I Feel Pithy Book Blog

Many of you may have heard of the 50 Books Challenge. It has been passed along the internet with growing popularity for at least a couple of years. The basic idea is that you would read 50 books in a year. In most cases, people set up blogs and discuss the books and the challenge of finding the time.

My personal belief is that one should read without it being part of a contest even if it is simply a contest with oneself. However, I know just how much real life can intrude on something as nebulous as free time. And when said free time has been found it is very difficult to simply read for enjoyment. That isn't necessarily the case with me. As, I can pretty much read under any circumstances. Just ask my husband, he has plenty of horror stories of having a conversation with me and my only response being "Huh? sorry, I was reading".

But, it occurred to me that I have never actually tracked the number of books that I have read. And while the challenge in and of itself is unnecessary to get me reading, I am intrigued by the idea of knowing how many books I can read in a year.

But, this isn't going to be a typical 50 Books challenge. My challenge is to read 50 Books that have been banned or at least challenged at some point in American History. Which, really, gives me thousands to choose from. I was inspired to do this by a number of things. The biggest being that I despise the idea of books being banned for whatever reason. The idea that a group could prohibit me from reading a book because they personally disagreed with it is downright chilling. The next step is to bore into our very brains and remove any thoughts or ideas that others may find objectionable. Where does it actually end?

But, personal views about book banning aside, the real catalyst for this particular challenge is Anastasia Krupnik. For those of you who have never been an eleven year old female bookworm, Anastasia is a fictional character created by Lowis Lowry. I read these books growing up and the comfort they gave me was immeasurable. And yet there is an effort right now in Florida to remove her books from the school's library. The reason being that a mother objected to the mention of stuffing bras.

Because a 12 year old girl has never thought about stuffing her bra? Or because the idea of a girl stuffing her bra is somehow, unthinkable? I really don't understand the reasoning. But, then I have to remember that reason isn't a requirement for banning or challenging books. Anyway, learning about Anastasia, reminded me of all the books out there- many of them classics, that have been banned or challenged in this country over the years. Then I got really irritated by the very thought that someone else is trying to decide what I should be able to read. That is when it hit me. I never do anything about this type of injustice. I just quietly seethe and complain to people who already agree with me. So, I needed to do something. Even if what I did was only for myself, I had to somehow acknowledge just how screwed up things can get when one group is given the power to decide what is right and what is wrong for everyone.

It was really quite funny how it all happened. There I was silently fuming about Anastasia, as I browsed one of my favorite web sites (bookslut- it's on my links page), and I noticed that they added a banned book column. It was like a sign. And so here we are. I am taking the challenge. This year I plan to read at least 50 books that have been banned or challenged at some point somewhere in this country. I wonder how far I can get before Banned Book Week?

Anyway, other than the fact that all of the books have to have been banned or challenged in the US, the rest of the challenge rules still apply. I will try to post about the books as I read them so we can share.

I will apply one other rule to myself: If I post about one of the books I read, I have to include when, where, and why it was challenged or banned. Because I think some of you will be really shocked at the reason a book has been challenged. You have been warned.

Title: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

Author: J.K. Rowling

Status: According to the the American Library Association, The entire Harry Potter Series has been challenged or banned across the country for their depictions of "magic, sorcery, wizardry, witchcraft, Satanism, occult, and sheer evil". Violence has also been added to the list of reasons for challenging this particular series.

The Plot:

This is the sixth installment of the Harry Potter series. At the age of 16, Harry is now one year away from coming of age within the wizarding world. This means that his time with the Durselys will soon be at an end, but it also means that he is closer to facing Lord Voldemort. In order to prepare for the coming battle, Harry must learn all he can about Voldemort's past. While learning about Voldemort's childhood, Harry must also survive another year at Hogwarts.

My Take:

WARNING:This portion contains spoilers of the previous 5 books.

This book is sad. The best I can do in the way of spoilers is tell you that someone very important to Harry (and the audience) dies.

It is interesting to me how JK Rowling sets up the deaths in these books. Beginning with Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, Harry begins losing people who are important to his life.

