[MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie]

This is my view on the topic, so if I say that something is, that doesn't neccesarily mean it is. I'm just saying my opinion as if it were a fact, even if its not.

Is there any possible valid knowledge or analysis that makes the banning of Tolkien understandable or justifiable?

Justifiable? It depends. Understandable? Probably. Here's my take on this.

If a principal bans a book, it could be for many reasons. They could abuse thier power and just ban the book because they don't like it. They could do it for a random reason. They could do it because a parent demands it. They could do it because they are paranoid. They could do it because they over reacted. They could do it because they looked at it the wrong way. Or they could do it for the right reasons.

First of all, the only reasons something should get banned is if it is extremely violent, sexually explicit, or if it constantly interferes with a primary task. Of course you can see the first two reasons as obvious ones. People don't want thier children reading violent books or reading (actually looking) at porn. So one kid somehow gets his hands on mein kampf and say that his parents don't care if he reads it because they adore hitler or something. Now when the other parents see that their children are reading this, they going to make a big fuss about it. That way, it gets banned completely from the school. Now, things that get banned are not always something that should be banned. If you substitute harry potter for mein kampf in that example, and no cares that their children read it except for one parent, you still get the same outcome. The book is banned even though harry potter not like mein kampf at all and even though its only one parent making a fuss. It doesn't matter what the book is or how many parents complain as long as its one; the book will still be banned.

If a person is reading lotr in history class and not paying attention, the book will not be banned. The teacher will just confiscate the book and give the person detention if he does it again. Outside reading should not interfere with classtime. If twenty different kids were reading twenty differnet books in class, they would all get in trouble, but if twenty differnet kids were reading the same book, that would become a problem. If the same book repeatedly distracts students form their work, it is a high probability that the book will get banned. Only if the book causes a serious problem. Say that students continuosly have violent fights in the schoolyards over a lotr controversy, then it could get banned.
Bill Ferney, you bring up a good point about setting limits. However, in school, you can't set limits like that. Have you ever heard of a shool where the principal says 'ok, only 7th and 8th graders can read tolkien and bring it to school, 3rd to 6th grade students can do the same with authorization from parents, and it is banned to the rest of the students.' Yeah they do set limits in real life but in school, principals merely do not set limits. You need to look at it from a smaller scale: school. Even smaller: grammer school. In grammer school pricipals deem themselves as more advanced and more worthy of power because of the age difference. They think that students are weak minded and sometimes think that tehy don't know what they want. So sometimes they just ban things because they want to- for a good reason or a bad one. Once it's done, it's set in stone and there's no going back on it. Something like this would probably not happen in highschool because the deen would recognize students as smarter, more independent individuals who probably do know what they want. If tolkien was banned, the students would do something about it- rationally or irrationally, where as grammer students would just complain because they feel they wouldn't make a difference and they would be intimidated by the faculty. They difference between deens in highschool and principles in grammer schools is that in grammerschool, principles underestimate students while in highschool, deens do not underestimate students. So looking at a much smaller scale (grammer school) the principle might act as a tyrant, and to the principle, something either is or isn't. There are no limits, like PG-13 or R. It's either ok or it's not ok. It's banned or not banned. Yes, being not allowed to read a novel in history class is a restriction and it would be wrong to ban a book for that reason, but, that's not the case. tolkien books and harry potter books were banned, and for wrong reasons, but not because some one read them in history class. As much as I hate harry potter, it should not have been banned. It got banned because it was of 'demonology'??? I think that that was just bull-**** . I don't know about the books of the other authors that you mentioned since I haven't read them, but for tolkien books and harry potter to be banned. For christ's sake they're children's fantasy books. I think that some people took it a little too far.

Sometimes, no one knows why something gets banned. Oh yeah, Kalessin, I live in San Francisco, California- in the U.S. and I went to a catholic grammer school and go to a catholic highschool so this might clarify some things I say. Anyways, I remember in my grammer school, pogs were banned,then star wars cards, and then bikes and skateboards in the schoolyards. When I went to highschool, my little brother told me that the principal had banned pokemon cards, razor scooters, and then 'spikey hair.' Now, I can understand why pogs and cards were banned- the kids used to gamble when they played. I can also understand the bikes, skateboards, and scooters- when you grind on the benches it ****s up the paint and tears up the wood, the girls had to wear skirts so they got splinters in thier legs. I connot understand why the students could no longer spike thier hair. This is the point where you would hear 'school sucks.' Even though you didn't want to hear it, it was inevitable. People who cannot figure out why something is the way it is in school will say that school sucks. But let's look at the reasons. I think that the pricipal banned it or a parent complained about it. If the principal did ban it, then she did it because (a) she didn't like the look and decided to abuse her power, (b) she got paranoid and thought kids would all do it and turn into anarchy punks..., or (c) she thought that it meant anarchy and the only kids that spiked their hair were no good punks. Maybe she did it because of teh most random reason you can think of. I don't know why, but you take a guess. Relate this to the banning of harry potter or any of tolkien books and I still don't know. Ask yourself.


What does it mean when one author isn't banned while others are?

To me, I think that this is more of a personal banning. If Tolkien isn't banned, but every other fantasy book is, I think that it is because the principal likes Tolkien but doesn't give a rat's-*** for the other books and authors. I think that that is stupid and that people shouldn't abuse power like that. For those who might disagree with me, you might ask 'Why shouldn't they?' Well I'd have to say because it is not fair at all. There is no reasonable cause for doing something like that. It's selfish and greedy. For those of us who feel this way, there lies a problem. People feel there is almost nothing that they can do about it. They say, 'you can try but it probably won't work.' I think that's just grammer school talk. I think that you should try to do something about it if this happens to you (please do it in a rational matter and non-violently, I don't want to be blamed for someone killing a teacher because they banned tolkien, and if you can't think of a rational way, try a petition or an essay).

I also think that it might have to do with obviousness. In harry potter, readers can see a more direct example of 'demonology.' i.e., wichcraft, so they are banned. But in lotr, all you can really see is magic and elves and wizards. Thats just at a first glance but if you look deeper, you can probably put together some bull-**** to classify tolkien of 'demonology' and get it banned. Tolkien might not have been banned because the others were seen as hethen books (and they are not at all) while tolkien was not seen as an author of hethen books. I think that this is stupid too. None of these books should have been banned, especially for these reasons. These books were written to entertain young children, and they actually did the same for people of all ages. They were not written to portray 'demonology' or to make children believe in witchcraft. If you're going to ban harry potter because it shows witchcraft, why don't you just prohibit halloween; its just as stupid as that. People took these books the wrong way. I know that this will probably not happen, but I think that schools should repeal their ban's and apologize for the way they tried to portray these books. They should especially spologize to the authors. Maybe on their way to hell they can stop by heaven and apologize to Tolkien himself. (Just kidding about the last remark, I hope no one gets offended)

Well Kalessin, I hope that answers your questions. Its the best I could do.

There were a lot of good responses and insight to your questions. I hope I match up to them.

[ November 30, 2002: Message edited by: MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie ]