Who has the balls?
To publish a children’s book that incorporates the word “scrotum”?
Susan Patron, that’s who. You may recall that Ms. Patron won a the Newberry Award for her coming of age novel, The Higher Power of Lucky.
Earlier this year, Ms. Patron had this to say in response to criticisms about her book:
“I wrote The Higher Power of Lucky for the 10-year-old who lives inside me. That girl was curious about everything and sometimes went to great lengths to get information about the world and how it works.
In writing The Higher Power of Lucky, I was interested in creating authentic characters who would ring true for readers. I wanted readers to trust that I respect them and would not talk down to them. Like the child-version of myself, Lucky eavesdrops on adult conversations; she is searching for a form of spirituality, a higher power.
I was shocked and horrified to read that some school librarians, teachers, and media specialists are choosing not to include the 2007 Newbery Medal winner in their collections because they fear parental objections to the word scrotum, or because they are uncomfortable with the word themselves. If I were a parent of a middle-grade child, I would want to make decisions about my child’s reading myself—I’d be appalled that my school librarian had decided to take on the role of censor and deny my child access to a major award-winning book. And if I were a 10-year-old and learned that adults were worried that the current Newbery book was not appropriate for me, I’d figure out a way to get my mitts on it anyway, its allure intensified by the exciting forbidden-ness—by the unexpressed but obvious fear on the part of these adults.
There’s a direct correlation between fear of naming body parts and kids’ interest in finding out about them. To figure out the world, children have to unscramble a mishmash of secrets, clues, overheard tidbits, half-truths, out-of-context information, and their own observations. The lucky ones discover the Robie Harris/Michael Emberley books, and/or they have access to parents or teachers or librarians who will answer their questions and define unknown words. The child who learns the definition of scrotum and other body parts in this way, through reading and talking with responsible adults, is armed with, for one thing, an alternative to finding answers through first-hand experience.
As regards 12-step programs, it seems there are also literature gatekeepers who are frightened that children may learn that these recovery programs exist.Do they think children are unaware that drug/alcohol/tobacco/gambling/overeating addictions are rampant in the U.S.? Many children, of course, know about addictions first-hand, through affected family members. Isn’t it useful for them to know that some adults choose recovery through a 12-step program? Isn’t it one of the truly heartening aspects of our culture that human beings can be this brave?”
I’ve been thinking about this quite a bit - especially in light of the Gossip Girl series that I mentioned earlier. Books - unlike television - are a little more difficult for parents to monitor. Should that responsibility fall to public and school librarians?
I know that, as a kid, I checked Jackie Collins and Danielle Steel (I was a child of the 80s) books out of the library without my mom knowing - or maybe she did know and chose to not make a big deal of it, who knows? And I didn’t implode into a million little pieces from reading them. I didn’t become trampy or run out and try drugs. In fact, I stayed a pretty good kid; trashy novels were probably my biggest vice.
As a parent, I will say that I don’t want my kids to be exposed to a lot of things before they have to be. In this day and age, information comes at our kids from all kinds of sources, fast and furious. And my gut instinct is to protect those children. But as a reader (and a writer), I personally don’t believe that censorship of a child’s reading material should be the job of anyone else but the child’s parent.
What do you think?
children, censorship, book, The Higher Power of Lucky, library, Susan Patron, Newberry Award
August 13th, 2007 at 8:20 am
I don’t think this is protecting children, though. I think it is promoting ignorance and body shame. Scrotum is an organ in the reproductive system, but it is also just a body part. If we quit “mystifying” these things and making them so forbidden, I think they’d be less of an issue.
I prefer protecting my children by teaching them to listen to their guts, look both ways before crossing the street, and so forth.
Parents ought to do their own censorship; I don’t appreciate librarians doing it for me.
If you (general) feel differently than me, fair enough…just don’t check out the book.
It’s that easy.
Julie, Your About Houston, Tx writer
August 13th, 2007 at 8:33 am
Quote: “If I were a parent of a middle-grade child, I would want to make decisions about my child’s reading myself—I’d be appalled that my school librarian had decided to take on the role of censor and deny my child access to a major award-winning book.” BRAVO!
Librarians and school principals need to grow a backbone. It is up to the parent to decide what is and is not appropriate reading for their child, not them. And if parents don’t like a book, they need to stop making such a stink about it. Instead, they need to mind their manners, use their indoor voices, be polite and say “I don’t think this is right for my child.”