In the fourth book The Goblet of Fire, Harry's schoolmate is killed at the hands of Lord Voldemort. In the fifth book, The Order of the Phoenix,Harry loses someone much closer to him, his godfather, Sirius Black. By the end of The Half-Blood Prince, Harry (along with the rest of us) has lost a character that has been with us from the very beginning. It is in this book that we get our first funeral, and honestly, it threw me for a bit of a loop. I found myself waiting for Rowling to say "Psyche! I was just fooling". But, that moment never comes.

As a series, I have to say that the Harry Potter books have surprised me. I was only a year or two out of college, when a college friend of mine (a fellow English major) recommended that I read these books. I had heard about the mania that was sweeping the world regarding these books. But, I never really thought anything of them. It was another 3 years before I even picked up the first one. What surprised me, was how quickly I became hooked on the books. I didn't read the first one until the fourth one had been released, so I had the luxury of reading them back-to-back.

The fourth book, The Goblet of Fire, is definitely the transition book. It is the first book in which a character dies. It is also the first book to truly transition Harry and his friends from childhood to adolescence. From that point, death becomes a natural ending to the subsequent books. But, it is with this latest book, that Rowling goes a step further. By killing off a character that has been there since the beginning, she has taken a totally unexpected step towards realism.

Do you know what today is? It's the first day of the ALA's Banned Books Week. To celebrate BBW, I have made a promise to myself. Everyday this week, I will post something that relates to Banned or Challenged books. So, keep checking for reviews, essays, and articles all this week. I will start by simply posting the Banned Books Week Proclamation:

BANNED BOOKS WEEK:

CELEBRATING THE FREEDOM TO READ

WHEREAS, the freedom to read is essential to our democracy, and reading is among our greatest freedoms; and

WHEREAS, privacy is essential to the exercise of that freedom, and the right to privacy is the right to open inquiry without having the subject of one’s interest examined or scrutinized by others; and

WHEREAS, the freedom to read is protected by our Constitution; and

WHEREAS, some individuals, groups, and public authorities work to remove or limit access to reading materials, to censor content in schools, to label “controversial” views, to distribute lists of “objectionable” books or authors, and to purge libraries of materials reflecting the diversity of society; and

WHEREAS, both governmental intimidation and the fear of censorship cause authors who seek to avoid controversy to practice self-censorship, thus limiting our access to new ideas; and

WHEREAS, every silencing of a heresy, every enforcement of an orthodoxy, diminishes the toughness and resilience of American society and leaves it less able to deal with controversy and difference; and

WHEREAS, Americans still favor free enterprise in ideas and expression, and can be trusted to exercise critical judgment, to recognize propaganda and misinformation, and to make their own decisions about what they read and believe, and to exercise the responsibilities that accompany this freedom; and

WHEREAS, intellectual freedom is essential to the preservation of a free society and a creative culture; and

WHEREAS, conformity limits the range and variety of inquiry and expression on which our democracy and our culture depend; and

WHEREAS, the American Library Association’s Banned Books Week: Celebrating the Freedom to Read is observed during the last week of September each year as a reminder to Americans not to take their precious freedom for granted; and

WHEREAS, Banned Books Week celebrates the freedom to choose or the freedom to express one’s opinion even if that opinion might be considered unorthodox or unpopular and stresses the importance of ensuring the availability of those unorthodox or unpopular viewpoints to all who wish to read them; now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED, that I Feel Pithy celebrates the American Library Association’s Banned Books Week, September 24–October 2, 2005, and be it further

RESOLVED, that I Feel Pithy encourages all libraries and bookstores to acquire and make available materials representative of all the people in our society; and be it further

RESOLVED, that I Feel Pithy encourages free people to read freely, now and forever.

Title: Tropic of Cancer

Author: Henry Miller

Status: Tropic of Cancer is now considered to be an American Classic. Published in 1934 in Paris, the book was banned for 30 years as obscene in the United States and Great Britain. It is considered to be one of the most challenged and banned books in American History. Interestingly, the only reason the book was published in France, was because it was written in English for an English speaking audience. After almost 100 court cases, the US supreme court declared that the book was not obscene and it that it was protected by the American Constitution in 1964. This is a very condensed version of the book’s challenged/banned US history. There are countless resources for learning more about it’s status in the US, England, Canada, and other countries.

