(With apologies to pkbites.) (I’d make a joke about how this thread is only directed to book owners, but I don’t want it to be seen as an insult to the people in the other thread.)
Anyway, within living memory we had a situation in which certain books were simply forbidden in the U.S. Not banned in the wussy “they wouldn’t put The Wizard of Oz in the school library” sense. I mean in the “I faced criminal charges for bringing a copy of Lady Chatterley’s Lover into the U.S.” sense. (I will admit, I don’t know what the criminal penalties were, but so far as I know it was impossible to legally obtain copies of certain classics in the U.S. during the 1960’s.)
So, given that it’s our responsibility to vote for candidates who will preserve the First Amendment, let’s talk about some questions:
What is the likelihood that certain books will be banned again? On the one hand, book-banning has such a stigma that it’s hard to imagine any US politician getting away with it. On the other hand, in Oklahoma City the police apparently went around confiscating copies of the movie “The Tin Drum” from anyone who had rented it, on the grounds that it was child pornography. (Cite? Soitanly!)
If that can happen, then you can imagine some pious nincompoop deciding to ban it completely, especially given the rising tide of “But what about the children?!?” hysteria which is being used to justify various forms of Internet censorship. (Maybe my memory is playing tricks on me, but I could have sworn that I heard someone saying that we needed to make Playboy’s website illegal in order to protect children from pedophiles.) And if they can round up the movie, why not round up the book? And if they can round up The Tin Drum, how can Naked Lunch have a snowball’s chance in hell of escaping the censors?
“(Diana) is forbidden to have contact with children. And he must submit to unannounced searches to ensure he is drawing nothing unacceptable.” That’s right- not only can he not distribute his work, they search his journal for evidence of thoughtcrime.
What do we do if these books are banned, other than agitate for the First Amendment? Memorize them, like the folks in Fahrenheit 451? Is it plausible that within our lifetimes people could be jailed for being able to recite a banned book? (Normally I’d find that implausible, but remember, Diana is in a situation where he can basically be jailed for nothing more than thoughtcrime right now.) Could books be encoded using steganography? (It would be perversely amusing if Naked Lunch were to be smuggled around, encoded into photographs of hardcore pornography…) What about the rumblings about the US making it illegal to have encoded messages without being willing to hand it the key?
Well, me and Montag would probably set up an elaborate plot in which he is to memorize the Book of Ecclesiastes, so that its literary magic is not completely lost to mankind.
The ATF has been harassing John Ross and his ex-wife, and threatening gunshow vendors who sell his book, Unintended Consequences.
I believe Paladin Press has also stopped publishing some titles due to threats.
Steganography is a good thing, and steganographic file systems can still protect you if you have to hand over a key.
If any books are going to be banned again, it’ll be the left doing the banning. Books endorsing or even depicting racism, ‘hate’ books against women or minorities, books describing how to make weapons, that sort of stuff.
I’m not as worried about banning books as banning stuff in newpapers, magazines and TV. Under the Campaign Finance legislation passed by the Senate, organizations like Planned Parenthood would have their political advertisements legally banned for a certain period before each election.
I know of a certain book that contains a scene in which a weary traveler is promised safe housing for the night. When local ruffians lay siege to the hosts home intent on anally raping the traveler, the beleaguered host takes his promise of safe housing seriously enough to offer his virgin daughter to the crowd for their sexual amusement. To the relief of the young girl, the crowd declines, but does take possession of the traveler’s lady friend who they rape, torture, and murder. A sick tale of depraved cruelty, but not one our book-hating friends will ever suggest be banned.
I don’t believe it need be that difficult to distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable material. As long as no living person is hurt (eg a photo essay of pedophilia), then there should be not reason to disallow it. Who wants to make the sticky (and subjective) distinction between worthwhile literature and obscenity? This is not to say that some material doesn’t contain mature content not meant for minors, but that can be dealt with by limiting distribution and access.
I have been a book trader and collector for over 15 years. I have seen books come and go into and out of being banned. I have seen parts of the ‘Bible Belt’ in the United States ban such books as Huck Finn, The Catcher in the Rye, The Scarlet Letter. And more recently I have seen books like the Left Behind Series and Harry Potter being banned. I mean give me a F**KING break. ‘Some’ of these are Classics, and how could anyone in their right mind want to ban something like the opinion of another human being? This is a Rhetorical question but I think the point is there.
