Banned Children's Books

3/14/2018

I like to read.  Now, that's not completely true, I love to read.  I generally avoid what I consider "heavy" books, books that require a lot of thinking.  I enjoy "pleasant" reads, where nothing really bad happens to anyone.  Oh, there maybe a murder, but it's a pleasant murder, if there's such a thing.  No gore, no blood, just a dead body shows up. and the murder is most likely, solved by a nosy neighbor.  Perfecto.

Today's paper has an article where the ALA (American Library Association), is considering the renaming of the Wilder Award.  Think "Little House on the Prairie").  Why, on earth would anyone even think of renaming the award?  Apparently, the ALA believes that Wilder's books reflect racism and anti-Native American sentiments.  Really?  I read Wilder's books, including my favorite "Little House on the Prairie.  Perhaps, I had blinders on when I read her books, because all I was reading, was a good story.  I also remember watching the television show, where Michael Langdon (sp) had a primary role.

So, after reading the nonsense in the paper, I decided to check out a few other children's books, and I was truly shocked by some of the books, that are now considered "banned" books.  Winners of this "high" honor include:

"Where is Waldo" because there is a topless beachgoer.
"Winnie the Poo" because talking animals are considered to be ungodly.
"Anne Frank" for sexual and homosexual content.
"Wizard of Oz" for ungodly influence for depicting women in strong leadership roles.
And last, as only an example of ridiculousness, is "Merriam Webster Collegiate Dictionary" for its definition of oral sex.

As an adult, I have read most of these, as well as other banned books, enjoying their stories. And, I've read some of these books to my sons and my grandson.  It could be, that I wasn't looking or thinking hard enough, to see that talking animals are ungodly.  This absolutely makes no sense to me.  As far as I'm concerned, "Winnie the Poo" for example, is just a story about a bear and his rabbit friend.  I actually like that animals talk, and if any of these stories, think "Wizard of Oz", have somehow got a hidden agenda, then fool be me.  Those in power of banning books, are truly looking to find "bad" things in books.  I read for pleasure, and spend no amount of my time, thinking about things, for example, that talking animals are ungodly.  I do believe those folks at the ALA, are taking their job a little too seriously.  These are books, for heaven's sake, and for the most part, children's books at that.  To be sure, I'm not going to go upstairs and start reading Benjamin's books, that he keeps here, to make sure that all of those books are "G" rated.

There is even a "banned books week".  Who even knew there was such a thing? Needless to say, yours truly will not even give a thought or a hoot to such a silly, my opinion only, week.

People, keep reading.  Books can take you anywhere, any time period, and/or any character.  Even though I read most books on my Kindle, every now and then, I'll pick up an actual book.  I still love the feel of a book, but poor eyesight, makes reading anything but large print books, a challenge.

P