Comments on: Reference Question of the Week – 11/6/11

By: Thad McIlroy

Thad McIlroy — Tue, 19 Jun 2012 23:37:12 +0000

I was a bookseller in Toronto when the book was first published and being young and idealistic I enjoyed confronting the ethical challenge of whether to protect this book. I agreed with the court that it should be made available — it’s on the difficult questions like this one where it’s most important that we carefully think through our position.

You see from the Wikipedia article that the eventual effect of the legal challenges by the book’s opponents was to effectively censor this book (and presumable some others like it) — St. Martin’s reasonably enough had to draw the line at the mounting legal costs.

And America, as we all know, remains a culture committed to treating our physical bodies and our sexuality as something damned, strange and forbidden.

By: Brian Herzog

Brian Herzog — Thu, 17 Nov 2011 03:18:45 +0000

@laura: no, definitely not just you. Despite the content, the whole “surreptitious photo” thing made me laugh – although if it weren’t for the extreme content, she might not have been prompted to act.

By: laura k

laura k — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 22:14:45 +0000

Maybe it’s just me, but I think it’s a little weird that someone would see this book at a friend’s house and try to surreptitiously find out if it’s child pornography, instead of asking the friend about it. That smacks to me of weird neighbor surveillance. Although I guess maybe it just made her uncomfortable?

By: Brian Herzog

Brian Herzog — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 15:49:31 +0000

@JP: thanks for the update.

By: JP

JP — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 20:18:30 +0000

The class didn’t really give an opinion. Just presented the book as a contested item because of the photography. It was in the context of the 1982 Supreme Court decision (Miller Decision) that upheld a NY law stating that it was illegal to use children in sexually explicit photographs, obscene or not. After that, the company decided to stop distributing the books, since it was too complicated to determine each states’ morality codes regarding “questionable” photographs.

By: Brian Herzog

Brian Herzog — Mon, 14 Nov 2011 19:07:10 +0000

@Edith: I agree – and was surprised to see the subject heading for this book is “Sex Instruction for Children — Pictorial Works.” As @jmb98115 indicated, some things are going to be uncomfortable based on your cultural background, and this definitely qualifies for me personally.

@JP: Just out of curiosity, what did the class think of this book?

By: JP

JP — Mon, 14 Nov 2011 16:17:05 +0000

How timely. I just finished up the intellectual freedom unit in my collection development class, where this book and it being challenged was discussed.

By: jmb98115

jmb98115 — Sat, 12 Nov 2011 17:00:25 +0000

Could she been asking out of incredulity that our society and culture are so tolerant of these materials? Perhaps she comes from a society or country that has less freedom of expression and she is shocked by our permissiveness to allow such materials, and is not personally offended.
Not even a remote chance of that, huh?

By: Edith

Edith — Sat, 12 Nov 2011 16:54:24 +0000

I remember my TA in grad school in my Youth Services class showing us a copy of this book when we were talking banned books. Apparently it is now considered a rare book, she said her battered copy had cost her $50 but copies of the book in good condition can go for hundreds of dollars. It is a bit uncomfortable to look through because of the content, but I believe it is suppose to be a sex ed book for children.