Hover Mothers and Helicopter Dads are so obnoxious in ranting about scrotums and Harry Potter’s use of magic, for example, that I can understand that librarians are tired of dealing with them. But “obnoxious parent fatigue” is no excuse for them to self-censor their collections and ordering habits.
The whole thing is very sad and I would encourage everyone from parents and teachers to librarians and book bloggers/writers to participate in the American Library Association’s banned book week. I do it over at A Readable Feast every year, and it’s a lot of fun.
August 13th, 2007 at 8:59 am
Anne,
Do you have the link to the banned book week?
August 13th, 2007 at 9:30 am
[...] This isn’t a purely religious question, but how do you feel about the censoring of some books? Is that the librarian’s job of the parent’s job? And, should you (or anyone) stop your child from reading something that goes against your own religious morals/values? At Tiny Treasures, Kelly asks us - Who has balls? [...]
August 13th, 2007 at 9:43 am
Censorship is the responsibility of parents. I was incensed a couple of years ago when my son’s librarian would not let him check out a 7th grade level book on BASKETBALL because he was in the third grade. He had a tested 6th grade reading level, and the 3rd grade books bored him. The next day I was in her office informing her that if anyone was going to censor my child’s reading it would be me, and that any book in that elementary school library was open game for him. I do not want anyone else making decisions on what my child can and cannot learn about.
August 13th, 2007 at 1:01 pm
I went to a Catholic private school and we had mandatory summer reading. One summer a mother thought some of the books were inappropriate. I can’t rememeber what they were ’cause I didn’t know what was going on at the time. However, I remember my family thinking it was lame and not supporting it. I mean if the Catholic school thought it was okay - geez, it must have already been pretty safe. For the most part, it’s probably just good if kids are reading in general. Minus those how to make a bomb books.
August 13th, 2007 at 1:39 pm
For me, it would depend on the way the word was used, and I would suspect that it was used appropriately if it was given the Newberry Medal. I, too, believe it’s the parent’s responsibility to preview what their children are reading regardless of where they obtain their reading material.
August 14th, 2007 at 11:53 am
[...] you want your librarian to be the designated “censor” for what award winning books are in your child’s school library? What if it was a Newbery [...]
August 14th, 2007 at 12:23 pm
I don’t believe in censorship and I know that children are curious and they will find a way to learn what they want to know. Finding answers in books and reading empowers them to know how to learn and grow with life. I read this book and I think it is a shame that librarians chose to censor it for that perceived infraction. Hiding things from children just makes them believe that it really is a bad thing and “scrotum” is actually the proper term for what it is.
August 14th, 2007 at 1:18 pm
[...] Higher Power of Lucky August 14th, 2007 by Kelly Following up on yesterday’s post about The Higher Power of Lucky, and the continued controversy surrounding the book, here is a clip [...]
August 14th, 2007 at 6:16 pm
This isn’t news it’s olds! All of this was in the papers back in February. The New York Times reported on this (Feb 18th, 2007) and made a big stink that was grossly overstated. No, we shouldn’t censor–but the fact is, in a limited budget (my school library gets $5/student to spend on books each year) we have to be choosy. The elementary librarian who said she wouldn’t be buying it for her school was in a primary school PK-3rd grade.
Did I buy the book for my (middle school) library? Yes. Do I think kids will read it? No, the cover is unappealing and the main character is 10–too babyish for my students. Even so, it’s a Newbery winner and should be in my library, so I spent three kids worth of book money to put it in my library.
Librarians are always deciding what books to put in their collection and what to leave out. Is it censorship if I don’t purchase Cosmopolitan or Glamour magazines? We call it selection, but it’s informed based on professional reviews of titles, our knowledge of our students, our community, and our parents. Since I’ve been a librarian, I’ve dealt with at least 10 instances of book challenges. They’ve been as minor as “I don’t want my child reading this type of book.” to “I didn’t like it and he lied about borrowing it so I made him take it out back to the burn barrell and burn it.” Yep! A real live book burning in one of the communities I worked in. I walked around my building in shock for about a week afterward. I still shudder when I think about it.
So, forgive those of us who take into consideration our professional opinions and the situations of our community and the needs of our teachers and students before we spend our very precious, very limited budgets. We’re just doing our jobs!
