# To burn, or not to burn a book. **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [June 18, 2005, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836 "2005-06-18T20:15:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![KGS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/90ced4/32.png) [@KGS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KGS)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2005, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836/21 "2005-06-19T02:00:45Z")
> [@FisherQueen](#): > > Wouldn’t you love to have a book arguing against interracial marriage printed in the 1950s? What an amusing little novelty it would be! My grandma found a reference book from 1910 in her father’s vast collection, it contained a section on the different human races and described whites as “the most intelligent and peaceful race.” We had a good laugh over how ridiculous that sounds today. ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2005, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836/22 "2005-06-19T02:07:37Z")
And let’s not forget that _Little Black Sambo_ has fallen into ill-repute because people think that it’s racist or that Bert and Ernie had to get seperate places to live because people thought that they were gay. ---
**Author:** ![ChoosyChipsAndCeilingWhacks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c77e96/32.png) [@ChoosyChipsAndCeilingWhacks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ChoosyChipsAndCeilingWhacks)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2005, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836/23 "2005-06-19T02:14:16Z")
> [@Tuckerfan](#): > > And let’s not forget that _Little Black Sambo_ has fallen into ill-repute because people think that it’s racist or that Bert and Ernie had to get seperate places to live because people thought that they were gay. Bert and Ernie aren’t gay? Dang…I always assumed… ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2005, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836/24 "2005-06-19T14:02:24Z")
Bert and Ernie don’t live together anymore? While we’re burning books, can we add Ayn Rand to the pyre? Not because she’s dangerous, but because her writing sucks. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2005, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836/25 "2005-06-19T16:15:17Z")
Write your own rebuttals, arguments, etc. in the margins, and _then_ donate it to the “book thing” or wherever! ---
**Author:** ![RandMcnally](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b782af/32.png) [@RandMcnally](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RandMcnally)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2005, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836/26 "2005-06-19T16:55:53Z")
I say burn the book for the simple fact that fire is cool. ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2005, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836/27 "2005-06-19T17:31:12Z")
> [@ChoosyChipsAndCeilingWhacks](#): > > Bert and Ernie aren’t gay? > > Dang…I always assumed… Well, if it makes you feel any better [Ernest and Bertram](http://film.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/Exclusive/0,4029,681812,00.html) are. ---
**Author:** ![elfbabe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b782af/32.png) [@elfbabe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elfbabe)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2005, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836/28 "2005-06-19T18:08:20Z")
I burned a book last weekend. It was Sue Grafton’s _M is for Malice_. See, we had this fire… and we were burnin’ stuff… for fun… and I had this book I’d fished out of a dumpster… and we thought it was kind of stupid… and you probably get the picture at this point. I just destroyed **Qadgop** ’s rep as a good parent, didn’t I? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2005, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836/29 "2005-06-19T18:47:03Z")
I’d find some good rebuttals to the sillier stuff from qualified authors and write those in the margins rebutting the errors, then give it to someone who needs to see it. (Sort of what **Thudlow** said, but I’ve seen your argumentation and I think you want someone better prepared to perform that service.) 😉 ---
**Author:** ![OtakuLoki](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ac8455/32.png) [@OtakuLoki](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OtakuLoki)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2005, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836/30 "2005-06-19T23:18:37Z")
I used to think like **Anaamika** and others do about the horror of burning books. Then I read 84 Charing Cross Road, where Helene Hanff writes, as an aside, that there’s nothing sacred about a **bad** book. As long as you’re only destroying your own personal copy of a book, do it any way that you feel is appropriate. As for recycling, my understanding is that the heavily acid laced paper in most paperback books is almost impossible to recycle - so I’m not sure that’s an actual option. If any Dopers can correct that impression, I’d appreciate it. ---
