PDA

View Full Version : Banned Books Week



Maksutov
2005-Sep-29, 05:00 AM
It's Banned Books Week (Sept. 24-Oct. 1). (http://www.infoplease.com/spot/bannedbookslist.html) I'm proud to say I've all of the books listed as "American Classics" and The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, as well as Brave New World, Flowers for Algernon, Slaughterhouse-Five, Carrie, Private Parts, Cujo, The Dead Zone, and a number of others. Anyone else have any of these dangerous books?


[edit/typo]

Gillianren
2005-Sep-29, 05:19 AM
on the 1990-2001 list, I've read numbers 1-14 (well, only one book from #10; I didn't like it much), 17, 18, 20-27, 29, 30, 32, 33, 35, 37, 38, 41, 43, 44, 46-48, 50, 51, 53, 55, 56, 59, 60, 62-68, 73-73, 77-80, 83, 84, 88-92, 94, 96, 98, and 100. I got college credit for 'em, too.

of the 2005 list: I've read half of #1 (as much as I could manage overnight), #2, #3, #5, #6, #8, and #9. I'm rather surprised good ol' Harry's not on it; maybe they've just given up counting him?

and believe me, that list is merely the tip of the iceberg. I've a copy of the 2000 Banned Books Yearbook, which lists nearly two thousand books that had been challenged or banned up to that point.

Astrobairn
2005-Sep-29, 11:14 AM
I can't think of any reason to challenge James and the Giant Peach.

N C More
2005-Sep-29, 11:17 AM
Well, it appears that I've read enough banned books to most likely be considered a "literary criminal" as well! We used to joke about the idea of the "thought police". Apparently, not all that "out there" of a concept.

N C More
2005-Sep-29, 11:21 AM
I can't think of any reason to challenge James and the Giant Peach.

It's a humongous peach...obviously some Freudian sexual connotation! Shame on them! ;)

MrClean
2005-Sep-29, 11:22 AM
I don't think I've read any of those.

Ate a few though.

Eroica
2005-Sep-29, 11:58 AM
Someone challenged To Kill A Mocking Bird! The mind boggles.

SciFi Chick
2005-Sep-29, 12:05 PM
Someone challenged To Kill A Mocking Bird! The mind boggles.

I feel the same way about The Outsiders and Ordinary People.

Moose
2005-Sep-29, 12:14 PM
I've read nowhere near enough of those. I think I have an unread* copy of Slaughterhouse-Five in a shelf somewhere. I think I'll dig it up once I finish rereading the Harry Potter series in a couple of weeks.

(* Picked up as many classics as I could carry the last time I'd been able to get out to the local SPCA book sale. A solid two shelves-full. Not done yet, and I need to find a replacement copy of Moby Dick. My soft-cover rescue copy disintegrated just after they'd set sail.)

A.DIM
2005-Sep-29, 12:25 PM
Many of those were required reading for English majors in my day for not only their literary merit but for the societal and cultural questions raised as to why they were banned.

Eta C
2005-Sep-29, 12:48 PM
Interesting list, some strange bedfellows there indeed. For example, I wouldn't consider Howard Stern's "Private Parts" up there with "To Kill a Mockingbird" as quality literature. That's no reason to ban it though.

There seem to be a few trends there.

1) Anything to do with sex, especially as it involves teenagers.
2) Books that treat homosexuality as normal.
3) Books that show children coping with or confronted by adult issues.
4) Books some find to be religiously offensive.
5) Classics that use language no longer deemed acceptable.

"Mockingbird" probably falls under 3. After all, it deals with race relations, rape, prejudice and is all told from a child's point of view. Twain's books fall into this case as well, although there the excuse of his use of "n..." is more readily accepted. Of course, that's the way people talked back then.

I find it somewhat ironic that "Catcher in the Rye" constantly falls on these lists, primarily for its language and the scene with the prostitute. The irony is that Holden himself would probably agree with the banning. One of the themes of the book is his desire to protect his younger sister, and all children, from the experiences he has gone through and to protect their innocence. That's what the parable referred to in the title is. He pictures children running through a field of rye toward a cliff they cannot see (adulthood). He is in the field as well trying to catch them before they fall off (grow up). Somehow those so keen on banning the book seem to miss the point.

