Sunday, March 15, 2009

`A Poorer World'

A reader in Texas passes along a story in City Journal about the possible banning of children’s books published before 1985. If the idea reminds you of Fahrenheit 451 or sounds like another online parody of do-gooder shenanigans, consider the conclusion to Walter Olson’s story:

“Whatever the future of new media may hold, ours will be a poorer world if we begin to lose (or `sequester’ from children) the millions of books published before our own era. They serve as a path into history, literature, and imagination for kids everywhere. They link the generations by enabling parents to pass on the stories and discoveries in which they delighted as children. Their illustrations open up worlds far removed from what kids are likely to see on the video or TV screen. Could we really be on the verge of losing all of this? And if this is what government protection of our kids means, shouldn’t we be thinking instead about protecting our kids from the government?”

1 comment:

R. T. said...

You have shared another story in which the lesson is clear: Government is not the solution . . . it is the problem. As the federal government continues to wield more and more power (not necessarily with benign intentions though liberals would suggest otherwise), the nation's foundational principles and freedoms are being neutralized and eliminated.

Lead in the ink of the print! That is absolutely absurd. When I was a child, I would voraciously devour books. Perhaps that federal government should accept that as anecdotal evidence that books are not harmful; however, no one in the federal government who is responsible for the kinds of frightening policies highlighted in your cited article would appreciate either the metaphor or the irony in my claim of childhood consumption of books.

Finally, I'll say this: Your cited article scares the hell out of me. It is another example of a federal government gone horribly wrong. God help us all!