**Author:** ![Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/qadgop_the_mercotan/32/83_2.png) [@Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qadgop_the_Mercotan)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2005, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836/31 "2005-06-19T23:37:02Z")
When it came time to clear out items from my parents’ house after they had died, I was left trying to figure out to do with about 250 pounds of Readers Digest Condensed books dating back to the 1950’s. You remember condensed books? Cut out all the unnecessary stuff and reduce a 500 page book to a 90 page summary? Airport, War & Peace, Gone With the Wind, all in manageable bites. Recyclers didn’t want them due to type of binding they had, libraries and nursing homes didn’t want them, and it appeared I would have to pay to dispose them or sneak them a volume or two at a time into the garbage for the next 20 years. I chose to make a bonfire of them. They didn’t burn well, either. ---
**Author:** ![OtakuLoki](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ac8455/32.png) [@OtakuLoki](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OtakuLoki)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2005, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836/32 "2005-06-19T23:40:34Z")
> [@Qadgop the Mercotan](#): > > They didn’t burn well, either. :smack: Maybe they can be used constructively to make walls for do-it-yourself house additions? This sounds like a modern quest - finding something RD condensed books could be used for. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2005, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836/33 "2005-06-19T23:51:38Z")
1. I adopt **tomndebb** ’s commentary in its entirety. 2. If #1 does not move you… It’s your book. You own it. Burn it if it pleases you. ---
**Author:** ![Cheez\_Whia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/d26b3c/32.png) [@Cheez\_Whia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheez_Whia)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2005, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836/34 "2005-06-20T04:27:22Z")
IMO, forcing others to burn books is oppression. Burning a book that is your personal property is merely criticism. ---
**Author:** ![Sternvogel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bc79bd/32.png) [@Sternvogel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sternvogel)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2005, 6:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836/35 "2005-06-20T06:07:54Z")
> [@KGS](#): > > My grandma found a reference book from 1910 in her father’s vast collection, it contained a section on the different human races and described whites as “the most intelligent and peaceful race.” We had a good laugh over how ridiculous that sounds today. Similarly, I inherited a volume called _The Circle of Knowledge_ that had belonged to my paternal grandparents. In the chapter titled “Races and Peoples”, the subheadings include **THE CAUCASIAN THE REAL HISTORIC RACE** and **THE SUPREMACY OF THE ARYANS IN HISTORY**. Passing for anthropological insights are such gems as “The negro is a tireless talker and story-teller” and “[The Japanese] are deficient in moral earnestness and courage, which leads to corruption in social life and institutions.” The “Hebrews”, however, are given credit for “the highest capacity for poetry, letters, erudition of all kinds, philosophy, finance, music, and diplomacy.” As the Semitic (and Hamitic) peoples are Caucasian, they are members of “the only (race) whose history is important for us”, as it is the one “to which we ourselves belong”. Nevertheless, it is “the Aryan branch of the Caucasian family (that) presents us with the noblest pattern of that highest type.” The chapter dealing with the geological history of Earth also illustrates how different the state of advanced learning was less than a century ago. Evolution is accepted, but the age of the planet is believed to be about 100,000,000 years, with the Mesozoic Era estimated to have lasted for 9,000,000. Also, “\*t is believed that an island continent, Antarctica, surrounds the South Pole.” However, the world map depicts an “Antarctic Ocean” as occupying the entire surface from the Arctic Circle south. As a textbook, this volume would obviously be of little use today. As a historical curiosity, however, it is well worth preserving as a snapshot of what an educated person of its day was expected to “know”. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2005, 7:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836/36 "2005-06-20T07:25:25Z")
**Sternvogel** : What an amazing book. I use the term ‘amazing’ because it has no moral weight, much like books themselves: it’s simply an expression of how unusual the book is and how amazed modern readers would be in discovering it and its ideas. ‘Fantastic’ used to mean roughly the same thing, before it got the connotation of ‘something really _good_.’ I think it’s important to preserve books like that so we can keep reminding ourselves of the transience of _all_ fashions, especially moral fashions. Paul Graham has an insightful essay titled [“What You Can’t Say”](http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html) on precisely this subject. Even books that are full of wrongheaded, false, or otherwise potentially dangerous ideas can be enjoyed at that level. (Insert ‘All is Vanity’, ‘This Too Shall Pass’, ‘The Paths of Glory Lead but to the Grave’, etc. verbiage here. I’ve never once kept a skull on my desk. ;)) Back on topic, it is (usually) no crime or _faux pas_ to burn a book you own without any intent to intimidate someone. It can be a symbolic gesture of release, an act of hatred, or simply a utilitarian desire to get rid of a piece of trash. Observe the fire codes and do it in good health. The exception is collectable or unique books, in which case it is legal but immoral to burn them. It can also be quite stupid, since there are plenty of bibliophiles ready