Jim
2005-Sep-29, 12:56 PM
There are many strange reasons for people wanting to ban books. (Remember the M*A*S*H episode where they went to great lengthes to get the banned movie The Moon Is Blue thinking it would be racy? It was banned because it used the word "pregnant.")

It comes down to someone feeling his/her ox is getting gored, and a desire to impress his/her moral ideals on everyone else.

JessM
2005-Sep-29, 01:08 PM
88. Where’s Waldo? by Martin Hanford

O_o

Please tell me what on earth could be offensive about "Where's Waldo?"...

Swift
2005-Sep-29, 01:20 PM
I've read lots of them... just a couple of other thoughts.

47. "Flowers for Algernon" by Daniel Keyes - I love that book, it is so beautiful and sad, I can't imagine why you would ban it.

52. "Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley - I guess it is sort of appropriate and ironic.

I'm reminded of the Lee Hays' quote (The Weavers, folk singer who wrote a bunch of songs with Pete Seeger), talking about being blacklisted in the 50's...
"If it wasn't for the honor of it, I would just as soon skipped the whole thing"
(I'm paraphrasing from memory - couldn't Google the exact quote)

gethen
2005-Sep-29, 01:44 PM
What's disturbing is that some of those books are among the best children's literature--The Giver, for Pete's sake? And I have about 1/3 of them.

ToSeek
2005-Sep-29, 01:59 PM
I'm feeling my age - I've only read about 11 of them. But then most of them seem to have been written after I outgrew them.

OptimusShr
2005-Sep-29, 04:35 PM
from 1990-2001 list I've read:

3, 6, 12, 16, part of 22, 41, 56, 88.

Jim
2005-Sep-29, 05:00 PM
I'm reminded of the Lee Hays' quote (The Weavers, folk singer who wrote a bunch of songs with Pete Seeger), talking about being blacklisted in the 50's...
"If it wasn't for the honor of it, I would just as soon skipped the whole thing"
(I'm paraphrasing from memory - couldn't Google the exact quote)

Actually from Mark Twain, talking about a politician being tarred, feathered and ridden out of town on a rail.

Metricyard
2005-Sep-29, 05:57 PM
I'm curious, how many books that are banned get read because they're banned?

In other words, if the books weren't on the banned list, would they have been as popular or successful?

And I hope this doesn't end up in the banned posters thread.
__________________

peter eldergill
2005-Sep-29, 06:18 PM
I tried reading Brave New World and stopped half way through. I thought it was awful...don't really know why, I just could bring myself to read one more page

Pete

Monique
2005-Sep-29, 06:26 PM
I tried reading Brave New World and stopped half way through. I thought it was awful...don't really know why, I just could bring myself to read one more page

Pete
I believe is well written. Is also meant for awful. Is awful exam to human engineering.


I have question --

I read Flowers for Algernon for respect to dear friend. Why people ban it??

tjm220
2005-Sep-29, 07:55 PM
I've read #'s 5, 6, 7, 13, 22, 37, 41, 47, 51, 52, 55, 69, 70, 77, 83, 84.

TriangleMan
2005-Sep-29, 08:02 PM
Please tell me what on earth could be offensive about "Where's Waldo?"...
There is a woman sunbathing topless in one of the pictures.

TriangleMan
2005-Sep-29, 08:08 PM
I'm not a big fan of fiction so I've only read #6, 13, 41, 43, 55, 70, 83 & 88. Was surprised that many Stephen King books made it on the list but books with more "adult" themes (such as Heinlein's later works or the War against the Cthorr series) didn't. Weird. I guess prudes don't like sci-fi.

Monique
2005-Sep-29, 08:17 PM
There is a woman sunbathing topless in one of the pictures.
Shocking... :eek:

OK, we not discuss my beach attire here... ;)

publiusr
2005-Sep-29, 08:33 PM
I was kinda hoping the whole list would be those awful romance 'novels' --ugh! Seen one you've seen them all!

(uh-oh...here come the blue-hairs.)

I think the NASA chief banned number 33 on that list :)

Gemini
2005-Sep-29, 08:56 PM
Lol!

