Post User Polls

Should 'Twilight' be banned?

The "Twilight" series, a multi-million selling book series about vampires by Stephenie Meyer has been added to the American Library Association's list of "challenged books." Do you agree?

Read the full article.

By Jodi Westrick  |  April 14, 2010; 3:58 PM ET  | Category:  National Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati  
Previous: Could you be Vegan before 6 p.m.? | Next: Tax Day: Did you get money back this year?

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



Clinton had a man's balls in a jar on his desk and answered the Dukakis question with the story Rising Sun... whose balls? Kill Bill. Hillbillies ATE MY BALLS. Hooknosed ratfaced inglorious basterds. Queen Of England is the biggest jewel thief... Family Jewels. Resevoir Dogs.

Posted by: Uoughtano | April 15, 2010 6:05 AM

ok, ranty nutjob much?

ANYway, on the Twilight question: let your kids read the books, BUT, explain to them that emotionally overwrought teens do not run the world. There. Done.

Posted by: Sam888 | April 15, 2010 7:18 AM

Most of the complaints I have read about the books have little to do with the supernatural content. Most complaints are made about the character Bella (the female protagonist) having no real sense of self, she is only a complete person when she is in a relationship and her life is meaningless with out a man. Also she is subservient to the men in her life and totally relies on them. Certainly not a healthy point of view for modern women and these books are aimed at tweens.


That said I don't believe in book banning, if you are worried about the content read it at the same time as your kids and explain to them why it is a poor message.

Posted by: flonzy3 | April 15, 2010 8:09 AM

Although I have yet to read one, the author obviously struck a chord with women and girls. Books shouldn't be banned. What if Edgar Rice Burroughs or Bram Stoker had been banned? Banning books is a reflection of small minds and leads to ridiculous situations such as in the California Menifee School district this past January where an official tried to pull the Merriam Webster Dictionary from grade school shelves because a distraught parent complained that her daughter had looked up some objectionable words.

Posted by: davemarks | April 15, 2010 8:31 AM

No book should be banned. Ever.

Posted by: topwriter | April 15, 2010 8:39 AM

While the books should be "challenged" because they are abysmal, I don't think that is why people are getting het up about them. Book are not for banning. Criticize, vilify, even, but never tell another citizen "*YOU* cannot read what *I* dislike."

Posted by: paulhume | April 15, 2010 9:04 AM

Paulhume said it so well, what can I possibly add? I have read the books, and they are compelling, but the quality of writing--uck. It's like eating too many marshmallow peeps; it seems like a good idea at the time, but afterward you feel a bit ill.

Posted by: subrosa77 | April 15, 2010 9:32 AM

Look, I LOATHE "Twilight". It is a hackneyed story full of bland, one dimensional characters, written by a sexually repressed Mormon house wife.

BUT, I am *extremely* against banning books. Banning books is not the answer, regardless of what it is, be it the Bible, "Huckleberry Finn," or "On the Origin of the Species". Knowledge is how we free our minds.

Posted by: jromaniello | April 15, 2010 9:38 AM

The ALA's "challenged" list is not a list of books that they want banned, it's a list of books that are *frequently* banned by schools/etc. The poll makes it seem like the ALA wants it banned or something equally idiotic, when the opposite is true - they keep the list to alert people to attempts at censorship. Do some research, guys.

Posted by: madmacrae | April 15, 2010 10:16 AM

What is hilarious about this "controversy" is that any discussion of or reference to sexuality in the Twilight books is in the context of them NOT having sex. In fact

**** SPOILER ALERT****

they do not sleep together until after they are married - you'd think conservatives would applaud that message. Yes, the books are horribly anti-feminist and terribly written, but I agree that book banning is a bad thing.

Posted by: Agfras | April 15, 2010 10:24 AM

I have to reiterate Madmacrae's comment that the way you phrased your question made it sound like the American Library Association comes up with a list of books that should be challenged.

The list is a compilation of challenges brought by patrons of the libraries, or their parents -- public libraries, school libraries, etc.

The ALA published the list to show which books are being attacked. The ALA does not believe in banning books -- just the opposite, in fact.

The person who wrote your poll question either failed to read the article to which the poll links, or is not a very good writer and should not be working for a newspaper.

Posted by: mmpd | April 15, 2010 11:09 AM

I forced myself to read the Twilight book and watch the movie just to know what it was my son enjoyed about it.

The book is pretty much a teen romance novel. Call it a harlequin romance on steroids. There is zero sexual content in it. There are allusions to threats, extreme violence, and death. (We ARE talking about vampires and werewolves after all!) Bella and Edward discover and resist the fact that they are both soulmates; in spite of being so different from each other. Pretty standard romance novel there. Parallels to Romeo and Juliet are all over the place.

The most socially objectionable part in both the movie and the book is that there is a relationship between a teenager, and a vastly older person. Edward is actually a 100 year old man frozen in the body of a teenager. This begs the question of whether Stephanie Meyer is making a commentary on social mores. Since Bella can transition from human to vampire; it makes you wonder about the parallel transformation from us non-mormon members of the various churches of the devil converting to the Church of LDS.

Only fools, idiots, or the criminally intolerant would ban the books. The intelligent will dig out a copy and discuss them; like intelligent people should do with all controversial writing.

Posted by: mhoust | April 15, 2010 11:14 AM

Books should never be banned. Period. You don't like it, don't read it. If you want to restrict YOUR children, fine. I disagree with that too, but it's certainly your right as a parent.

I'm a librarian and freedom of thought, freedom to read, freedom to experience new ideas ... these are sacrosanct things to me.

My mom would take me to the "Banned Books Week" display at our public library every year and specifically encourage me to read the banned books.

To raise a different issue though, "Twilight" may be among the least-thought-provoking and worst-written books to ever be challenged. I read all four (horrible) books in the series, and other than "OMG vampires!" I don't really see where they have objectionable material.

ALA Banned Books Week is Sept 25 - Oct 2 this year! Support your right to read and think!

Posted by: MiuBot116 | April 15, 2010 11:14 AM

No, these books should not be banned. Come on! Although I get that parents want to protect their kids, as I do, from content they may not be quite ready for. Perhaps a rating for books may be in order?

Bye the way, as a feminist, I do not think these books are antifeminist. There is nothing wrong with depending on the man you love and vice versa. Bella is, in the end the independent hero who helps save here family. What is subservient about that?

Posted by: sandnsmith | April 15, 2010 11:14 AM

No book should be banned. It's up to the parents to monitor what their child is reading. It's not up to organizations or governments.

Posted by: jckdoors | April 15, 2010 2:15 PM

If you ban books then you may as well take away our freedom of speech, our freedom to think and our freedom in general, there are a great many books out there that have been 'banned' by so called experts because the books do not agree with what they either believe in or think is right for us, let us decide what is good for us and what is bad for us.

Posted by: Fatherofone | April 16, 2010 8:20 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company