to pay top dollar for rare works. This will probably never really apply to modern mass-market paperbacks or hardcovers, unless they have been signed by the author or someone famous. If the book is old, it might be worth your time to do some research. Some have impugned your motives. I don’t think your motives have any relevance unless you intend to intimidate someone or otherwise impose your beliefs on someone else. Philosophically I’m a pragmatist, so I don’t put too much weight on motives either claimed or presumed. As a (minor) bibliophile, or one who appreciates books as physical artifacts in addition to all of their other assets, I am generally opposed to book burning. But it is not always wrong, and sometimes it can be the best option. ---
**Author:** ![OtakuLoki](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ac8455/32.png) [@OtakuLoki](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OtakuLoki)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2005, 8:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836/37 "2005-06-20T08:51:31Z")
**Sternvogel** , can I ask what year that book of your grandparents was printed? > [@Derleth](#): > > The exception is collectable or unique books, in which case it is legal but immoral to burn them. It can also be quite stupid, since there are plenty of bibliophiles ready to pay top dollar for rare works. This will probably never really apply to modern mass-market paperbacks or hardcovers, unless they have been signed by the author or someone famous. If the book is old, it might be worth your time to do some research. Just a minor disagreement: _some_ mass-market paperbacks can end up being pretty collectable. However they’re by far the exception. I know I made a handy profit on a first edition print of Larry Niven’s Ringworld. However, that was a matter of the first edition got released before someone noticed that the author, noted for relatively correct science in his SF, had the Earth rotating backwards. 2/3 of the modest print run were recalled and destroyed, and since then the book won major awards, and has been almost constantly in print. But, that is, admittedly, the exception to your general rule. The question then becomes what does one hold on to in hopes that it may become collectable. A few months ago there was a bit of a hoo-rah about one of the major computer component manufacturers offering approximately $10 K for a copy of an old and relatively obscure magazine where the company’s founder had written an article predicting the coming chip revolution. My point is that almost anything can be collected, and can be worth a lot of money to the right audience. The difficulty is that often we’re talking a small market, and/or one that is difficult to connect with. And of course, predicting what will pick up as a mass collectable is even harder to predict. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2005, 9:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836/38 "2005-06-20T09:09:13Z")
> [@OtakuLoki](#): > > However, that was a matter of the first edition got released before someone noticed that the author, noted for relatively correct science in his SF, had the Earth rotating backwards. “The sun rose red over the Pacific that day in L.A., and it was indeed a good time to take warning. Niven had taken up noir and now, nobody was safe.” > [@](#): > > A few months ago there was a bit of a hoo-rah about one of the major computer component manufacturers offering approximately $10 K for a copy of an old and relatively obscure magazine where the company’s founder had written an article predicting the coming chip revolution. Intel looking for the article where Moore made his famous prediction/rule of thumb now known as “Moore’s Law”, if I recall correctly. Libraries were quite put out by the vultures picking over their back issues of that magazine. And both of those are exceptions to my rule (The second one wasn’t mentioned by my rule, but it’s still an exception. ;)): The first is a rare case of foot-in-mouthism and the second is a publicity stunt that involved waving money at geeks willing to do all of the research required to claim it. ---
**Author:** ![Hypno-Toad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b2d939/32.png) [@Hypno-Toad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hypno-Toad)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2005, 12:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836/39 "2005-06-20T12:30:09Z")
> [@Cheez\_Whia](#): > > IMO, forcing others to burn books is oppression. Burning a book that is your personal property is merely criticism. Very true. Whereas I’m very much against the act of book burning, there is one key difference in Mr. Plaids account: he read the book before deciding to burn it. It makes all the difference between mindless censorship and a considered opinion. Besides, even if he burns it, he can’t unread it. The book has accomplished it’s mission. Burning it is somewhat moot. ---
**Author:** ![norinew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/eb9ed0/32.png) [@norinew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/norinew)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2005, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836/40 "2005-06-20T14:08:50Z")
> [@Scott Plaid](#): > > Are book simply sacred, in and of themselves? Anyone who’s ever read a Harlequin romance knows that they are not. :smack: 😛 (These smilies added at the request of my 5-year-old and have nothing to do with the actual post). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/to-burn-or-not-to-burn-a-book/308836.md?page=3)