This story is amusing on its face, but I think people should face the point the anti-Harry Potter crowd has. A Georgia woman is trying to ban the works of J.K. Rowling from public schools.
First of all, it is important to note that this does not amount to censorship. The woman is not saying the books should not see release or even appear in public libraries, only that taxpayers should not subsidize their promotion to children by putting them in school libraries. The cry of “censorship” is overused and tiresome, and the media often fails to make the public aware of the concept’s true meaning.
Second, the books are obviously light and childish, but they portray a school of “Witchcraft and Wizardry” as light and childish as well. I doubt many young Potter fans will end up dabbling in the dark arts, and I would have no problem with my children (if I had some) reading Rowling, but it’s not difficult to see how someone with deep religious convictions could take issue with the series. And the woman has a valid point in that other religion-themed materials, like the Bible, set off waves of American Civil Liberties Union protest whenever they crop up in educational settings.
Where the woman’s case goes awry is when she accuses Potter books of inspiring school violence. I’ve never denied that art can inspire feelings of alienation and rage — there is no point to Nine Inch Nails otherwise — but these tales, typically fun and imaginative if the few I’ve experience are representative, lack any form of edge or cynicism.
Robert VerBruggen blogs at http://robertsrationale.blogspot.com.
Loading ...
1 user commented in " Georgia woman vs. Harry Potter "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackUm… this IS censorship…
Anyone who sides with the opinions of this woman to ban such a book misses all the legal ramifications and problems associated with her claims.
1. Actually, Censorship as defined by the 1986 Intellectual Freedom Committee regarding the removal of books from public libraries inlcudes: “A change in the access status of material, based on the content of the work and made by a governing authority or its representatives. Such changes include exclusion, restriction, removal, or age/grade level changes.”
2. This woman has no right to legislate book choices for other parents. If she doesn’t like the books (which she’s never read) she can simply ask the librarians to not allow her children to check them out. It’s as simple as changing the channel on TV. Should she be out crusading against anything and everything that’s repulsive to her? It’s her right as an American to do so and the courts will decide the rest. So far, the courts have sided with others. Will she continue on if the Ga court decides against her to the Supreme Court? What a waste of taxpayer money.
3. Separation of Church and State. Does anyone remember this from the Constitution anymore?
4. Lastly, I leave you with the Library Bill of Rights:
The American Library Association affirms that all libraries are forums for information and ideas, and that the following basic policies should guide their services.
I. Books and other library resources should be provided for the interest, information, and enlightenment of all people of the community the library serves. Materials should not be excluded because of the origin, background, or views of those contributing to their creation.
II. Libraries should provide materials and information presenting all points of view on current and historical issues. Materials should not be proscribed or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval.
III. Libraries should challenge censorship in the fulfillment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment.
IV. Libraries should cooperate with all persons and groups concerned with resisting abridgment of free expression and free access to ideas.
V. A person’s right to use a library should not be denied or abridged because of origin, age, background, or views.
VI. Libraries which make exhibit spaces and meeting rooms available to the public they serve should make such facilities available on an equitable basis, regardless of the beliefs or affiliations of individuals or groups requesting their use.
Adopted June 18, 1948, by the ALA Council; amended February 2, 1961; January 23, 1980; inclusion of “age” reaffirmed January 23, 1996. (http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/statementspols/statementsif/librarybillrights.htm)
Leave A Reply