2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.lisr.2014.06.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Society, institutions, and common sense: Themes in the discourse of book challengers in 21st century United States

Abstract: Understanding why people attempt to remove, relocate, or restrict books in an age of ubiquitous access is one of the more puzzling aspects of contemporary challenge cases. In order to better comprehend this largely symbolic phenomenon, this study focused on the arguments that book challengers employed to justify the removal, relocation, or restriction of books in 13 challenge cases in public libraries and schools across the United States between 2007 and 2011. Three sources of discourse, which were coded for c… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
16
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
(8 reference statements)
0
16
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Schmidt and colleagues (2007) asserted "the idea that teachers are responsible for protecting innocent children is inherent in their thinking" (p. 53). In her study about the discourse of book challengers, Knox (2014b) found that protecting children's innocence is a primary reason why people bring book challenges forward in schools and libraries. We are disturbed that some participants in our study, who are or will be working directly with children, share the same sentiments as book challengers despite their awareness of the right to read.…”
Section: Themes In Censorship Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Schmidt and colleagues (2007) asserted "the idea that teachers are responsible for protecting innocent children is inherent in their thinking" (p. 53). In her study about the discourse of book challengers, Knox (2014b) found that protecting children's innocence is a primary reason why people bring book challenges forward in schools and libraries. We are disturbed that some participants in our study, who are or will be working directly with children, share the same sentiments as book challengers despite their awareness of the right to read.…”
Section: Themes In Censorship Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to Dresang (2003), there are three common assumptions that adults have about children: (a) children are innocent and require the protection of adults, (b) children are depraved and require redemption, and (c) children are capable, wise, and seek connections with texts and other people. Those who would censor books may hold the first two assumptions as Knox’s (2014b) work suggests, yet Dresang believes the third assumption of children-as-capable most accurately describes contemporary youth, and it should be the role of adults to educate children about challenging or controversial topics rather than protect them through actions such as censorship and restricting access to information. Given that adult beliefs about children and childhood inform decisions to provide or restrict access to books, it is important to understand what teachers and school librarians believe regarding what is appropriate (or not) for children to read.…”
Section: Theoretical Perspectivesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Schrader (1997) links this dismissal to what he calls "word fear," noting that it is a type of interpretation of people who reject any distinction between narrative and indoctrination, between portrayal and instruction and promotion, between description and "how-to," between disclosure and endorsement and advocacy, between statement and encouragement and glorification, between exposure and seduction, between telling and teaching, between storytelling and condoning, between discussion and recruitment, between knowledge and action. (10) As I have previously (Knox 2014(Knox , 2015 demonstrated, this common sense interpretation of texts unites book challengers of different ideologies and worldviews. This type of interpretation can also be called "monosemic," wherein it is believed that texts possess a stable referent and can only have one meaning.…”
Section: N D O C T R I N a T I O N _ F E A T U R Ementioning
confidence: 89%
“…In this article, I hope to show that a particular interpretation of these books is crucial to understanding the opposition to the MAS program. As I have previously argued (Knox 2014), calls for the restriction, removal, and relocation of books are often a matter of interpretation of texts. Critics who argued for both the dismantling of the MAS program and the removal of the textbooks often employ what I call "common sense" interpretive strategy with regard to texts wherein texts "mean what they say and say what they mean"; this is an interpretive strategy that is strongly associated with the concept of indoctrination.…”
Section: N D O C T R I N a T I O N _ F E A T U R Ementioning
confidence: 99%
“…"Censor" is also a highly contested term, and its use can shut down rather than facilitate communication. (Knox 2014a(Knox , 2014b(Knox , 2015) that unite the discourse of those who challenge books in public institutions, and I will discuss those most relevant to the 2016 national election.…”
Section: Opposing Censorship In Difficult Timesmentioning
confidence: 99%