Books That Suck--LOLOMGWTFWWJD

DrPhil · #1 04-15-2010, 12:03 PM

Twilight among "most challenged" books of 2009

Los Angeles: The best-selling vampire themed "Twilight" book series has entered the top 10 list of books that US schools and public libraries were asked to remove from their shelves in 2009.

But the worst offenders were the popular young adult novel series "ttyl" by Lauren Myracle, which are written entirely in the style of instant messages, the American Library Association (ALA) said in a report on Wednesday.

http://www.dnaindia.com/lifestyle/re...f-2009_1371682

Good, bad or indifferent?

agzg · #2 04-15-2010, 12:22 PM

Wow, To Kill a Mockingbird?

Really?

tld221 · #3 04-15-2010, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by agzg

Wow, To Kill a Mockingbird?

Really?

Yeah, that's blasphemy.

BluPhire · #4 04-15-2010, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by agzg

Wow, To Kill a Mockingbird?

Really?

Fail (not you the list)

That just corrupted the list right there. I can understand the other books on the list, but once you include To Kill a Mockingbird, I can't take the list seriously.

agzg · #5 04-15-2010, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BluPhire

That just corrupted the list right there. I can understand the other books on the list, but once you include To Kill a Mockingbird, I can't take the list seriously.

The list is of the most challenged books in libraries, not of the "worst" books. It's probably true (not that it's the worst, that it's one of the most challenged). I just find it surprising that people still get their panties all up in a bunch about To Kill a Mockingbird because it's generally accepted as an "American Classic" and was written so long ago.

It was required 9th grade reading when I was in High School.

BluPhire · #6 04-15-2010, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by agzg

The list is of the most challenged books in libraries, not of the "worst" books. It's probably true (not that it's the worst, that it's one of the most challenged). I just find it surprising that people still get their panties all up in a bunch about To Kill a Mockingbird because it's generally accepted as an "American Classic" and was written so long ago.

It was required 9th grade reading when I was in High School.

Yeah I know, still doesn't neglect the fact I can't take it serious.

I mean if "To kill a Mockingbird" is the number 4 most challenged book on this list, it tells me that no matter how controversial, poorly written, etc the other books are the people challenging these books to make this list do not have an understanding of literature.

Thus they fail. Thus civilization is one step closer to an idiocracy. To Kill a Mockingbird should never be lumped in a top five with any of these other books.

KSUViolet06 · #7 04-15-2010, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by agzg

It was required 9th grade reading when I was in High School.

Same here.

PeppyGPhiB · #8 04-15-2010, 12:49 PM

One has to be pretty pathetic, ignorant and thoughtless to challenge To Kill a Mockingbird. It's one of the best American books ever written.

The people that want to ban these books are the same that make their children read the Bible, which is one of the most edgy, racy books EVER. Have they read Song of Songs/Solomon?!

Ooh La La · #9 04-15-2010, 01:19 PM

It's not a surprise. To Kill a Mockingbird has been on that list since its publication. Normally its usage of the "n-word" is the reason cited for the ban. I believe if the rest of the top ten were published, you'd also see Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn on the list for the same reason.

Munchkin03 · #10 04-15-2010, 01:20 PM

To Kill a Mockingbird has ALWAYS been on these lists, usually right up there with The Catcher in the Rye.

In my hometown, a HS performance of To Kill a Mockingbird was stopped because the NAACP objected to the use of the N-word, so it's not just conservative Bible-thumpers nutting up.

BabyPiNK_FL · #11 04-15-2010, 01:21 PM

I'm tutoring a 9th grader w/ To Kill A Mockingbird this now, honestly they should teach it younger because the lead character is so young and at 14 these kids just don't want to hear it.

ThetaDancer · #12 04-15-2010, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BabyPiNK_FL

I'm tutoring a 9th grader w/ To Kill A Mockingbird this now, honestly they should teach it younger because the lead character is so young and at 14 these kids just don't want to hear it.

It was required reading for us in 7th grade, which usually surprises people, but I thought it was especially effective.

The Perks of Being A Wallflower is on that list too.

Still one of my favorite books of all time.

Book banning always reminds me of the scene in "Field of Dreams" when Annie is in the PTA meeting and yells "At least he's not a book burner, you nazi cow." That scene cracks me up every time.

AGDee · #13 04-15-2010, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 33girl

And I thought they didn't get busy in the Twilight series until after they were married. WTF? How is that "sexually explicit"?

They didn't, and it isn't. They barely kiss ever. Whoever is making these statements isn't reading these books. They don't even know what is in them. I think they assume that if kids like them, there must be bad stuff in them.

My daughter had to read TKAM for 8th grade English and AGAIN in 10th grade. I don't know if they changed the curriculum in between or what, but I don't think a kid needs to read the same book twice for school.

My daughter has read some books with some pretty adult subject matter. She's a pretty mature kid and we have good, open communication. We frequently discuss topics from them when she's done reading.

epchick · #14 04-15-2010, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AGDee

They didn't, and it isn't. They barely kiss ever.

They most definitely do have sex in the book (and they kiss.... A LOT). It doesn't go as graphic as "and he stuck ___ into ___" but they do speak a lot about Bella/Edward sex and Rosalie/Emmett sex.

I wouldn't call it "sexually explicit" but for a book geared towards tweens, it is a little much.

AGDee · #15 04-15-2010, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by epchick

They most definitely do have sex in the book (and they kiss.... A LOT). It doesn't go as graphic as "and he stuck ___ into ___" but they do speak a lot about Bella/Edward sex and Rosalie/Emmett sex.

I wouldn't call it "sexually explicit" but for a book geared towards tweens, it is a little much.

Not until after they are married though. The kissing in Twilight is very tentative because Edward isn't sure he can kiss Bella and maintain control. If anything, the book is quite violent!