Dr Nigel
2005-Sep-29, 09:06 PM
Some of them are fairly obvious. Others less so. I've read numbers 7, 13, 41, 44, 52, 53 and 90, so not many of them at all.

I think it's pretty obvious why Little Black Sambo was banned (but I wonder if those who decided it should be banned have actually read it ...?). I cannot fathom why The Pigman might be banned - I read that at school as part of an English class.

Is that the same Judy Blume who wrote Tales of a Fourth Grade Nothing and Superfudge? Who has had four books banned?

I agree that Brave New World is a difficult read : I found it very depressing. I kind of gathered, however, that that is the whole point. I once tried to read Of Mice and Men, but couldn't really get past the opening scene.

Also, with regard to the "shocking" content of Where's Waldo?, although protecting children from sexually-themed material is a worthy goal, is there any point in trying to hide from them the fact that women have breasts?

Monique
2005-Sep-29, 09:23 PM
Also, with regard to the "shocking" content of Where's Waldo?, although protecting children from sexually-themed material is a worthy goal, is there any point in trying to hide from them the fact that women have breasts?
Americans worry much about protect children from sexual themes. Attitude more open here, children still grow up, have normal life. Attitude toward clothing on beach same. Life continue, I do not see harm.

Doodler
2005-Sep-29, 09:35 PM
Is that the same Judy Blume who wrote Tales of a Fourth Grade Nothing and Superfudge? Who has had four books banned?

That is indeed her. Tragically stupid.

To be honest, I'm surprised there aren't a few science fiction classics up there, and some new stuff. I'm utterly amazed Dune and its decendents aren't on the list, and I know I read them in high school.

publiusr
2005-Sep-29, 10:05 PM
I still don't see a listing of the Kitab Al Asif...

Van Rijn
2005-Sep-29, 10:52 PM
I've read lots of them... just a couple of other thoughts.

47. "Flowers for Algernon" by Daniel Keyes - I love that book, it is so beautiful and sad, I can't imagine why you would ban it.


I was wondering about that one too. It has been a very long time since I read it last, so I may have forgotten details, but the first time I read it was 6th or 7th grade. At that age, it wouldn't have taken much of anything to shock me, but I don't remember anything of note. By comparison, that was about the age that I started reading Heinlein's more adult books, and I remember that "Farnham's Freehold" was very shocking ... for things I probably wouldn't even notice today.

Perhaps it is the emotional impact? The story had an immense emotional impact on me in the first reading. It was quite painful.

Ilya
2005-Sep-30, 02:04 AM
To be honest, I'm surprised there aren't a few science fiction classics up there, and some new stuff. I'm utterly amazed Dune and its decendents aren't on the list, and I know I read them in high school.
I think people who ban books never read any science fiction.

I still don't see a listing of the Kitab Al Asif...
Anyone who tries to ban it, mysteriously disappears.

CalabashCorolla
2005-Sep-30, 02:24 AM
It's not surprising to see that America: The Book wound up on the banned list for 2005. I think the official reason, at least the one quoted by Wal-Mart, was the simulated Supreme Court Justice nudity, but the whole book is irksome to certain people, which is why I love it :) . John Grisham was on the Daily Show and congratulated Jon Stewart on the ban: "Oh, getting your book banned is great, the sales go right up!" Definitely one of the best books of 2004.

As for Harry Potter, I recently read an article on Snopes which pretty well sums up the staggering, willful ignorance of the woowoos who think that HP is driving kids towards Satanism. It is doubly funny for you Onion fans out there: http://www.snopes.com/humor/iftrue/potter.htm

TriangleMan
2005-Sep-30, 10:58 AM
Shocking... :eek:
OK, we not discuss my beach attire here... ;)
North America as a whole is more conservative than Europe when it comes to matters such as nudity. Recall that the Janet Jackson "wardrobe malfunction" caused millions to go into conniptions. Where I live attitudes are similar. Ladies wearing a bathing suit top away from the beach may be asked to cover-up by policemen.

