Guest Dmann2000 Posted September 24, 2003 Report Posted September 24, 2003 I think it easy to see why Religous, Parent or School groups could have a problem with Catcher In The Rye. The character of Holden. He's quite the little bastard and I can see why groups would have problems with younger children having access to it. I don't agree with the mindset, but it all goes back to the thinking of "won't someone think of the children". I'm sorry, I couldn't stand Catcher in the Rye, I didn't sympathize with Holden, I didn't identify with him, all I thought was "man, what a whiney little bitch".
Guest Choken One Posted September 24, 2003 Report Posted September 24, 2003 That's another good thing about CITR, It can create Holden as a Egocentric asshole...
godthedog Posted September 24, 2003 Report Posted September 24, 2003 dammit, where's 'ulysses'? that shit set the standard for banned books in america. although, i guess teachers should really have no fear that any student would actually want to read it.
Guest Cerebus Posted September 24, 2003 Report Posted September 24, 2003 Look a little deeper and things will get a bit clearer. I don't think the list of banned book is as interesting as this list which gives where (specifically) these books were challenged. Seventy-one percent of the challenges were to material in schools or school libraries. Another twenty-four percent were to material in public libraries. Schools and school libraries make sense...but public libraries are a different story.
CanadianChris Posted September 24, 2003 Report Posted September 24, 2003 Look a little deeper and things will get a bit clearer. I don't think the list of banned book is as interesting as this list which gives where (specifically) these books were challenged. Seventy-one percent of the challenges were to material in schools or school libraries. Another twenty-four percent were to material in public libraries. Schools and school libraries make sense...but public libraries are a different story. Public libraries? That's fucked up. There shouldn't even be attempts to censor public libraries. If every book that was offensive to someone in some way was removed from a public library, you'd end up with an empty room.
Guest Anglesault Posted September 24, 2003 Report Posted September 24, 2003 The Giver and The Outsiders are two ofthe best books I've ever read. Flowers for Algernon was very, very good as well.
Guest Harry Hood Posted September 24, 2003 Report Posted September 24, 2003 Scary Stories (Series) by Alvin Schwartz I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck Harry Potter (Series) by J.K. Rowling The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger The Giver by Lois Lowry Goosebumps (Series) by R.L. Stine A Wrinkle in Time by Madeleine L’Engle Go Ask Alice by Anonymous The Stupids (Series) by Harry Allard Blubber by Judy Blume To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee Flowers for Algernon by Daniel Keyes A Light in the Attic by Shel Silverstein Brave New World by Aldous Huxley Cujo by Stephen King James and the Giant Peach by Roald Dahl Ordinary People by Judith Guest Are You There, God? It’s Me, Margaret by Judy Blume Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut Lord of the Flies by William Golding Native Son by Richard Wright The Adventures of Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain Where’s Waldo? by Martin Hanford How to Eat Fried Worms by Thomas Rockwell seems to me like i'm pretty bannable myself. and i'm disappointed that there are no chuck palahniuk's (sp) books on the list. Lullaby alone would fuck up some major kids, not to mention fight club and choke
BorneAgain Posted September 24, 2003 Report Posted September 24, 2003 I think it easy to see why Religous, Parent or School groups could have a problem with Catcher In The Rye. The character of Holden. He's quite the little bastard and I can see why groups would have problems with younger children having access to it. I don't agree with the mindset, but it all goes back to the thinking of "won't someone think of the children". I'm sorry, I couldn't stand Catcher in the Rye, I didn't sympathize with Holden, I didn't identify with him, all I thought was "man, what a whiney little bitch". Holden's hypocrisy, combined with his extreme denial, prevented me from seeing him as a role model, though I did sympathize with him at points.
Jingus Posted September 24, 2003 Report Posted September 24, 2003 Why are there Stephen King books on the list? Yeah, Cujo is fairly violent, but hell, King is softcore as far as horror writers go. Check out some Bentley Little for more truly graphic, disturbing shit. Why would King be banned from anywhere? Also, The Witches? Tha hell? They can't even argue that it's trying to preach occultism, since the witches are all villains in that one. Hmmm... maybe a wiccans' rights group complained.
