Banned books? Hardly

Another Banned Books Week (Sept. 18-24) has come and gone with another ho-hum from me. I am a strong opponent of banning books. So why don't I get more excited about Banned Books Week? Two reasons.

1. The week has come to be more about politics and social posturing than either literature or censorship.

Most of the books at the top of this year's list have to do with LBGT-etc. These include Gender Queer, Lawn Boy, All Boys Aren't Blue and other books of this sort aimed primarily at children and teenagers. Books from the other side of the political and social spectrum are even more likely to be kept out of classrooms and school libraries, but they are ignored. Even some Dr. Seuss books have become controversial. No mention of that here.

2. What they call "banned books" aren't really banned. They are readily available, including in many classrooms and school libraries. Rather they are termed banned because many parents and educators object to their presence in classrooms and libraries. Many people consider such books little more than child pornography, or perhaps pornography for children. They probably would object to books with strong heterosexual content, as well.

Just as authors should be free to write any books they choose and publishers should be free to publish any books they choose, so should parents be free to choose which books they object to in their children's schools. And so should school boards and librarians be free to make decisions about which books to include and which to exclude. Excluding a certain book is not censorship; it is just a decision they are entitled, even required, to make. It's their job. Not every book can be taught in every classroom or shelved in every library.

And if a book like Gender Queer is taken off a school reading list, it remains readily available in bookstores. lt is hardly banned, any more than the Bible is banned just because a public school teacher is forbidden to teach it.