Here is an example of how we are supposed to do it
Annotated Bibliography: Banning Books
Kallweit, Karoline. “Librarians Lead Fight Against Banned Books.” Global Information
Network n.p. 24 Sept. 2010. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 24 Sept. 2013.
.
The act of banning books has been an issue in the world for many years. Books are
challenged year by year and day by day based solely off of “rough language and sexual
depictions” (Kallweit par. 14). Other key factors are eminent when challenging a book such as
particular religious views or social standpoints. Throughout this source, Kallweit explains that
librarians are not responsible for deciding if a book is to be banned. My standpoint is the same.
Throughout my essay, I will explain why books in libraries and schools should never be banned.
In years past, libraries had many book complaints by parents, the government, and teachers.
With the 460 book challenges to the American Librarian Association (ALA) in 2009, it became
apparent that something needed to be done (Kallweit 1). Librarians began to put books back on
shelves and were forced to ignore most books that were challenged. Angela Maycock, the
assistant director for ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom, explained that most books never
end up getting banned, and that it is not up to the librarians to decide on the moral standards of a
novel. Maycock shared that “if there is one person in the community who could benefit from a
book, it is a crime to remove it” (Kallweit par. 15). This source will help my essay because it
2
supports the role of librarians and teachers on book banning by declaring that they should not be
able to determine the moral standards of a novel based on their personal opinions.
Published in 2010, this source is timely and necessary to this time period. Book banning
still happens today as it did three years ago as well as fifty years ago. Although Kallweit is not
an authority on this issue, she still makes valid points about librarians dealing with book
challenges today and quotes various people of high titles, including Maycock, “the assistant
director of ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom” and Joan Bertin, the “executive director of
the National Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC)” (Kallweit par. 9). By providing strict
evidence about various authors who are affected by book banning, Kallweit was able to support
her viewpoint through actual news stories. SIRS Issues Researcher is a reliable source because it
is well-known and widely used. The database is supported by teachers and professors around the
country for being dependable and usable for research topics. The author is objective towards this
viewpoint because she accounts for actual events and supports it with detailed evidence to
support the events. Instead of taking a side, Kallweit presents facts and trends from the ALA and
explains how book banning is being handled by librarians at this time. However, Kallweit uses
sources that have opposite opinions on the matter to report an argument. I will be using the
opinions against book banning in my essay. The information presented seems well-researched
because Kallweit has many names of organizations and authors to back her viewpoint. She
includes actual times and places where book banning was increasing and how the organizations
reduced it.
Gallo, Don. “Teens Need Bold Books.” Book Banning. Ed. Thomas Riggs. Detroit: Greenhaven
Press, 2012. At Issue. Rpt. from “Censorship, Clear Thinking, and Bold Books for
3
Teens.” English Journal 97.3 (Jan. 2008). Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 24
Sept. 2013. .
This source presents the many reasons why books should not be banned. Gallo states that
book banners are distrustful and controlling when deciding what books should be banned. He
also explores the many reasons why schools should not be able to decide what a child can and
cannot read. Book banning strips students from gaining the knowledge of the outside world and
does not allow them to “open their minds to new and different possibilities” expressed in certain
novels (Gallo par. 3). Gallo also states that by banning books, teachers “do not want [students]
to consider other points of view” and “do not want them to think” (Gallo par. 3). In the source,
the author goes to great lengths to explain how teenagers and young adults are stripped of
learning valuable lessons from questionable novels, and that the best positive lessons come from
books that are bold. To conclude his thought, Gallo states that “to be able to face life outside
their protective homes and classrooms, teenagers need access to books that allow them to see the
bigger world” (Gallo par. 18). This source will be extremely helpful to my essay because the
points the author makes support my argument to the greatest degree and relate to my viewpoint
against banning books.
This source is from the Opposing Viewpoints database through the TCC database library
and was published in 2012, making it a current and relevant source. Since this source was
published a year ago, the arguments made in the viewpoint are still fresh and relatable to modern
day. A former English professor at Central Connecticut State University, Gallo is a very reliable
authority. He has edited “numerous anthologies of short stories for young adults” and backs up
his points with sources (Gallo par. 1). This source is reliable because it is one of the
4
recommended databases from the library at TCC. This database is highly respected and reliable
to provide students with accurate information on the topic of their choice. The author of the
source has an extreme bias towards the viewpoint presented. Gallo is against book banning and
proves several points to verify his claims, such as good books needing to make the reader think
and ponder what he or she is reading about. Gallo states that books make students contemplate
life in new ways and help them explore what life has to offer all “from the safe distance a book
provides” (Gallo par. 18). The information is supported by dates and specific people involved
with book banning across the country. The source is well-researched due to the detailed
accounts of states dealing with unnecessary book banning.
Remez, Anna. “Publish and Be Banned?” 5 July 2013. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 24 Sept.
2013. .
This source elaborates on book banning and censorship through the perspective of an
author. Remez, the author of many published short stories, recounts a book she wrote to have
published in Russia in 2012. About a fifteen year old girl, the book takes place in the 1990’s and
follows in the footsteps of the association with drugs and gangs. The book describes the journey
of the young girl moving to a new area of Russia, where she must earn the love of her suitor by
forcing herself to participate in a gang (Remez par. 6). The author’s story was rejected, however,
for allegedly appealing to the wrong age group. Remez shares her views on the shielding of
children’s thoughts in Russia by explaining her story of a failed publishing. Forced to change
5
the intended age group for her story, Remez questions whether or not her work will ever get
published because “what [person] over-18 will want to read about the problems of a 15 year
old?” (Remez par. 6). She has a point. With publishers eager to cut out any unsuitable material
in books, students in Russia and America are unable to learn about different cultures and the
reality of life around them. By explaining the effect of book banning on actual authors, I will be
able to gain a different perspective throughout my essay to determine how book banning affects
everyone.
