Would you boycott a book because it was controversial?

[Cosmic Mission]

So I ask would you boycott a book because it may be controversial?

No, because the only way to combat bad ideas is with better ones.

 

[Flibbertigibbet]

I personally wouldn't boycott any books unless they were inappropriate contentographic.

His Dark Materials was considered by my church friends to be controversial. I read it and loved it. I found it was very missunderstood and far from being anti - christian I found it inspiring.

When I challenged my friends I discovered that they hadn't even read it.

So I ask would you boycott a book because it may be controversial?

If you did not find the books to be anti-Christian, then you are missing the point that author, Phillip Pullman, wishes to make. He stated, in a Washington Post interview, "I'm trying to undermine the basis of Christian beliefs."

I don't believe that books should be banned at all. There are some materials that are clearly inappropriate for certain ages & maturity levels and that is where parental involvement is beneficial.

Unfortunately, it seems that fewer and fewer people read for enjoyment these days, and parents who don't read very much usually raise children who also don't like to read.

 

[Rois]

No, I just wouldn't own them in my book collection. Books that are controversial are often the most thought-provoking and challenging.

 

[Dharma Wheel]

"Where they burn books, they end up burning people'' - Heinrich Heine.

No books should be banned or destroyed; not even 'Mein Kampf'.

 

[kitty.lover]

I'm not sure that books that preach hate and the annilation of large numbers of people should be available

 

[Isambard]

I'm not sure that books that preach hate and the annilation of large numbers of people should be available

Why?

 

[kitty.lover]

Because we live in delicate times and there are alot of idiots and fanatics out there who act on dangerous ideas.

On the other hand I dont believe in censorship either and i guess all ideals, ideas, viewpoints and all manner of information can be dangerous in the imagination of the wrong person.

Except maybe the Mr men

 

[Isambard]

Because we live in delicate times and there are alot of idiots and fanatics out there who act on dangerous ideas.

There have always been idiots and fanatics. Why make concessions for them?

 

[pgp_protector]

Nope, I enjoy my E-book collection.
and reading

 

[Bampot]

I don't see the point in boycotting something like a book. Why hate something you've never even read?

Plus, the book's sales wouldn't be hurt by boycott if the book is already controversial. If anything, an open boycott would get more people to read it. That's usually how it goes.

If you don't think a book will interest you, don't read it. If you've read it already, you have every right to hate and complain about it, but there's no point in boycotting if you've already read it.

 

[kitty.lover]

I see where you're coming from

 

[KingCrimson250]

You know, I'm actually tempted to boycott controversial books. I know it's a bit cynical, but it seems that all of the controversial books of recent years have been rubbish - Da Vinci Code, the Shack, Left Behind, Harry Potter, His Dark Materials, etc. Not one of them is any good (although I haven't read His Dark Materials in ages now...). Now when I hear that a book is controversial, I just automatically assume that it's an awful book that only became well-known through the hype generated by the controversy.

But the sad truth is I'll probably end up reading it anyway. And hating it.

Though a lot of the older controversial books I really enjoy - 1984, Catcher in the Rye, etc. Things have changed, I guess.

 

[One day at a time]

What may be controversial to one may not be to another. It depends on if you know where you stand and are able to be discerning and not swayed by what is said. I have read The Shack, Left Behind, and truthfully think it's funny that they are considered controversial. Do I believe everything in them are true? No, but they are thought provoking. But I know where I stand so it's no big deal...but I would definitely watch what my children would read because they are not mature enough to understand the difference between God's truth and what is plain filth.
Just my opinion!

 

[SparkyMaddie]

probably not unless it was totally offensive to me and that's not alot of topics,i am open minded and believe everyone has a right to decide what they should read and believe or seek for entertainment themselves.

 

[One day at a time]

I was just told yesterday by a Christian that The Shack is heresy! She said that she has it from a very reliable person that it is so! So I asked her if she thought that I was then a heretic since I have the book and have read it 3 times! She didn't have too much of a comment. My thought is....IT'S FICTION! The author didn't say this is what the Bible says! I think there is a difference.....

 

[SSior.27]

I have noticed all too frequently that Christians have this meerkat-like tendency to skirt off at the first sign of anything without trying to investigate like a... well, a thinking human capable of rational thought. They jump into their hovels at do nothing more but stick their heads out squeaking something along the lines of 'It's different, it's hyped, it's evil!'

This I do not subscribe to in any fashion. Did Christ run from every confrontation? No! Not even when the mob closed in around him. He simply walked through them. Instead he heard out the Pharisees and answered their queries, turning their doubt into a lesson for those who would hear and believe.