Personally, I think they should rethink what they are banning and look more towards the ‘yuck literature’ as I like to call it. Like Tom Clancy, who outlines how to be a terrorist, and how to go about the tactical take over of Governments. What to do and what not to do… Well that is a little extreme. Any way good thread, and I hope to write more but I have to get outa here.
Whoa. It wasn’t the ‘bible belt’ banning Huck Finn. It was politically-correct school districts who objected to its depiction of racism. Let’s not blame the Christians for everything, okay?
There already is one category of book that is not only banned, but posession of such a book can get you thrown in jail for a long time. ‘Child Pornography’. And I’m not just talking about photos of children engaged in sex acts (which should be banned), but stories, diaries, animations, drawings, etc. Anything which depicts children in a lurid way.
There was a man here in Canada convicted under child porn laws and sentenced to jail because he drew cartoons showing children engaged in sexual behaviour. In another case, a person was charged under child porn laws by photographing adults having sex, but dressed as children.
Oh, and the scarlet letter is back. In Texas, a judge has been requiring that sex offenders put signs on their lawn saying, “Warning! This is the home of a sex offender.” They also have to put bumper stickers on their car, and carry a portable sign to stick in the window of a vehicle they are riding in if it isn’t their own.
Don’t get me wrong - I think child porn is evil, and as the parent of a young daughter I’m terrified at the thought of my daughter running into one of these creeps. But as a civil libertarian, I just can’t condone these laws, no matter how much I may sympathize with the cause. We have simply gone too far.
I hate the stupidity of the left, I hate the stupidity of the right, but I really hate the idea that only one side or the other is capable of stupidity-
The right remains just as capable of banning books for their favorite reasons (Sex. Drugs. Rock and Roll.) as the left is for theirs.
I don’t care if they come for my copy of “Lolita” or my copy of “The Turner Diaries”, my Bible or my “Satanic Bible”, “The Communist Manifesto”, “Mein Kamph”, Robert Mapplethorpe, Andrea Dowrkin- they’re not getting 'em.
Which rather begs the question (wait for it) - “What is obscene?”
Any of the stuff I mentioned above? “The Story of O”? Jock Sturges? Sally Mann? (To repeat) “The Turner Diaries”? A very obscene book I don’t want banned. It’s our responibilty as voters to elect candidates who are very very careful about what they are willing to deem legally obscene.
Actually Waverly was referring to the story of an unnamed Levite in Judges, chapters 19 through 21, which is similar to, but even more gruesome than, the more famous story of Lot in Genesis 19:1-11.
P.S. Whooooosh!
P.P.S. And I detest censorship done in the name of whatever ideology.
"They’ll take my books when they pry them from my cold, dead hand."
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act http://www.educause.edu/issues/dmca.html makes it a crime to publish certain types of information that might harm corporate or national interests.
Discussing or publishing information that might possibly be used to circumvent someone’s electronic security systems can get you a jail term.
Sure, nobody but geeks cares about this stuff anyway, but that doesn’t make the rose smell any sweeter.
Sam
-The last time I checked no one had accused ADOBE and friends of being leftist organizations. Has something changed recently ? There’s lots of room for abuse here from all sides of the political spectrum.
No, the story is from Judges 19 and is about an unnamed Levite taken in by an unnamed host near mount Ephraim. I forgot to mention that the woman was later cut into 12 pieces. Lot [Genisis 19] offered two of his daughters to a group of rapists [thanks dad!] in an effort to protect two angels of the lord. Very similar stories. Both men are portrayed as righteous… how’s that for creepy?
I didn’t mean to hijack, just give an example of the hypocrisy often involved with book banning; and yes, ultra-PC-liberals are no better then uber-conservatives when it comes to decrying literature.
Sorry, I wasn’t trying to just single out the left. I was rsponding to one of the earlier questions which asked for the most likely form for book bannings. I don’t rule out the possibility of the far right or the Bible Belt doing the same thing.
Enemies of liberty cross all party lines. As do the defenders of liberty. The ACLU (which I heartily support) is generally seen as a ‘leftist’ organization. On the other hand, the Cato Institute (which I also heartily support) is seen as a right-wing institute. But on matters of civil liberty, they tend to march together.
