Originally Posted By JohnS1 Here's a question that has come to me since working part time at a bookstore the last six months. How come we have ratings for movies and television programs (G,PG, PG-13, R, etc.) but nothing for books? How come a 10 year old can come into the bookstore and buy an Anne Rice or James Patterson or any number of Silhouette or Harlequin "extreme" romances and be treated to graphic sex, horrifying violence and language so blue it makes me blush? I'm not for censorship, but I'm just curious why the whole world of books has not been subject to the same sort of ratings applied to other forms of entertainment. Any opinions out there?
Originally Posted By peeaanuut maybe they figure now its too late. The complete lack of imagination and overstructuring of the young ones lives now a days, most cannot put a picture to the words. Of course it might have something to do with all the book burnings that had been going on, noone wants to look like the literature killer anymore.
Originally Posted By JohnS1 I assume that when you use the word "literature," Joe, you are being very lenient, right? (-;
Originally Posted By ecdc It's definitely a fair question, but all other current rating systems are pretty useless (IMO) anyway. They're self-regulated and self-imposed by the entertainment industry to keep the government off their backs and from intervening and imposing their own system. My guess is that books just don't make enough noise. It's easier (as the Veggitales thread shows) to get up in arms and spout off how Americans see X amount of violence and sex each day on TV than talk about it in books.
Originally Posted By YourPalEd In the book store, aren't the books, separated by genre? I'm sure you have a childrens section, a computer book section, reference, et al. I doubt you sell any of the censored x rated books. Those would be found in stores that sell those x rated products. A lot of books have already been seperated out of those sales venues. Censorship is natural, more a task of the child learning enough to be able to understand the words. There are strict photographic codes involved though as to what is pornography or not. They have evolved through the years. Just ask larry flynt. Interesting point though. Censorship of tv or films which are passive entertainment have different priorities than the printed word. A television set to me is nothing more than an optical modem for humans.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<My guess is that books just don't make enough noise>> Movies, TV, music can be broadcast to a large audience, but books are something that can only be read one person at a time (unless someone is reading it aloud.) So I think that's part of it... it's not quite as in-your-face as other media. There is *some* rated material... minors can't buy Playboy and other "adult" publications.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 My God, even Ed gets it while others still want to make this a far right wing thing. Good post Ed
Originally Posted By BlueDevilSF Given the sheer number of books that are published, could you imagine what sort of nightmare it would be to have a rating system for books? I don't know how things are today but I do remember that when I was a kid, I had to have parental permission to check out books from anywhere outside the children's section of the library. My mom was pretty permissive in what I read, but she had a good idea of what I should/shouldn't be allowed to read. I think very, very few kids have the wherewithal to browse in the other sections of libraries and bookstores outside of their age-specific literature.
Originally Posted By ecdc "My God, even Ed gets it while others still want to make this a far right wing thing. Good post Ed" Err... vbdad, no one said a word about the far right. You're reading into the comments too much.
Originally Posted By DlandJB It isn't necessarily a far right issue, although the only protest I've ever attended had to do with a far right push to ban books from the public library. That is a very dangerous road, imo. And I will agree that this was among the most coherent and useful posts that Ed has produced so far. The sheer volume of books would make a rating system difficult -- Books that are appropriate for kids are already in the kid or young adult sections. It also wouldn't hurt if parents took the initiative to check out what kids are reading/watching/listening to themselves instead of trying to make someone else do their parenting for them.
Originally Posted By YourPalEd <<<The sheer volume of books would make a rating system difficult>>> And the fact bush and his crew can't read very well. I guess the non partisan intelligencia will have to be the ones to rate everything. Okay, anything that mentions george bush must be removed from the shelves immediately, and placed in the porno section.
Originally Posted By YourPalEd i think george bush's style is more in line with the sado masochistic section, don't you?
Originally Posted By vbdad55 Err... vbdad, no one said a word about the far right. You're reading into the comments too much. "It's easier (as the Veggitales thread shows) to get up in arms and spout off how Americans see X amount of violence and sex each day on TV than talk about it in books" who did you mean here then may I ask ? As in the other thread it is a en masse ripping of the far right for being the only people being cocerned over this , while that simply is not true. Yes they are upset, but more for political reasons, others are concerned over the 'select' censorship so let's be honest here, were you ripping the left or middle ?
Originally Posted By JohnS1 Part of the problem as I see it too, is that many contemporary authors experiment with a variety of genres, topics and intensity. So, if you think you are familiar with an author's work, style, and acceptability for certain age groups, that author's next book can totally throw you if he/she has decided to suddenly change his/her writing style and topics. I think some basic guidelines printed maybe on the back covers of the books themselves would be helpful - even for people like me who do not prefer overly graphic violence or sex in the books I read for entertainment.
Originally Posted By DlandJB <<<The sheer volume of books would make a rating system difficult>>> And the fact bush and his crew can't read very well. >>>>>>>>>>>>. That's a moot point. Ratings systems are voluntary. There are no government sponsored rating systems for television, movies and recordings. They are industry based.
Originally Posted By MissCandice What's with bookstores having a book at the counter with a sign saying that the author is available to sign the book? As far as rating books, like others have said, books don't make noise like other forms of entertainment so not a lot of fuss is made about rating them. I remember back in junior high my friends and I would read the "naughty" bits of books to each other and giggle maniacally, but we were book nerds anyway. I am sure other kids our age were trying to watch scrambled Playboy channel while we read our books.
Originally Posted By YourPalEd I remember sally field explaning it on a talk show, but she didn't mention books. She was talking about her email, and how she was getting the most disgusting porno in her email alone. That was years ago, but still, with the natural ability human children have to use computers and search for what they want, tv's are more of a quaint novelty when it comes to what is being said. There is not a news story on tv, that i haven't read, seen pictures, or video if you want, on line, already, usually 24 hours after i have read it. What i really hate is the weekend news cycle, which shuts down on the weekends, and they don't wake up til wednesday.
Originally Posted By YourPalEd I wouldn't worry about books anyway. Every year less and less are sold. Book publishers are busy trying to figure out what people are still willing to pay money for if they print something, not printing something people do not want them to. Oh, well, at least there is the bible. The bible always sells. But american media is to busy trying to tell people what to think. To think their way. To think the criminal way. But people find tv sickening now, and are not exactly listening as reverently as marketing execs keep wishing to believe. This is of course their crime too. A crime against humanity, and god. But i'll let god speak for god's self. If that's okay with you, god?
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By alexbook Wow, a book thread and I didn't see it right away. I have a few comments: 1. I agree with those who say that books don't make enough noise to cause a lot of outrage. I would guess that there are a lot fewer book readers than movie or television viewers. 2. Most publishers do provide recommended age ranges for their books, but this information is rarely printed on the books themselves for some reason. Librarians use these ratings to determine which books are appropriate for which ages, but very few booksellers are even aware of them. 3. There is a much stronger tradition of fighting for free speech among booksellers and librarians than among theater owners. Any suggestion that even hints at censorship is met with immediate, organized and vigorous opposition. 4. Ratings, as the MPAA and others have discovered, can be extremely difficult to apply objectively. Books without pictures are even harder to judge objectively, since they leave so much up to the readers' imagination. 5. Many parents take the attitude that reading *anything* is better than watching TV. One of the strangest phenomena I've seen (and I've seen it repeatedly) is the mother who objects to her children seeing pictures that might be rated PG-13 or R, but is perfectly willing to buy her children books or magazines full of X-rated prose. "Well, at least he's reading."
