I'll never leave.

Odd conversations always seem to happen at work, don't they? I could happily live in lockdown forever and work from home...

We are happy to to have you, Ben :)

I was profoundly shocked when a Jewish friend who is also a huge Chelsea fan and who travels to many of their away matches told me that other Chelsea fans have not infrequently made anti-Semitic remarks both directly to and about her.

One of the things that surprised me is that if I hadn't known her family history (German Jews, kindertransport, adoption by a London Jewish family) I'd never have looked at her and thought she was Jewish but she said that that's because I'm not searching for signs and that some of those fans are constantly on the lookout.

Ben wrote: "Before I moved to the UK, I had a job assignment that required us to live for 2 years in an Iowa "city" where my Christian neighbors wanted nothing to do with the Jews who had just moved in from fr..."

I'm so sorry you had to face that Ben, anti-Semitism here's pretty rife too as I'm sure you know but often expressed in more covert ways. I was so depressed by the level of prejudice in the Labour Party under Corbyn, I'm hoping Starmer has rooted out the worst of it, at least haven't seen any of the posts recently I used to see where Party members were priding themselves on supporting people of colour while espousing the most appalling anti-Jewish crap, as if that wasn't racism too!

I, too, am shocked, Ben, and like others I hope you don't get that level of anti-Semitism here. I never have; I've never been especially recognisable as a Jew but I've never hidden it either. I wore a Magen David on a neck chain for around 30 years which was intermittently visible; however, I gave up wearing it a few years ago with the rise of more overt anti-Semitism here. No point in asking for trouble, I guess, although I've never felt threatened.

And let us be thankful that, to my knowledge, that kind of bigoted thinking hasn't resulted in any book-burnings over here. Yet.

My children did have to deal with antisemitism from other students in school and university, and it was surprising to us how poorly prepared the schools were to deal with the problem, regarding it more as a form of "normal" bullying rather than racism. But it seemed to us to more a matter of incompetence and negligence on the part of the school heads than any kind of official endorsement. And my children all found their way through it.

I've seen antisemitism in all the political parties -- the latest Labour Party spasm was the most blatant and clumsy I've seen in recent times. I do hope it has become unacceptable again, reassigned to the fringes of all movements.

About book bans, I was wondering how the various bans and obscenity prosecutions on Ulysses affected the ability of people to read, review, comment and publish criticism on it.

Going back to the question of banned books, does anyone think any books should be banned?

The idea of not just banned books but persecuted and imprisoned authors throughout history has been really productive when talking to students about how and why literature matters, to the point where people are prepared to kill or die for what is written or to prevent it being read.

The Vatican's Index of forbidden books wasn't stopped till 1966.

I'm very much against banning books, but then I don't belong to any cultural group that is trying to defend itself against "cosmopolitan" forces in society. Banning books, and, more broadly, regulating or licensing publications has been a consistent practice throughout history across cultures.

Ben wrote: "About book bans, I was wondering how the various bans and obscenity prosecutions on Ulysses affected the ability of people to read, review, comment and publish criticism on it."

I haven't read it yet but have this which might give some insight into your question: The Most Dangerous Book: The Battle for James Joyce's Ulysses.

That book looks right on target, RC. I'm putting it on my post-Ulysses list.

Roman Clodia wrote: "You do know that some Americans have either banned or tried to ban the Harry Potter books because magic is 'unchristian'?"

I know people in the UK who feel that way about Harry Potter. I feel sorry for their kids.

I'm sorry for you bad experience in Iowa, Ben. Were you at least near the Illinois border? With multiple states making abortion impossible, Illinois is one of the few places people in the middle of the country can go.

Thanks for the link to the NYT article. I missed that one. The Reds (not the Commies) are taking over the school boards. My lovely boy Congressman keeps attending school board meetings in (and out of) the district packing a hunting knife - he always says that he "forgot" he had it. Hopefully some sense had gotten through an he won't be re-elected. Not that other Republicans here are much better, although some are.

When I was 8 we moved to a large suburb from a small exurb and one day I noticed that half the class was missing. Thought there was a holiday and no one told me about it. It was a holiday, a Jewish holiday. I went "Oh, okay". Hardly seemed fair though. They got the Christian holidays that everyone had and the Jewish holidays. I just didn't know there were so many of them in my class. It was okay, though.

I already have The Most Dangerous Book.

