A second-hand book shop in Wellington, New Zealand wound up with a copy of Bloody Mama by Robert Thom, a book published in 1970 about Ma Barker and her sons. According to Radio New Zealand News, it was removed from the book shop by the Department of Internal Affairs.

What???!!!

To say I am appalled is an understatement. As a teenager, I’m used to (sad to say) books being challenged by parents and removed for review by the schools. And I’ve even heard of a book being banned in a town before (although not recently), but that today, in 2011, a book can be banned for an ENTIRE COUNTRY is beyond belief. The book was confiscated from a second-hand bookstore by an arm of the government… not taken off the shelves of a school, which means that the government has decreed that the book should not be read — even by adults. Really New Zealand??? That people think that teenagers cannot make an appropriate decision, is maddening to say the least, but that the government has decided that ALL of the people in an entire country are incapable of handling the contents between the covers of a book is absurd. Maybe the most disturbing of all is that the Department of Internal Affairs arrived at the second-hand bookstore after an anonymous tip.

So, what is sooooo bad about Bloody Mama that a country is not allowed to read it? I couldn’t find a book blurb, but the movie, also made in 1970, had a write up:

A psychological gangster film based on fact. Machine gun totin’ Ma Barker lead her family gang (her sons) on a crime spree in the Depression era. Her loyal brood have every perversion imaginable. The sadistic Herman sleeps with his Ma. When Fred Barker is released from prison, he brings home his cell mate/lover Kevin Dirkman, who also sleeps with Ma, much to Fred’s chagrin. Lloyd Barker is a spaced-out drug addict who sniffs glue if nothing better is around. Ma kidnaps happy-go-lucky millionaire Sam Adams Pendlebury and holds him for ransom. Arthur Barker – Ma’s wallflower son – and Herman’s hooker lady friend Mona Gibson also figure in the story. The bloody finale is virtually choreographed and a visual stunner. Filmed in the Ozarks.

Apparently, the suggestion of incestuous relationships is what caused this book to be banned. Again, really??? The book has now been passed by the Department of Internal Affairs to the Office of Film and Literature Classification to see whether they feel it can be removed from the list. On this whole thing, I have to agree with Mr. Hollander, the bookstore owner, “…people should be free to read any book.”

The post Banned in New Zealand appeared first on Be the Cat.

For those out there who take the stance that since the book is available somewhere in the world, then it can not possibly be banned, let me say hogwash! Banning has historically been done by location, hence the phrase Banned in Boston. Banning is the restriction to an item, whether it be music, books, art, or anything else for that matter, within a locale. The decision as to whether or not I should read a particular book or not should not be decided by anyone other than me or (when I was young) my parents. The decision should be made from a position of knowledge and looking at the context of the work rather than simply an overview of the words which may be objectionable. A current example of the absurdity of banning is what has happened to Ellen Hopkins because of her bestselling novels Crank and Glass which are loosely based on her daughter’s struggle with methamphetamine abuse. Ellen was scheduled to give a talk at a middle school in Norman, OK and because a child’s parents objected to the books and they were being reviewed, the superintendent also cancelled the talk. This is outrageous. Even though the books were going through a review process, what possible harm did they think Ellen would do in a few hours chat with school children, keeping in mind she has given talks across the nation with no adverse incidents. This is a woman who wrote about something intensely personal to her, and would be the last person on earth to glamourize addiction. The books were written with the aim of potentially stopping a child from going down that path, if possible. Again, context seems to be the issue. Do the child’s parents who objected to the books have every right to object to their child reading them? Absolutely. Do they have the right to keep them from being read by other children? Absolutely not!

Several of the groups who seem to speak out against books and want them to be removed, tend to do so from the high ground of morality, or so they think. While not all calls for banning stem from religious zealots, quite a number do, which to me becomes ironic. Most religions have suffered over the years of having been banned or have been the focus of persecution at some point in their history, even in to current day. You would think somewhere along the line we would learn from history and develop some tolerance. But tolerance of the right for others to hold beliefs different to ours still seems to be a long way off.

Let’s continue the fight against intolerance and celebrate Banned Book Week by reading a banned or challenged book. I’m going to support Ellen Hopkins by reading one of her books. Ellen is also the writer of the Manifesto adopted for Banned Book Week. Banned Books Week is September 26–October 3, 2009.

Posted for the LL Book Review

The post Let Freedom Ring appeared first on Be the Cat.

Please note in my above statement, I referenced banning being acceptable from the standpoint of someone’s personal library, and not the public libraries. The American Library Association (ALA) takes a firm stand on the unconstitutionality of banning of books because it violates our First Amendment rights.

If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable. ~ Supreme Court Justice William J. Brennan, Jr.

Who is the target audience for the majority of the banned or challenged books? Primarily children and young adults. Challenges are generally motivated by a desire to protect children from inappropriate sexual content or offensive language. While I applaud the motivation, the assumption that the group who wishes to protect our youth knows what constitutes inappropriate or offensive content for each and every child or teen is laughable. Each child’s readiness to handle the content varies, and it is not possible to even designate by age guidelines. In an interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights adopted by the ALA, the Free Access to Libraries for Minors states:

Librarians and governing bodies should maintain that parents—and only parents—have the right and the responsibility to restrict the access of their children—and only their children—to library resources.

Another factor is that children and teens tend to self-regulate. If they are not ready to handle a particular topic or find something within a book to be offensive, they simply stop reading. In addition to this, sometimes the book which has deemed to be a bad influence, may have a positive effect. A prime example of this is Go Ask Alice which is perennially on the challenged or banned lists. Does this book have strong content and language? Absolutely. Does it discuss the drug culture and the effects of taking drugs? Again yes. Those who wish to ban this particular book feel by exposing youth to the content they could be harmed in some way. Maybe they feel using drugs would then become attractive. I can honestly say when I was young, the made-for-TV-movie, which we watched as a family, had a strong impact on me. Then later, for one of my classes, Go Ask Alice was required reading material, with the permission of parents.

The movie provided a safe environment to experience the content found between the covers of the book, and we discussed it in depth afterwards, so I thought I was amply prepared to meet the actual diary. There are parts of the book I skipped because I was not ready to handle the content (if the truth be known, I’m probably still not ready). But, the lasting impact of the story was a lifelong fear of recreational drug usage. Because of this one book, I have never once in my life been tempted when offered any street drugs. Effective book? Although unpleasant in places to read, I don’t have any regrets about reading it and will always be glad I did.

Banned Books Week is September 26–October 3, 2009. Get out there, read a banned book, and support intellectual freedom.

Posted on the LL Book Review

The post Support Intellectual Freedom – Read a Banned Book appeared first on Be the Cat.