One other prompt on: http://nablopomo.blogher.com/ was: What do you think about the act for banning books?
Why would ‘higher authorities’ ban books? It actually annoys me that they think books need to be banned. Surely if they ban books it will actually make people go out & find that book.
If they publicise the banning of certain books that it will make them all the more popular as readers will be intrigued as to the reasons for banning it in the first place & they will therefore find it, buy it & read it. This defeats the idea of having a book banned.
It’s just the same as when they try to ban films, people go out of their way to find banned films which then makes them popular & years on they show them on TV or bring them out on DVD.
So why go through all the trouble of banning books? It seems a pointless task to me & involves unnecessary paper work, laws etc. So why bother? It will only make people discover the books either in other formats or from another paying/selling/buying market.
Surely it would be wiser just to allow the books to come onto the market & let readers decide for themselves. If some people disagree with the books idea or plot then they do not need to read or buy it.
Why destroy the enjoyment of other people reading books they make like or prefer to read just because some disagree with them?