Roman Clodia wrote: "Going back to the question of banned books, does anyone think any books should be banned? "

The short answer is no. I'm not much for "banning" anything. I am in favour of legislation which protects those who need it from unfair discrimination, exploitation, the threat of violence and so on. There is also a case for making it difficult for children to access some more extreme content, although I'm wary of the abuse of such regulation (e.g. to ban Harry Potter because it's "unchristian".) Such legislation should be sufficient to prosecute any book which oversteps what are widely considered to be civilised norms.

I am wholly against the banning of anything because it offends one group or another. I do not have the right never to be offended - it's a ridiculous idea. I have the right to dislike and disagree with what has been said and to voice what objections I have, but most certainly not to insist that no-one should ever say anything which I find offensive. This applies to other people and other groups, too - including religious groups, who often seem somehow to be granted special Protected Status. Thus, I found the anti-Semitism in Stamboul Train very unpleasant and, I suppose, offensive, and I said so. I wouldn't dream of suggesting that the book should be banned from anywhere.

(To be clear, I draw a distinction between "offensive" as described above, and "hate speech" which may incite violence, cause economic harm, exclusion from any normal actitivty and so on. That is, quite rightly, illegal in the UK and is a different matter.)

Er...sorry. Gone on a bit there.

Roman Clodia wrote: "Going back to the question of banned books, does anyone think any books should be banned?"

Me neither

That Art Spiegelman quote in the article in message one (about his book being banned) sums up my views....

“It just shows you can’t ban books unless you’re willing to burn them and you can’t burn them all unless you’re willing to burn the writers and the readers too.”

That’s just as well, adds the 74-year-old cartoonist, “because this is the most Orwellian version of society I’ve ever lived in. It’s not as simple as left v right. It’s a culture war that’s totally out of control. As a first-amendment fundamentalist, I believe in the right of anyone to read anything, provided they are properly supported. If a kid wants to read Mein Kampf, it’s better to do it in a library or school environment than to discover it on Daddy’s shelves and be traumatised.”

I am guessing we are all in agreement on banning books. I'm probably as much of a "1st Amendment Absolutist" as anyone. Louis Brandeis, one of the great liberal American Supreme Court justices (yes, there was such a thing), wrote in a 1927 case.

If there be time to expose through discussion, the falsehoods and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.

These days the threat to speech in non-autocratic countries seems to be on two fronts: protecting children from experiences they cannot yet process and protecting minorities and victims of discrimination and racism from hatred and abuse.

How do you feel about restrictions on speech and publications on these grounds?

Personally I would go with Brandeis and let more speech be the cure for bad speech. But I think this is becoming an increasingly unpopular view.

Jan C wrote: "I'm sorry for you bad experience in Iowa, Ben. Were you at least near the Illinois border? "

No, I was in the western part of the State. We'd go to Des Moines or Omaha for a taste of civilisation, such as some Italian food or a visit to a museum.

The thought of burning books chills me to the core.

Ben wrote: "These days the threat to speech in non-autocratic countries seems to be on two fronts: protecting children from experiences they cannot yet process and protecting minorities and victims of discrimination and racism from hatred and abuse.

How do you feel about restrictions on speech and publications on these grounds?"

I think that's a subtle and complex question. I am very cautious about restricting freedom of speech, but I think there is a case on both the above counts. The problem is that making the judgement about what should and should not be restricted is difficult and is open to abuse - in the same way that "National Security" arguments are valid but can be abused in order to cover up things which might simply embarrass those with influence.

I don't have a definitive answer - no-one does - and I've little to add to the above and to my previous post.

Ben wrote: "I am guessing we are all in agreement on banning books. I'm probably as much of a "1st Amendment Absolutist" as anyone. Louis Brandeis, one of the great liberal American Supreme Court justices (yes..."

I'm with you on this one Ben.

So sorry to hear about your dreadful experiences Ben.

Thank-you for introducing such a fascinating topic Nigeyb. How do you feel about editing books that some people find offensive or contain language that is not acceptable now. So any reprint might find particular sections omitted or words substituted. Where would that end, and who decides how they would be edited?

Fascinating article about sensitivity readers.

https://unherd.com/2022/02/how-sensit...

I'm not defending the author of the article -- her book sounds highly flawed -- and I rarely find an article on Unherd that I agree with. But this process sounds horrific.