The Plot: Tropic of Cancer is a thinly veiled

autobiography of Miller’s time in Paris. There isn’t really a plot per se. It is mainly a book of conversations and insights into the mind of a struggling artist in Paris. It frankly discusses sex, art, friendship, and random character insights. The book is more of an experience than a story.

My Take: Meh. Before the flaming begins, let me say that I recognize and appreciate this book as a classic. Countless authors look to Miller as a standard for their own works. He is probably one of the most influential authors of the 20th century. With that said, I was still left feeling totally apathetic after finishing the final page.

For me, this book is a prime example of how censorship can change our perspective of literature. I can’t help but wonder if it’s banned status had more of an effect on its status as a classic than the actual work. It also speaks volumes about how much time can increase or diminish the standing of any work of literature.

I say this because I read it without really knowing anything about the history of it. I had heard of the book. I had seen it mentioned in other works, but I didn’t know what it was about or what to expect from it. So, when I read it, I didn’t really feel anything.

I wasn’t reading it as “the book that set the stage for 20th century writers.” I was reading it as it was with no preamble. While I was struck by the stark simple style of it, I wasn’t really that impressed. It just seemed so self-conscious and self-indulgent. I should qualify that statement by saying that I believe most if not all writing is self-indulgent. So, that wasn’t the problem for me. The real problem I had with this particular book is very similar to the one I had with The Catcher in the Rye. It was the self-consciousness of the book. It tries too hard to be shocking as opposed to simply being shocking. And while I totally see how it would shock the delicate mindset of the early 20th century, it just doesn’t shock me. And I don’t know if the author’s intent was to be shocking or if he was simply trying to tell the story as clearly as he could with no flowery sentiment. But, whichever the case, time has definitely muddied the original intent. All the while I was reading it, I kept thinking "who cares?"

Preview the banned book template.

Download the banned book template.

I loved the old time feel of this image. So, I decided I needed to do a template based on it. The idea of which, coincided nicely with banned book week.

As one of the most challenged authors in children's fiction, Judy Blume discusses censorship and its effect on children's literature.

Judy Blume Discusses Censorship

Be sure to check out the link to her OpEd piece: Is Harry Potter Evil?

Want to read a banned book? How about downloading one right now? The Online Books Page presents Banned Books Online.

You won't find every book that has been challenged or banned on this site. Mainly, because not every one of them has been made available in an online format. But, if you are curious, this is a good place to get your feet wet. Of course, there is also the library.

Chris Zammarelli is a columnist for the Bookslut website. I am not sure whether or not he is still a contributor. I do know that his Banned Bookslut column is no more. However, you can still read his articles in the archives. Check them out here.

FAQ

I have gotten so many emails about my support of Banned Book Week, that I thought I would take the time to condense and answer them here.

Question: Shouldn't parents have the right to monitor their children's reading?

Answer: Absolutely. That is why I am against banning or challenging books. When one group bans a book, they are making a decision for all parents. They are removing the right of a parent to govern what is appropriate for his or her child.

Question: How do politics figure into challenging or banning books?

Answer: Politics are moot when it comes to challenging or banning books. No matter what your political affiliation, someone in your party has tried to ban or challenge a book at some point in history.

Question: Are you a communist/liberalist/socialist or something?

Answer: No more than Benjamin Franklin who said “Without Freedom of Thought, there can be no such Thing as Wisdom; and no such Thing as publick Liberty, without Freedom of Speech.”

Question: Do you plan to do this every year?

Answer: I hope to. Even if I can't participate in BBW, I will continue to review banned or challenged books for this website.

Question: I am interested in participating in BBW, how do I learn more?

Answer: The American Library Association's Banned Book Week website has all of the information you need to get started.

If you have any more questions out there, I encourage you ask. You can email me at chasitymoody@ifeelpithy.com, or you can ask it in my comments section.

Ladies and Gentleman, I give you the The 100 Most Frequently Challenged Books between 1990 and 2000.

