The image is a flyer for a "Banned Books Club" (Bokklubb för förbjudna böcker) targeted at young people between the ages of 13 and 18 in Bromölla, Sweden. It invites readers to explore the topic of banned books, asking questions like "Which books are banned, where are they banned, and why?" The club aims to discuss these books during the fall and winter, and the first meeting is scheduled for Thursday, September 19, from 3 to 4 p.m. at the library (biblioteket).
The flyer has a "STOP" sign, a warning label at the bottom, and a bird illustration. It encourages participants to sign up via email and features logos for Kulturpunkten and Bromölla Municipality.
Every book report in high school where I could choose the author was a Stephen King novel and I turned out fine. And in Florida too. Class of 1991. 😁. BRD.
Cut my teeth on King, but he ruined his magnum opus in his rush to complete when confronted by his own mortality. It has some good moments, there are interesting bones in the structure, but he ruined it in the last few books.
This opinion formed after reading the entire series twice, and the first 3-4 books many more times.
It makes me happiest to view it as an incomplete series.
Did you forget about the shit weasels in Dreamcatcher, the various instances of SA in Hearts in Atlantis, the forced abortion in the Gunslinger, insomnia, and so forth
Everythings genocide with you ppl. Get a clue and realize America is extremely pro Israel.
You're in the cast minority and nothing will change no matter how hard you demonize Democrats you're just going to end up with trump who'll be worse.
To be fair, that’s pretty much every American. They’re all blood thirsty monsters. Just watch them come to tell me I’m a Nazi for not supporting a second holocaust lmfao
I'm not for banning any books, but with that said, Stephen King has some very fucked up books, like the one where the 10-year-olds have a spontaneous orgy at the end of It.
Technically it was a train, and they were experiencing a transcendent connection across time with their older selves, in a deliberately unsettling and transgressive scene meant to evoke the rawness of adolescence being laid bare before the worst cosmic horror -- an eldritch carrion-eater who feeds on destroying the souls of children -- as a way of reclaiming strength from vulnerability. At any rate, depiction is not endorsement.
But yes, considering how many actual adults misinterpret and mischaracterize that scene, I don't recommend that particular book to children -- not because they'll be damaged by it, but because they won't have the wisdom of age to understand it.
I read IT in the 8th grade and I didn't really get the whole "transgressive scene meant to evoke the rawness of adolescence being laid bare before the worst cosmic horror" part, but I did understand that they were doing it as a way to 'ground' themselves to reality. And as a 13 year old boy, I thought it was kinda hot.
Yeah. It was horrible but literally “need to grow up fast” as a kind of pseudo protection from the demon that is pennywise.
The entire book is a series of horrors. Another story that hits just as hard but in a different way is Needful Things. Definitely an apt metaphor for how people can be cajoled and manipulated into doing heinous things.
It’s definitely messed up just like the old vampire in the body of a 13 year old in the Diaries of a Vampire series.
It’s fair to have an issue with it but what about all the other books?
I bet I can guess what they don’t like about them and that isn’t it
I think high schoolers can handle that. But I guess when you're in a state where the intention is to prevent young people from understanding sex, it starts to make sense.
Now violence on the other hand... No problem there.
I turned out mostly ok and was reading King well before 12. There were quite a few things I didn't understand yet but it didn't make me want to go out and assault people or something
Bullshit, most of his work is fine for anyone able to read it. If you think there are exception, make those specific exceptions …. Although most of us will likely disagree
Yea. There has to be some kind of balancing act. I don't know what the right answer is. My wife is a teacher and we spar over this sometimes. I lean towards not banning but she claims the resources just aren't there to vet and manage check-out. She concedes that if there were more resources and staff available then it wouldn't be an issue.
This does bring up a good question though: Should access be
Completely unrestricted?
Somewhat restricted?
Heavily moderated?
The last time I posed this question I got dogpiled on Lemmy but I feel like people are really not thinking through the consequences. And if you can't, then you should really pause and think about it.
There are pros and cons for each stance. I just don't think it's that simple as many here want it to be.
Edit : to be clear, Im not pro-banning. I'm just musing online hoping to hear other perspectives. I'm not offended if you down vote, but I was hoping to hear more your opinion.
This is just more bullshit to solve a problem that doesn't exist. We should not be restricting books at all. Isn't it always Republicans that talk about small government and that it should be parents protecting their kids? Well why can't parents just attempt to be aware of what they're child is reading?
What is the worst possible outcome of someone reading about sex? It's just puritanical bullshit, and forcing everyone else to adhere to their beliefs. Would love to hear how this comports with "limited government".
I sincerely think that access to books should never be restricted, I think even stuff like Mein Kampf should be available, just that for kids, there should be guidance to help digest it, both for Stephen King and Mein Kampf. So if you ask me, it should be completely unrestricted, but moderated, so if you check out Mein Kampf, you get a free mandatory lesson on the Holocaust.
I guess I got downvoted since one of those US dipshits did something stupid, and my opinion on it was more nuanced than "lol, idiot".