TriangleMan
2005-Sep-30, 11:02 AM
As for Harry Potter, I recently read an article on Snopes which pretty well sums up the staggering, willful ignorance of the woowoos who think that HP is driving kids towards Satanism. It is doubly funny for you Onion fans out there: Link (http://www.snopes.com/humor/iftrue/potter.htm)

This quote from that snopes article is the best :D

If The Onion's parody has demonstrated anything, it's that we should be worrying about adults not being able to distinguish between fiction and reality. The kids themselves seem to have a pretty good grasp of it.

Monique
2005-Sep-30, 08:14 PM
[sigh] Many issues for worry. Waste time to blame books. :sad:

Gillianren
2005-Oct-01, 03:58 AM
Jim:

the word wasn't pregnant; it was "virgin." Hawkeye comments that everyone in the movie was one, remember?

James and the Giant Peach was banned because of the centipede's songs, wherein he mentions alcohol and tobacco, and because James isn't at all sorry that his aunts are dead. (of course, his aunts are evil, but that's not the point.)

I believe (I read it in college, and it's been a few years) Flowers for Algernon had sex in it. also, it's pretty depressing. someone tried to ban The Diary of Anne Frank for being "a real downer."

any other questions? I've studied all this, remember.

CalabashCorolla
2005-Oct-01, 04:33 AM
Jim:
James and the Giant Peach was banned because of the centipede's songs, wherein he mentions alcohol and tobacco, and because James isn't at all sorry that his aunts are dead. (of course, his aunts are evil, but that's not the point.)

It seems that the more conservative of the American reading public do not like Roald Dahl in general, but it mystifies me a little why James and the Giant Peach has been banned while Charlie and the Chocolate Factory has escaped unscathed. After all, the latter does contain a rather disturbing poem about a woman who chews gum so much that she eventually chews off her own tounge and ends up in an asylum. Not that I would feel uncomfortable reading this to my young niece and nephew (and it is one of my favorite stories, because of how dryly humorous it is), but it is a little strange how some books were banned for much less.

Also, I'm not sure I saw many fairy tales on the list. Disneyfied versions of stuff like Cinderella are mostly innocuous, I guess, but any child who has access to a thorough collection of Brothers Grimm can find content such as child abduction, dismemberment, cannibalism, incest, child abuse, murder, torture, and various other unpleasant acts. They are all framed within strict morality tales, of course, but not something one would want to relate to a young child right before bedtime. I guess this goes to show how violence - even in children's stories - is mostly condoned in America, yet sex, drugs, and anything else remotely controversial, no matter what the context, can end up getting a book banned.

Dr Nigel
2005-Oct-01, 11:50 AM
Calabash, that's a very good point. It strikes me as so hypocritical - that violence is seen as so normal (how many kids in the US grow up with guns in the house? I mean, guns, in a house where you raise your kids - what is that all about?), yet there is a very vocal portion of the population that objects to anything even remotely sexual in nature (such as the picture in Where's Waldo?, even though sunbathing topless is not actually a sexual act) in public media.

Gillianren
2005-Oct-02, 04:44 AM
ah, but they are banned/challenged. it's just that they're not banned/challenged enough to make the top 100. as I said, I've a book with roughly two thousand banned books listed in it. included are Little Red Riding Hood and half the collected works of Roald Dahl. those that aren't on it, I suspect, aren't because the sort of people who ban books haven't gotten to them yet or don't know they exist.

I mean, if those books were the only ones banned/challenged, there wouldn't be a top 100 list, now, would there?

CalabashCorolla
2005-Oct-02, 05:55 AM
Calabash, that's a very good point. It strikes me as so hypocritical - that violence is seen as so normal (how many kids in the US grow up with guns in the house? I mean, guns, in a house where you raise your kids - what is that all about?), yet there is a very vocal portion of the population that objects to anything even remotely sexual in nature (such as the picture in Where's Waldo?, even though sunbathing topless is not actually a sexual act) in public media.
The scariest part about all the hype over The Passion of the Christ last year was the seemingly huge number of parents who planned on taking their children to see the movie. Now, that movie was rated R for a reason - INCREDIBLY violent scenes of torture and crucifixion, some of the bloodiest I have seen outside of Quentin Tarantino movies. Yet, these parents felt somehow that a good way to educate their children on the teachings of Christ was for them to watch flesh-ripping scourgings and nails being pounded through human limbs. Never mind teaching their children about the importance of loving and caring for others...somehow it was suddenly OK for them to attend an R-rated movie because they NEEDED to witness Christ's suffering. Most puzzling of all, and I am not trying to generalize here, but I would wager that more than a few of these parents would agree with at least some of the submissions to the top 100 banned list.