August 14th, 2007 at 9:22 pm
Kim,
Thanks for the comment. I know that it’s not “new” anymore - in fact, I reference the fact that the author’s response was made earlier in the year. The reason that I chose to post it at this time is because I have been reading and reviewing some books - like Gossip Girl - targeted to older teens and I am surprised by some of the strong language, drug use and sex in the books. It made me think about censorship and when (if ever) it was appropriate. More importantly, I was interested in whose job it was to censor. This (along with Harry Potter) is probably the most sensational censorship issue in recent memory, which is why I chose to feature it in the discussion.
And I applaud librarians in schools - I think it’s a highly underappreciated job. I know that budgets are limited and that there is tremendous pressure from administrative officials and parents to include or exclude certain books. A HUGE thank you to those librarians who make those difficult decisions. I just hope that they are for the right reasons.
August 14th, 2007 at 9:24 pm
Nicole/Rebecca -
I agree. I think too often in today’s society, parents expect teachers, principals, librarians, coaches - you name it - to be the parent. Parents should be the parent. And as a parent, you should do your best to be aware of what your child is reading.
August 14th, 2007 at 9:26 pm
April -
That’s crazy about the basketball book! Did they say why it was? I mean, what about the book made it 7th grade beyond the reading level? If your child can read at that level, why limit him or her?
August 15th, 2007 at 12:15 pm
I could think of much worst words that could have been used instead. But no matter what the word was I don’t see how reading it would impact a child enough that the book should be banned because of one word. I believe parents need to be aware of what their children are reading and with that let their children know they can come to them if they have questions or if there is anything in a book that makes them uncomfortable.
August 18th, 2007 at 12:28 am
Banned Books Week is September 29th to October 26th. The ALA Office of Intellectual Freedom sponsors this awareness tool each year, including reporting the most challenged titles of the previous year. This year’s theme/slogan is “Free People Read Freely.” I don’t know if the link will be accepted in your comments, some strip them. To save me having to repost, I’m putting it as my website even though it isn’t, so click on my name to get to the resource page for Banned Books Week.
I have a great poster in my library from a few years ago that looks like an eye chart and when you read the letters it says “Censorship causes blindness.”
Kelly, I’m sorry if I jumped on your case too quickly, but this whole situation was really blown out of proportion in the first NY Times article and people were misquoted. One of the people who was quoted, Frederick Muller reported on his discussion with the reporter from the Times on a school librarian listserv before the article appeared. Out of a (if I recall correctly) 20 minute interview, they chose one quote which unfairly represented the whole content of the interview. He was very unhappy that he’d consented to the interview. The lesson? Don’t let your interviews be published without approval–but who would have guessed that the liberal NYT would have tried so hard to twist his words to suit her premise?
At any rate, there are several reasons that schools have to act as parents. One is the court interpretation that schools act in loco parentis from the time students leave their homes in the mornings until they arrive back there at the end of the day. Another, and the biggest problem in my estimation, are the parents who think they need to parent everyone’s kid. Challenges in libraries happen because rather than a person saying to their child, “this book is not something I want you to read, please don’t borrow it or others like it again” the parent comes calling to the librarian, teacher, principal, superintendent, or school board member saying, “Have you seen this? No one should read it!”
Some schools have policies in place that they follow and books are given a fair evaluation by a committee and then a decision is made. Some school districts even follow their policies. Sadly, I’ve been employed in some districts who don’t follow their board’s own written policy and make decisions individually or at the request of a community member. I could go on and on about this as intellectual freedom is something of a passion of mine.
August 18th, 2007 at 6:05 am
In my experience as a reporter, this kind of thing is usually at the heart of censorship. It’s not protests and book-burnings that curb freedom of speech most often, but well-meaning individuals who decide that something is objectionable and keep it off of library shelves to try and avoid conflict, or pull it, based on the complaints of one person or a handful of people.
It’s very difficult to track and, like so many things, way too nuanced a debate to get covered meaningfully in our ham-handed media culture.
August 24th, 2007 at 8:06 pm
I don’t think books should be censored except for in very RARE circumstances. Of course everyone should do what they feel is best for their own family but I really don’t think public libraries or schools should ban books.
I can’t imagine never having been able to read The Chocolate War (one of the most powerful stories ever written) or plenty of other books I read in middle school.
My middle school & high school carried books dealing with very adult issues. But what makes the experience different in the written format is you see how their actions affect their lives and see them living with the consequences of their actions. Books don’t normally glorify bad behavior while TV, movies, and other sources do.