Discernment! Believe me when I say I'm overjoyed to see 5+ pages of discerning comments. Just as steel is refined by heat and force, so is our faith. If we let ourselves be 'protected' from every potentially harmful, controversial story or influence, we never allow our hope to be forged into a strong, viable faith. Without it, we let ourselves set in cast iron, rough, impure.

Looking out of our own perception, though, we see another benefit. If we know the influences which try to sway us and we overcome with our knowledge, faith, and logic, then we know that much better how to address the doubts and fears nonbelievers have. Does this make for more conversions? Well, perhaps, but quite honestly, it makes us easier to be around.

....it's late, I tend to ramble =P

 

[JCFantasy23]

Being controversial would only make it more interesting to me. I never ban or boycott books so far

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

I'm not sure that books that preach hate and the annilation of large numbers of people should be available

Well, the fathers of the German Grundgesetz (our constitution) agreed with you on that: even though censorship is otherwise incompatible with our constitution, they prohibited the distribution and display of each and every item connected to the Nazi regime: movies, books, paraphernalia - even symbols that are in fact MUCH older than national socialism, yet were abused by them (such as certain Germanic runes).
And what can I say? I think they were wrong to do so, and for several reasons. First of all, no one will become a nazi just because he sees a swastika displayed. Nor will a nazi cease to be one such just because he isn't allowed to use these symbols any longer. And as for other forbidden media: keeping them on the red list not only gives them the allure of the forbidden, but turns them into myths. Think of the way Richard the Lionheart was turned into an ideal king by folklore, simply because he was absent. Something similar can occur with a book. It would make MUCH more sense to publish "Mein Kampf" in annotated editions: after all, it is an awful book, both stylistically and with regards to its content. Allowing people to see just how crappy it actually is might help a lot in dispelling its dark glamour. Alas, it's not to be.


I wonder if I would support banning books that teach people how to build bombs with mere household items. Not so much because of potential terrorists or the like (usually, such people know where to find instructions on that, even if it's illegal), but because of hare-brained teenagers seeking cheap thrills and ending up blowing off their hands. Heck, there are even some adults who are stupid enough to do that.

 

[kitty.lover]

Thankyou for your perspective speaking for myself i did not get the impression that you were rambling

Thanks too to everyone who has posted a response it is really good to get the opportunity to view so many points of view.

 

[keith99]

Well, the fathers of the German Grundgesetz (our constitution) agreed with you on that: even though censorship is otherwise incompatible with our constitution, they prohibited the distribution and display of each and every item connected to the Nazi regime: movies, books, paraphernalia - even symbols that are in fact MUCH older than national socialism, yet were abused by them (such as certain Germanic runes).
And what can I say? I think they were wrong to do so, and for several reasons. First of all, no one will become a nazi just because he sees a swastika displayed. Nor will a nazi cease to be one such just because he isn't allowed to use these symbols any longer. And as for other forbidden media: keeping them on the red list not only gives them the allure of the forbidden, but turns them into myths. Think of the way Richard the Lionheart was turned into an ideal king by folklore, simply because he was absent. Something similar can occur with a book. It would make MUCH more sense to publish "Mein Kampf" in annotated editions: after all, it is an awful book, both stylistically and with regards to its content. Allowing people to see just how crappy it actually is might help a lot in dispelling its dark glamour. Alas, it's not to be.


I wonder if I would support banning books that teach people how to build bombs with mere household items. Not so much because of potential terrorists or the like (usually, such people know where to find instructions on that, even if it's illegal), but because of hare-brained teenagers seeking cheap thrills and ending up blowing off their hands. Heck, there are even some adults who are stupid enough to do that.

I agree totally on the Mein Kampf point. Actually I have read it (long ago) along with The Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital. Not because I am a follower of any, but because if they have good points I want to know them and in most areas I wish to know my enemy.

On the bomb making years (like 40) ago I found a book on making (rather tame) fireworks in the public library. I tried to find it a second time a few months later and could not. But I could find detailed instructions in refererence works for the powerfull traditional explosives. TNT, Nitro, Fulminate of Mercury, Gun Cotton, all these and more!

Perhaps you can help me on one thing. A while ago I found a website, since gone, that detailed a lot about the German resistance to Hitler. It included a reference to one unit that had a sstrange distinction, the largest number of officers executed for treason. It was something line the 29th battalion of the 7th division, or the 7th of the 29th (hence my problem). I do know they were based out of Potsdam, my second problem as any serach in the WW II era with Potsdam gets swamped with links to the conference.