Monique
2005-Oct-03, 04:40 PM
I am surprised American Gods by Neil Gaiman not in list.

Doodler
2005-Oct-03, 05:01 PM
The scariest part about all the hype over The Passion of the Christ last year was the seemingly huge number of parents who planned on taking their children to see the movie. Now, that movie was rated R for a reason - INCREDIBLY violent scenes of torture and crucifixion, some of the bloodiest I have seen outside of Quentin Tarantino movies. Yet, these parents felt somehow that a good way to educate their children on the teachings of Christ was for them to watch flesh-ripping scourgings and nails being pounded through human limbs. Never mind teaching their children about the importance of loving and caring for others...somehow it was suddenly OK for them to attend an R-rated movie because they NEEDED to witness Christ's suffering. Most puzzling of all, and I am not trying to generalize here, but I would wager that more than a few of these parents would agree with at least some of the submissions to the top 100 banned list.

You could write a book on hyprocritical practices of modern Christians, but the odds are the book would be on this list before it hit the printers...

Kemal
2005-Oct-03, 05:07 PM
I was expecting to see Hitman or The Turner Diaries on that list. Check out the Loompanics catalog if you want to see some really scary titles.

Monique
2005-Oct-03, 05:18 PM
You could write a book on hyprocritical practices of modern Christians, but the odds are the book would be on this list before it hit the printers...
Example: Easter stolen from pagan ancient fertility rite??

Easter Bunny legend perhaps come from ancient Celt culture. Celts revere "sacred hares". ;)

DodgerDean
2005-Oct-03, 07:09 PM
I don't see "Tom Sawyer" on the list, must have meant "Huck Finn"?

ToSeek
2005-Oct-03, 07:11 PM
I don't see "Tom Sawyer" on the list, must have meant "Huck Finn"?

They're both on there. Tom Sawyer is #84.

Doodler
2005-Oct-03, 07:14 PM
Example: Easter stolen from pagan ancient fertility rite??

Easter Bunny legend perhaps come from ancient Celt culture. Celts revere "sacred hares". ;)

Pagan fertility rite? Heh, kinda puts a new kink in the "hunt for eggs", doesn't it?

GDwarf
2005-Oct-03, 10:09 PM
Some of those seem rather odd to challenge,
Julie of the Wolves (Girl gets lost, is raised by wolves.)
A Wrinkle in Time
Tom Sawyer
Huckleberry Finn
Where's Waldo?!?!
The Giver, I cant' really see what's wrong with this one, it's anti-uniformity really, but hardly anything objectional in it.

Edit: I guess I can see why some of these were banned, but at the same time, are there people who just have nothing better to do and so go on book-banning sprees?

Gillianren
2005-Oct-03, 11:40 PM
I am surprised American Gods by Neil Gaiman not in list.

I assume book banners haven't heard of it. this, in my opinion, is not an unsafe assumption, given some of what I've read.

while specific fantasy titles are very seldom banned, I did talk to a kid while I was studying the subject who went to a Christian school wherein any book that mentioned magic was banned, which I could have a great deal of fun arguing with their administration, if I chose to get pedantic.

let me give you a couple of specific insights into the mentality of the sort of people who ban books. bear in mind, these are true stories.

number one, every now and again, The Chronicles of Narnia get cited of "anti-Christian themes," ie magic. now, I challenge anyone with half a brain to read the Chronicles and not find Christian imagery!

number two, there's a book, title of which I cannot remember, that was challenged in a school because someone in it chews gum.

number three, The Diary of Anne Frank. because it's a real downer.

do you guys really want me to keep going? (and remember, just because your book didn't make the top 100, it doesn't mean I can't cite a specific instance of it getting challenged or banned.)

aurora
2005-Oct-03, 11:55 PM
I agree that Brave New World is a difficult read : I found it very depressing. I kind of gathered, however, that that is the whole point.

