10 Banned Children’s Books in Honor of Banned Book Week
Who knew that the world of children— innocent, carefree, often painful, but usually hopeful — could get such a rise out of the book jerks of the world? It’s Banned Book Week, and while we usually jump to “Animal Farm” or “The Satanic Verses” as canonized literature which has endured some bumps in the road towards general readership, there are children’s books which have been under fire for their…homosexual promotion? Depicting strong women? Talking animals (“insult to God”)? Not making these up. Here are 10 of them.
Sources: bannedbooks.world.edu, guardian.com, mynorthwest.com, childrensbooks.about.com, pen.org,
Charlotte’s Web
Willbuur! What ever could E.B. White’s creations Charlotte, Fern, Templeton, and the raucous little pig have to offend the world? In 2006 (note, not 1835), parents at a Kansas school district ruled that talking animals were blasphemous, and the depiction of the spider dying was “inappropriate.” The parent group issued a statement, explaining: “Showing lower life forms with human abilities is sacrilegious and disrespectful to God.” (Banned Books Awareness).
Green Eggs and Ham
Dr. Seuss has permeated all of our lives with heavy doses of required goofyness, but apparently Sam I Am’s insistence that his unnamed friend try his odd culinary treat was a gay come-on. “Would you could you on a boat/would you could you with a goat?” was taken by California education leaders to be overtly sexual, and was briefly pulled from the shelves. China also threw the book out from 1965 until Seuss’ death in 1991 for “early Marxism” conveyance to children.
Anne Frank: The Diary of a Young Girl
The actual diary which tore at the hearts of adults and children alike has been attacked quite frequently, most recently in 2013 at a Michigan school, where a mother objected to her daughter reading the “definitive” version of the diary, which contained passages of Anne examining her genitalia in detail. Amazon.com claims it is one of the most challenged books for schools because it’s been cited as “too depressing.” A Virginia school district withdrew the original version, claiming it was pornographic.
The Giving Tree
Apparently deforestation’s destructive effects are arguable — and this is why Shel Silverstein’s absolute classic book on companionship was roundly criticized by many institutions across the nation, for pointing fingers at the industry. A Colorado public library also tossed it out, crying “sexism” that a young boy who grows into a man relies without reciprocity on the tree for all of his needs. Moral of the story was not to be selfish to the hand that gives; guess that library didn’t read the book through.
Harriet the Spy
Louie Fitzhugh’s 1964 book was highly influential and unique, depicting a resourceful, somewhat lonely yet creative young girl who lives vicariously through those around her by spying. At a 1983 Xenia, Ohio school board meeting, the book was challenged because it “teaches children to lie, spy, back-talk and curse.” Although the book was kept available in Xenia, it suffered elimination in other libraries and schools of America, cited by critics as a slanderous, gossip-promoting book depicting a young, rude lady who some say was meant to be a lesbian.
Where the Wild Things Are
Maurice Sendak’s visionary, Caldecott-winning journey into the alter-world of a child’s imagination was considered “too frightening” and “too dark” by librarians and psychologists after its publication in 1963. It was promptly banned in most southern, God-fearing states, where the claims of “witchcraft” and “supernatural events” could commonly be heard. Popular child psychologist Bruno Bettelheim wrote in Ladies’ Home Journal: “What [Sendak] failed to understand is the incredible fear it evokes in the child to be sent to bed without supper, and this by the first and foremost giver of food and security—his mother.” (Pen America)
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory
“A poor philosophy of life” deemed a Colorado library which put Roald Dahl’s 1964 classic under lock-and-key in their reference section. Actually disconcerting and worth noting are the allegations that the Oompa-Loompas were meant to characterize African pygmies. Dahl responded to this in 1988: “I created a group of little fantasy creatures…. I saw them as charming creatures, whereas the white kids in the books were… most unpleasant. It didn’t occur to me that my depiction of the Oompa-Loompas was racist, but it did occur to the NAACP and others…. After listening to the criticisms, I found myself sympathizing with them, which is why I revised the book.” (Roald Dahl Fans.com).
Bridge to Terabithia
Katherine Paterson’s junior fiction Newberry-award winner has stood the test of time, but was not well-received by many when first born in 1977. The American Library Association listed it as the 28th most banned/challenged book from 2001-2009, and here are some cited reasons from around America: promoting Satanism, paganism, violence, the use of the word “Lord” outside of a prayer, and depictions of abusive parents. While it’s rarely been banned, it has been challenged numerous times over the decades. Ironically, Paterson’s parents were Christian missionaries, and she herself is married to a Presbyterian minister.
The Wonderful Wizard of Oz
There’s no greater fantasy perhaps than L. Frank Baum’s book, bringing us Dorothy and her cohorts and immortalizing our childhood forever. In 1928, every single Chicago public library banned his work for “ungodly” portrayals of a woman in a leadership position. In 1986, seven Christian families in Tennessee filed a suit against the book’s existence in their regional public schools, railing against the depiction of a benevolent witch (Glinda), arguing that it was “theologically impossible” for a witch to exist who wasn’t evil.
Where’s Waldo?
There was no book with greater hours of fun to pass than the scope-out sensation of the “Waldo” series. What could have gone wrong with thousands of figures gleefully eclipsing one skinny guy with glasses? In the early 90s, there was an image of a topless sunbather laying on her stomach on the beach, her left breast exposed. Not cool for scores of children’s libraries, who banned it, demanding its re-print. I mean seriously, we were looking for Waldo the whole time, not a topless gal!