I see nothing at all wrong with soliciting comments from readers with different backgrounds than the writer's. That seems to me to be just good research. But requiring a writer to make changes suggested by sensitivity readers seems to me highly damaging to the creative process. You can't write a book by committee. (Well, you can, but I wouldn't want to. I had enough of that sort of thing when I was working on litigation papers and had to satisfy PR advisors, political advisors, people with commercial relationships and businessmen who liked to pretend they were better lawyers than the lawyers.)

Ben wrote: "Fascinating article about sensitivity readers.

https://unherd.com/2022/02/how-sensit...

I'm not defending the author of the article -- her book sounds highly flaw..."

Yes but a lot of publishing companies are headed up by their marketing rather than their editorial depts. and so they're interested in targeting specific readerships, in which case this process can be part of ensuring that the text is acceptable to those readers. But, in any case, even pre the dominance of marketing books were always extensively edited in-house, unless the author was so huge like Stephen King that they could negotiate not to be, but the process was largely invisible.

Yes. I hadn't thought of it as simply another form of marketing, combined with fear of litigation. But I'm sure you're right.

If only publishing houses were thinking of nothing other than beauty and truth!

Ben wrote: "If only publishing houses were thinking of nothing other than beauty and truth!"

What - you mean that isn't all they know on earth and all they need to know? I'm shocked! 😊

Ben wrote: "I am guessing we are all in agreement on banning books. I'm probably as much of a "1st Amendment Absolutist" as anyone. Louis Brandeis, one of the great liberal American Supreme Court justices (yes..."

I’m not surprised that this treatment happened in western Iowa. As an Iowan, born and bred, I am so sorry that this happened, and very disappointed in these not so neighborly people. That area is more sparsely populated, and pretty insular. As I’m sure you discovered, this is not the norm for most of the state.

I’m not sure where all this book banning hysteria is coming from recently. It seems like it cycles every twenty years or so. It’s up to me to decide what books I want to read, and if something offends me, it’s my sensitivity.

It’s certainly not the responsibility of any lawmaker or group of people to tell me what I can’t read.

Back in the early 80s there was a comic strip called Bloom County: Loose Tails. One of the strips created a word: offensensitivity. It seems appropriate.

Ruth wrote: "So sorry to hear about your dreadful experiences Ben.

Thank-you for introducing such a fascinating topic Nigeyb. How do you feel about editing books that some people find offensive or contain lang..."

Some years ago when I EVEN heard that they were THINKING about doing it to Tom Sawyer/Huck Finn I ran right out and bought new copies of them. Twain used those words for a reason and it wasn't totally ignorance on how it made people feel.

Florida passed a Don’t Say Gay bill that makes it a crime for teachers to discuss gender identity or sexual orientation in classrooms. A teacher sent a letter to the FL House of Representatives saying that in accordance with this new law, she will no longer use gendered pronouns, all student will be referred to as ‘they’ or ‘them.’ She will no longer use gendered titles such as Mr. Mrs. or Ms and will use Mx. She will remove all books which refer to a person as mother, father, husband or wife as theses are gendered identities that allude to sexual orientation, and of course all books that refer to characters as he or she will be removed.

The far Right in the US fails always to look for unintended consequences of their bigoted, hateful actions.

Brilliant!

Whoa that is some story Ben! Early 90s isn’t even close to the olden days.

I need cosmopolitan places too. I think you often need a certain scale for that. I have seen prejudice in big cities loads, but if it is big and diverse enough you can often get away from it to some extent.
I think the worst is when you’re stuck in a place that is big or all encompassing so to say but not diverse - if you see things differently to everyone else you feel like you’re shouting in space.
I wonder if small towns might often know they are small in the scheme of things. I think there might be a whole social dynamic to small towns that is something else. I wonder if this interacts in a toxic way and exacerbates any prejudice around and makes things worse.

I am team omit book banning too. I like that Supreme Court Justice quote.
But as Sid and Ben allude to above it can get complex. What about parents censoring browsers on their computers for their children? Does this fall within the realm of banning stuff? Children cannot handle some things. I think I have heard of harm being done from young people being exposed to a lot of harmful porn?

America is such a diverse place! It has some of the most progressive places and some way less so! Is it something to do with railroads that connected all the states and kept them tied together, without which, being so different, they would have been different countries?
-Unlearned wonderings from definitely not an American history expert.