Yes, indeed. It is a dystopia. From dictionary.com:


dys·to·pi·a ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ds-tp-)
n.
An imaginary place or state in which the condition of life is extremely bad, as from deprivation, oppression, or terror.
A work describing such a place or state: “dystopias such as Brave New World” (Times Literary Supplement).

So, not only is it one, it is sort of the poster child for such books.

Other books I would put in the genre include 1984 (George Orwell), Animal Farm (also George Orwell), Player Piano (Kurt Vonnegut) and Fahrenheit 451 (Ray Bradbury).

ngc3314
2005-Oct-04, 02:41 AM
It's Banned Books Week (Sept. 24-Oct. 1). (http://www.infoplease.com/spot/bannedbookslist.html) I'm proud to say I've all of the books listed as "American Classics" and The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, as well as Brave New World, Flowers for Algernon, Slaughterhouse-Five, Carrie, Private Parts, Cujo, The Dead Zone, and a number of others. Anyone else have any of these dangerous books?


[edit/typo]

As the link says, " According to the ALA, most challenges are made by parents, and most are unsuccessful." From what I've seen in local schools, parental challenges range from someone uncomfortable with books depicting, say, witches (in any fictional version), to those who simply feel that certain books are inappropriate for elementary-school libraries (a viewpoint with which I have more sympathy). As such, not all these challenges really qualify as attempts at book-banning.

But really - A Wrinkle in Time?? I was personally responsible for maybe a dozen of the times that was checked out of our school library, and was soooo happy when one of our sons wanted me to read it to him in his early years.

Gillianren
2005-Oct-04, 04:24 AM
actually, I'm pretty sure I found the exact page that made all the trouble for A Wrinkle in Time. (banned for promoting New Age Religion, a concept that didn't exist at the time it was written, in case anyone's curious.) Meg, Calvin, and Charles Wallace are talking to the witches about Warriors for the Light. now, Jesus is mentioned. however, Jesus is not referred to as being any better or any different than any of the others, including Euclid and Ghandi.

Eroica
2005-Oct-04, 11:16 AM
Celts revere "sacred hares". ;)We do? :surprised

ngc3314
2005-Oct-04, 11:27 AM
actually, I'm pretty sure I found the exact page that made all the trouble for A Wrinkle in Time. (banned for promoting New Age Religion, a concept that didn't exist at the time it was written, in case anyone's curious.) Meg, Calvin, and Charles Wallace are talking to the witches about Warriors for the Light. now, Jesus is mentioned. however, Jesus is not referred to as being any better or any different than any of the others, including Euclid and Ghandi.

Ahh. That would be written by the same Madeleine L'Engle who I find profiled in the book Christian Mythmakers? I guess this would be a complaint by the same folks who don't find Christian symbolism in the Narnia series. (However, lots of the ideas later billed as "New Age" weren't at all new when widely discussed in the 1960s...)

HenrikOlsen
2005-Oct-04, 12:08 PM
I've read #5, #7(all), #23, #47, #52, #53(first book), #69, #70, #77, #84, #90

I only have a few of these, reading the rest is due to growing up with parent who likes books and a couple of libraries.

Kesh
2005-Oct-04, 05:00 PM
I still need to read a few of those. I still can't quite figure out Cujo though. It's very violent, but no moreso than other books not on the list. I guess it was because of the ending (which I won't spoil here).

Dr Nigel
2005-Oct-04, 05:32 PM
We do? :surprised

Well, the hare was the symbol of the fertility goddess Eastre (Pronounced, as far as I can gather, "Ay-ah-struh"), and Eastre was a pre-Christian British deity, I guess it follows that the original celts would have held hares either sacred or with respect.

Dr Nigel
2005-Oct-04, 05:38 PM
Aurora, I've also read Animal Farm and Farenheit 451. They were depressing, too. The weird thing is, I read them at school as part of an English class. And here they are being taken out of school libraries as unsuitable for children. Maybe if our children developed a better, deeper understanding of their feelings and the human condition in general earlier on in life, things wouldn't be quite so screwed-up. Hey, I can dream, can't I?