This source, published in 2013, is very current and relevant to my essay. The author
recounts actual events happening in Russia and elaborates on the importance it had on her as an
author of an unpublished book. The author is not an authority on the issue because she reports
on an event in her life and how it affected the people in her country. This viewpoint is still
important because Remez describes a personal experience to get the viewpoint across that
banning books should not be allowed. Since this source is from the SIRS Issues Researcher, it
can be concluded that the source is reliable. The SIRS database is widely used and contains
reliable sources with accurate and proven information from professors and authors. The author
has bias towards the viewpoint because she was affected by book banning first hand. Her book
was unable to be published because of inappropriate material for the intended audience, so
Remez’s opinion was reflected through this source as she explained the importance of abolishing
book censoring. The source is well supported because Remez describes the laws that were
passed in Russia to prevent her book from being published and the names of other authors
affected by this law.
6
Wilson, Brian. “Counterpoint: The Value of Censorship.” Points Of View: Banning Books
(2013): 6. Points of View Reference Center. Web. 22 Sept. 2013.
.
An opposing point to my argument, the author of this source goes into detail about the
responsibilities of teachers in elementary schools. Wilson states that “school district trustees
must balance their responsibility to ensure everyone is granted access to the best education”
(Wilson par. 10). The article provides well-organized information about the role of government
in deciding what books are appropriate for elementary level kids. Wilson also goes into detail
about the difference between history and morals. He elaborates on the acceptance of certain
novels in schools due to their effect on history, such as slavery and racism, and explains why
novels about same-sex marriage and other controversial topics should be banned in order for
parents to “decide what they teach their children” (Wilson par. 11). This topic will be useful for
my essay because it serves as an overview of an opposing point to counteract my argument. By
encouraging a refutation, this source serves as the fuel to my argument by allowing me to explain
why I oppose this viewpoint and opinion.
This source was published in 1993. Although this source is outdated, it is still relevant to
my viewpoint because it demonstrates the thoughts some people still have today. Teachers
around the country are shielding their students from the reality of the world and monitoring what
they can and cannot read. Although Wilson is not an authority of the source, his viewpoints are
still important because uses evidence to support his claim and acts as an opposing perspective to
my argument. Because the source is from the Points of View Reference Center database, it can
be determined that it is a trustworthy source. There are many references to different articles and
7
laws that help develop the source and cause the material provided to be reliable and helpful. The
author has a bias towards the opposing viewpoint. Wilson comments on the role of teachers
versus the role of parents, explaining that teachers have the right to keep learning in the
classroom equal for all students by banning certain books that may or may not cause controversy
(Wilson 1). The information in this source is well-researched because there are various
references to specific laws supporting the claim and examples of situations in schools where
teachers have needed to ban books to keep the classroom as equal as possible for all students.
Hopkins, Ellen. “Censorship Cannot Be Allowed in America.” Book Banning. Ed. Thomas
Riggs. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2012. Huffington Post. 2010. Opposing Viewpoints in
Context. Web. 25 Sept. 2013. .
Hopkins, the author of the Crank series for young adults and poem “Manifesto” explains
the role of dark novels in young adults’ lives and why they should never be banned. In the
source, she recalls a book signing she hosted for her first book Crank, a novel “inspired by [her]
daughter’s descent into the hell that is methamphetamine addiction” (Hopkins par. 3). She tells
of many instances when people approached her to tell their similar story and how she saved their
lives. Hopkins is a firm believer of putting a stop to book banning because of all the lives she
altered because of her novels. She states that teachers have no right to “decide ‘appropriateness’
for everyone” and that if they do not like the content, they are by no means forced to read it
(Hopkins par. 13). Throughout this source, Hopkins makes several valid points on the
abolishment of banning books. For example, she states that “what [is] perhaps not right for one
child is necessary to another” in growing up and learning about the reality we live in (Hopkins
8
par. 14). This source is helpful to my essay because it directly refutes the viewpoint of teachers
being allowed to ban books in school systems. Books about controversial topics such as abuse or
addiction are beneficial to some students because they can relate to them. For the students who
cannot relate, they simply do not need to read the book.
This source was published in 2012, making it a current source. Remez is not an authority
on the issue because she explained a personal encounter and her thoughts about the argument.
Her viewpoint is still important because it comes from the perspective of an author who has a
strong opinion about students’ rights to read what they want. The source is reliable because it
comes from the Opposing Viewpoints in Context database from Gale. This database is highly
praised for being consistent with their reliable articles. The author is bias against banning books.
She clearly states her opinion and includes many valid points and reasons backed up by evidence
and sources within the article. Since the author was affected by the banning of her own poem,
she has a strong opinion about enforcing teachers to think about the individual’s needs, and not
what they think is best for everyone. This information is supported by dates and organizations
also affected by book censorship. Hopkins goes into detail about other instances of unfair book
banning of certain authors and explains when and where they happened