Guest El Satanico Posted September 25, 2003 Report Posted September 25, 2003 I think it easy to see why Religous, Parent or School groups could have a problem with Catcher In The Rye. The character of Holden. He's quite the little bastard and I can see why groups would have problems with younger children having access to it. I don't agree with the mindset, but it all goes back to the thinking of "won't someone think of the children". I'm sorry, I couldn't stand Catcher in the Rye, I didn't sympathize with Holden, I didn't identify with him, all I thought was "man, what a whiney little bitch". Holden's hypocrisy, combined with his extreme denial, prevented me from seeing him as a role model, though I did sympathize with him at points. Well, I liked the book and I saw alot of myself in the character of Holden. I read Catcher In The Rye a few years after I graduated High School. So, I wasn't one of those "angry middle/high school kids who identifies with Holden" types which are most often associated with people who liked the character of Holden. I guess I'm just an unashamed prick.
spiny norman Posted September 25, 2003 Report Posted September 25, 2003 Seeing how PC groups and religious fundamentalists are being blamed for this, I just want to ask a question. If being politically correct is part of libertarianism, then shouldn't they also oppose censorship? I don't understand that.
Guest Choken One Posted September 25, 2003 Report Posted September 25, 2003 Scary Stories (Series) by Alvin Schwartz I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings by Maya Angelou The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck Harry Potter (Series) by J.K. Rowling The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger The Giver by Lois Lowry Goosebumps (Series) by R.L. Stine A Wrinkle in Time by Madeleine L’Engle Go Ask Alice by Anonymous The Stupids (Series) by Harry Allard Blubber by Judy Blume To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee Flowers for Algernon by Daniel Keyes A Light in the Attic by Shel Silverstein Brave New World by Aldous Huxley Cujo by Stephen King James and the Giant Peach by Roald Dahl Ordinary People by Judith Guest Are You There, God? It’s Me, Margaret by Judy Blume Slaughterhouse-Five by Kurt Vonnegut Lord of the Flies by William Golding Native Son by Richard Wright The Adventures of Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain Where’s Waldo? by Martin Hanford How to Eat Fried Worms by Thomas Rockwell seems to me like i'm pretty bannable myself. and i'm disappointed that there are no chuck palahniuk's (sp) books on the list. Lullaby alone would fuck up some major kids, not to mention fight club and choke too recent and they weren't big huge books like Potter was...
NYU Posted September 25, 2003 Report Posted September 25, 2003 The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger Goosebumps (Series) by R.L. Stine The Great Gilly Hopkins by Katherine Paterson The Stupids (Series) by Harry Allard To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee The Outsiders by S.E. Hinton Cujo by Stephen King Ordinary People by Judith Guest Lord of the Flies by William Golding The Adventures of Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain Private Parts by Howard Stern Where’s Waldo? by Martin Hanford How to Eat Fried Worms by Thomas Rockwell I readed 15 books on that list. I feel highly edumacated right now. -And it's ridiculous that there are even talks about getting some of these books banned. Even looking past the fact that this is censorship and - in America - censorship is more often than not a bad thing.....some of these books are about 50 years old, and possibly a little older. Why are there still discussions about banning them ? If it hasn't happened by now, it's pretty much not going to happen, so the case should be fucking closed by now.
Ced Posted September 25, 2003 Report Posted September 25, 2003 some of these books are about 50 years old, and possibly a little older. Why are there still discussions about banning them ? Simple. Some people are stubborn, persistent bitches in getting what they want. Anywho, only 8 read books for me because I'm illiterate. Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger Beloved by Toni Morrison The Outsiders by S.E. Hinton The Pigman by Paul Zindel A Light in the Attic by Shel Silverstein Lord of the Flies by William Golding How to Eat Fried Worms by Thomas Rockwell
Anakin Flair Posted September 25, 2003 Report Posted September 25, 2003 Why bother banning half of these books when you can just go out and rent the movie instead? And I read a good 2/3's of these books when I was a kid, and most of them on the list are ridiculous. Fucking uptight assholes...
caboose Posted September 25, 2003 Report Posted September 25, 2003 Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck The Witches by Roald Dahl To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee Where’s Waldo? by Martin Hanford FUCK THEM UP THERE STUPID ASSES FOR BANNINGS THESE BOOKS.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now