On this topic, I once read a newspaper article under the headline "Satan's Care Bears Banned". There was a list that a parents' group had drawn up of influences that lead to Satanism, and the Care Bears were right up ther with heavy metal music, role-playing games such as Dungeons and Dragons, and black magic. It would be hilarious if not for the fact that some people take these thinghs so seriously.

Monique
2005-Oct-04, 06:01 PM
Celts revere "sacred hares".

We do? :surprised:



Well, the hare was the symbol of the fertility goddess Eastre (Pronounced, as far as I can gather, "Ay-ah-struh"), and Eastre was a pre-Christian British deity, I guess it follows that the original celts would have held hares either sacred or with respect.
I do not wish to cause argument. Quote from wiccaweb page for Eastre (http://www.wiccaweb.org.uk/eastre.html):



Eastre, also spelt Easter, Ostara and Oestre celebrated at the Vernal Equinox (first day of Spring), approx. 21st March.

The Goddess is in her aspect of mother to be. She is Eastre, the Teutonic Goddess of Fertility. Her symbol is the egg, symbolising fertility in nature and rebirth from the long winter months. The seeds are now sown, ready to grow and ripen. The Goddess is fertile, rich with promise and potential life. (It is from the word "oestre" that we get the word "oestrogen" - the female hormone).

To the Saxons she was Ostara, in myth she is said to have amused children by turning her bird into a rabbit, the rabbit then laid coloured eggs much to the delight of the children.

Some sources dispute existance for Ostara.

Saxons never worshipped a goddess named Ostara. Ostara was simply invented by an 8th century scholar named the Venerable Bede, apparently because he thought it was a nice story

Please notify me if quotes too big for reference.

Gillianren
2005-Oct-04, 06:05 PM
I still need to read a few of those. I still can't quite figure out Cujo though. It's very violent, but no moreso than other books not on the list. I guess it was because of the ending (which I won't spoil here).

again, other Stephen King books have been banned. my guess is, yes, it's the ending; however, it's also that people heard of it. you're not going to get a lot of people trying to ban Insomnia, simply because fewer people have read it. (and King is usually banned over language issues, with the violence being a secondary consideration.)

aurora
2005-Oct-04, 10:55 PM
On this topic, I once read a newspaper article under the headline "Satan's Care Bears Banned". There was a list that a parents' group had drawn up of influences that lead to Satanism, and the Care Bears were right up ther with heavy metal music, role-playing games such as Dungeons and Dragons, and black magic. It would be hilarious if not for the fact that some people take these thinghs so seriously.

I've always thought of Barney the Dinosaur as somewhat satanic, but that probably isn't what they meant. Not sure what the Care Bears did to concern someone.

Eta C
2005-Oct-05, 12:33 AM
Another possiblilty is that "Ostare" etc. are corruptions of Astarte, a very ancient Babylonian-Sumerian fertility goddess.

In Greek the word for the holiday is "Pascha" derived from "Pesach" the Hebrew word for Passover. In Orthodox (as opposed to fundamentalist) Christianity the date of Pascha is closely tied to that of Passover as the Last Supper is taken to be the Passover Seder. That's one of the reasons (the other being the last remnant of the Julian-Gregorian difference) why Eastern Orthodox Pascha fell a full month after the Western Christian Easter this year. Pascha must fall after Passover and Passover fell in late April this year. To that extent, the date of Easter/Pascha is not a simple copying of a pagan holiday (as the date of Christmas is) but rather is tied to the Jewish lunar calendar and its holidays. (This leaves open, of course, the possibility that Passover is simply a Jewish spring, fertility holiday)

Anyway, to get back to the banned book list did anyone else notice two that were missing? The Origin of Species and The Descent of Man. In fact, there's an almost total lack of science books (except for those related to sex education) on the current list. Given that the infamous "Index" was full of them (Copernicus, Galileo, et al.) that's at least a little progress. Although we should be concerned now, we really need to worry when Sagan's Cosmos shows up on one of these lists.