Title: Of Mice and Men

Author: John Steinbeck

*Status: (2002) Challenged as required reading at the high school in Grandville, Michigan because the book “is full of racism, profanity, and foul language.” (2002) Banned from the George County, Mississippi because of profanity. (2003) Challenged in the Normal, Illinois Community High Schools because the book contains “racial slurs, profanity, violence, and does not represent traditional values.” An alternative, Steinbeck’s The Pearl, was offered but rejected by the family challenging the novel.

ThePlot: Of Mice and Men tells the story of George and Lennie. They are two migrant farm workers in Depression-era California. George is a small man with "sharp, strong features." Lennie is a large man with a face described as "shapeless". The two have been let off a bus miles away from their destination, a ranch where they are set to begin working. During the journey, we learn that Lennie has a mental disability and is dependent upon George for protection. While George complains about having Lennie as a companion, it is also clear that he feels a deep bond with him and is protective of him as a friend. We also learn that Lennie loves to pet soft things. Since he is unaware of his on strength, he tends to accidentally kill them. They share a common fantasy of owning their own farm and keeping rabbits for Lennie.

When they report to work, George does all of the talking and tells the boss that they are cousins and that Lennie was kicked in the head as a child. Once they begin work, they meet Candy, an old handyman. They also meet Curley, the boss's malicious son who tries to have fun at Lennie's expense. He is an aggressive ex-boxer who has gotten more dangerous since he married his very flirtatious wife. Knowing Lennie's weakness for soft and "purty" things George warns Lennie to keep his distance from Curley and his wife. Meanwhile they meet Slim, a mule hand and their direct overhead. Slim immediately notices the rarity of their friendship. George confides in Slim that he and Lennie had to flee their last job because Lennie touched a woman's dress (because it was soft) and was accused of rape. Slim offers Lennie a puppy.

Candy overhears George and Lennie's plan to buy land and wants to go in with them. He offers his life savings if they will allow him to live with them. The three make a pact to keep their plan a secret.

Lennie accidentally kills his puppy and Curley's wife tries to comfort him. She shares her life's disappointments with him. When he tells her how he likes touching soft things, she allows him to feel her hair. He accidentally kills her and flees. When the other men discover what has happened, George meets up with Lennie in their designated meeting place. They decided that if anything went wrong, they would meet at a pool of the Salinas River. George tell Lennie a story about the farm they are going to own as a lynch party approaches. He kills his friend by shooting him in the back of the head. When the lynch party arrives, only Slim understands that George shot his friend out of mercy.

My Take: It was an enjoyable read. There were times that I thought it was overly simplistic in it's moral observations. But, overall, the characters and their motivations of friendship and loyalty rang true. It's understandable why it is assigned in so many classes. It's short, it's written by a famous author, and it's loaded with thematic symbolism. And, I can understand people being hesitant about reading it. There is something about assigned reading that can suck all of the joy out of a good book. But, if you haven't read it since 9th grade English class, you really should give it another chance.

*Information courtesy of Social Sicences and Humanities Library.

It's that time of year once again folks. Banned Book Week has officially started. While I got way too busy to do the challenge this year, I do want to encourage everyone to read a banned or challenged book. The list for 2005-2006 has been released and can be found in this brochure on ILA's website.

I've set a goal to post something about Banned Book Week everyday this week. So, today we will start with something small. The Athens Clarke County Library is hosting an Exploration of John Steinbeck's Life and work tomorrow at 7pm. If you are in town, please check it out. If you aren't in town, how about checking out the ALA website to find out what you can do to help stop censorship.

Harry Potter is a troublemaker. I mean posting about him is bound to bring some type of discord. I wrote a post about one of those books and got lambasted for liking a children's book. I am not a genre snob. I certainly cannot dismiss a good book simply because it fits into a genre that other people think themselves too good for. But, apparently admitting to liking the Harry Potter stuff is akin to admitting you have no taste or intellect.

Why?

I finally figured it out.

Its because Harry Potter is a troublemaker.

So why am I not the least bit surprised that the Harry Potter series has topped the ALA's list of most challenged books of the 21st century? That Potter. Always making trouble for someone.

ALA's Top 10 Most Challenged Books of the 21st Century