Red Bear, Red Bear, What Do You See?

What I think is interesting in this case of censoring school board mistaken identity is that at least this particular article seems to think it’s natural that, if the same Bill Martin who wrote BROWN BEAR… had also written a book for adults called ETHICAL MARXISM, then it would be just fine to keep his well-loved (I haven’t read it) kids’ book out of the curriculum.

Whereas historically, as we now know from Julia Mickenberg, during McCarthyism, children’s publishing (because it was so trivialized) was one of the few places that blacklisted authors could still find work. Which is one reason why it became a relatively progressive industry, with, for example, books about racism and slavery — albeit ones that might strike us as dated or inadequate now — in the early ’60s, while the Civil Rights Movement was still in a pretty early stage of its spread North.

When I say relatively progressive, of course, we know to take that with a grain of salt. (By the way, a post by Editorial Anonymous — which makes a great second point about how having ignorantly non-racist intentions does not constitute a Get Out of Accusations of Racism Free card — is sparking an interesting discussion about the obligations of authors, and when pragmatic professionalism becomes opportunist careerism.)

But back to that Dallas News article… the other thing I find hilarious about it is that the author mentions that one of the school board members orchestrating the censorship of BROWN BEAR… is just plain mad that there are so many books being approved for the curriculum. This is mentioned almost as though it partially excuses his idiocy — see, it wasn’t about this book; he doesn’t want teachers to be able to choose any book for their classrooms!

West Bend, Wisc. goes ’round the bend on censorship

Now, if we were talking about the trauma inflicted by people talking too loudly on their cell phones on the bus, the "burning shit up" treatment might be one I'd be behind. Photo from http://www.flickr.com/photos/ender/517900257/

Thanks to blog reader (and off-blog friend, game-night hosting and chicken-raising extraordinaire) Kristy for pointing me to this article on a battle to remove “pornographic” (largely, LGBT-positive) books from the public library’s YA section.

Apparently learning from the U.S. corporate press’s working definition of “balance” (see Glenn Greenwald making this point on torture), the original couple calling for censorship is also claiming that the library needs to at least stock some materials by “ex-gays” in the YA section.

The efforts of the censors have now inspired a separate group of old men in Milwaukee to file a lawsuit calling for the books to be (what else?) burned. I mean, you have to feel sympathy for these guys, as evidently their “mental and emotional well-being” has been harmed by the books being stocked in a place where teenagers can find them. Insert your own joke about these dudes’ mental and emotional well-being here: ____________________.

Here’s me raising my glass to the West Bend librarians for standing their ground, and to West Bend citizen and mom Maria Hanahan, organizing the campaign against the censors. We can only hope that the publicity helps some of the books in question… much as I personally purchased GEOGRAPHY CLUB this morning in solidarity with its earlier censorship fight in one of my state’s libraries (and because I tend to trust Jennifer Hubbard‘s recommendations).

Facebook group: Hey Amazon, stop censoring LGBT books!

I made a Facebook group about the new Amazon policy of denying sales ranks to LGBT-themed books.

Tell your friends.

Outrageous.

Amazon decides LGBT books such as the picture book HEATHER HAS TWO MOMMIES are “too adult” for inclusion in its sales ranks.

Smart Bitches Trashy Books responds. (HT: ReviewerX)

If you Twitter (I don’t), read #amazonfail — apparently the most-searched Twitter trend within hours of Amazon making the change today. Author Maureen Johnson has some good tweets up on her blog, which is now in our blogroll.

This is not the first crazy/horrible Amazon corporate decision — they’ve long been censoring books critical of Scientology, for example — but it is possibly the most stupid. Haven’t they heard? There’s a new gay rights movement.

If anyone’s got updates (or other good parodies/responses to Amazon), please share!

UPDATE: Good blog coverage; you can read #amazonfail even without a Twitter account; and a petition to sign.

UPDATE #2: Jezebel says it all in pictures.

A People’s History of Censorship in the United States would be a long, long book

What I find most hilarious/disturbing about this attempt to remove from the Stafford County (Virginia) Advanced Placement US History reading list Howard Zinn’s much-loved A PEOPLE’S HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES is that the adult who wants the book removed got upset after seeing teenagers voluntarily reading this history book at the town’s public pool. Um…seriously?

Of course, the one actual teenager quoted loved the book. As have many of us loved it over the years — in all my years of asking other people how they became political, it’s certainly the single most-cited book — because it is a book, in Matt Damon’s words, that “will knock you on your ass.”

Which is more or less what I think needs to happen to some people in Stafford County.

UPDATED to add: If you want to stick it to the censors… then first of all, if you haven’t read Zinn’s book, you definitely should! If you have, you might consider reading the primary-source follow-up, VOICES OF A PEOPLE’S HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES, which was co-edited by Zinn and my friend Anthony Arnove. I think it’s a lot of fun to flip through (and even better if you happen to have the chance to see it performed live).  I much enjoyed this recent speech by Zinn. Finally, Zinn is coming to Madison this May, so if you happen to live in my town, we can go see the man in the flesh.

As if I didn’t already have enough things to rant about today

A federal appeals court upheld the Miami-Dade School Board’s ban on the children’s book A VISIT TO CUBA.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/11/opinion/11wed3.html?ref=opinion

What gets me is that the supposed rationale for the ban is “inaccuracies and omissions” in the book – its portrayal of life under Castro is too positive. Excuse me while I go file lawsuits against every US history book used in every school district in the country.