GDwarf
2005-Oct-05, 12:48 AM
I've always thought of Barney the Dinosaur as somewhat satanic, but that probably isn't what they meant. Not sure what the Care Bears did to concern someone.
The villain in CB is quite clearly some form of Demon/Wizard/Warlock, no doubt parents were scared that he was teaching their children sorcery (After all, he does cast evil spells :rolleyes: ) Many of the people who try and ban these books/shows seem to be unable to wrap their mind around the idea that everyone in them isn't supposed to be looked up to by the reader/watcher, they just assume that since they're in the book that the author must admire them, never mind that they're the hated and despised villain. This is shown by the attempted banning of To Kill a Mockingbird because it was a racist book. Never mind that anyone who reads the book can tell that the author is most defiantly anti-racist, simply the fact that a black man is killed for a crime he didn't commit is enough for people to cry 'RACISM'.

Ilya
2005-Oct-05, 02:26 AM
It's not surprising to see that America: The Book wound up on the banned list for 2005. I think the official reason, at least the one quoted by Wal-Mart, was the simulated Supreme Court Justice nudity, but the whole book is irksome to certain people, which is why I love it :) . John Grisham was on the Daily Show and congratulated Jon Stewart on the ban: "Oh, getting your book banned is great, the sales go right up!"
Which demonstrates that in a free democratic society all attempts at censorship are counterproductive to the point of being laughable.

Even an authoritarian society which allowes private enterprise has a hard time with censorship. Inquisition or Tsarist Russia had a lot more resources to suppress undesirable books than American libraries do, and still could not do it very well.

Effective censorship is possible only in a totalitarian state which controls all the economy, including all means of publishing, such as Soviet Union was. And it censored books not by banning them after the fact, but by not publishing them in the first place.

Halcyon Dayz
2005-Oct-05, 08:08 AM
And even they couldn't stop the underground press. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samizdat)

Fram
2005-Oct-05, 08:08 AM
Not only the Care Bears were accused of Satanism, but the Smurfs as well (together with Communism).

ToSeek
2005-Oct-05, 01:40 PM
And don't forget Tinky Winky, the gay teletubby.

Moose
2005-Oct-05, 01:51 PM
And don't forget Tinky Winky, the gay teletubby.

Tinky Winky's okay, but the Flaming Baby is evil. My evidence: while flipping channels, I once saw the FB crack up laughing at a flash-flooded gulley where bunnies had been hopping about only moments before. The bunnies never surfaced. Evil EVIL Flaming Baby! Meh.

Dr Nigel
2005-Oct-05, 06:41 PM
And don't forget Tinky Winky, the gay teletubby.

So, are you trying to say that Tinky Winky is a gay Satanist, or that someone objected to the depiction of a gay character in a programme for young children?

Or is it just that someone projected their stereotype of gay behaviour onto Tinky Winky and assumed he was gay without actually bothering to ask him?

ToSeek
2005-Oct-05, 06:47 PM
So, are you trying to say that Tinky Winky is a gay Satanist, or that someone objected to the depiction of a gay character in a programme for young children?

Or is it just that someone projected their stereotype of gay behaviour onto Tinky Winky and assumed he was gay without actually bothering to ask him?

Not me: (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/276677.stm)


The innocent world of the Teletubbies is under attack from America's religious right.

The Reverend Jerry Falwell, a former spokesman for America's Moral Majority, has denounced the BBC TV children's show. He says it does not provide a good role model for children because Tinky Winky is gay.

Moose
2005-Oct-05, 07:01 PM
The God and Devil Show* had a pretty good take on this.


I did NOT call and tell you the purple teletubby was gay. NO Jerry! That was Todd! Todd Mahoney, the veteranarian. He said "your turtle's shell and tummy are okay", you deaf old weiner!

(* The God and Devil Show is most definitely NOT safe for work, so I won't link to it here. It comes up as the top four (unsponsored) links in google, so it's not hard to find for the curious. Mods, let me know if the quoted weak adhom is going to be a problem, and I'll snip it.)

Dr Nigel
2005-Oct-07, 07:41 AM
To Seek, I followed your link. My word, but I had no idea The Teletubbies were so subversive (is the irony too heavy?).

There's no alternative - they have to join Satan's Care Bears on the banned list.