Archives Found

Over the past weekend, I had a fantastic time at the Texas Book Festival in Austin. Some highlights of the festival part of the weekend included sitting in more than a few author talks, having some new books signed, and making a huge list of books to check out once I’ve finished the current pile. One discussion that I particularly enjoyed on Sunday was that of the excellent-looking book Lone Stars of David: the Jews of Texas. Co-editors Hollace Ava Weiner and Rabbi Kenneth Roseman gave a rousing description of their process in compiling the source materials for this book (part of the Brandeis series on American Jewish History) that so moved me to run down to the B&N tent, purchase the book, and be the first person standing in line to have it signed. During the short talk, Weiner showed off her custom-made boots (shown on the cover of the book), and Roseman compared his theory of the melting pot/Jewish & immigrant assimilation to chocolate-chip cookies; eg. the chocolate chips are part of the batter and of the finished cookie, but they remain separate from the batter, unblended but still adding something special to the whole. I’m looking forward to settling down with the book once I have a spare hour or two.

Just a few of the other highlights: Kinky Friedman, the Cast-Iron Cookoff, and Elizabeth Samet. Of course, the weekend would not have been complete without some good BBQ, great Mexican food, and fantastic Indian food. Mmm. Books and good food– what more could one want?

I always love to find out what other people are reading, and I found it especially interesting to see how many Nobel Prize winners attribute their early influences to libraries. I feel like the ALA or a literacy group should try to team up with them for some sort of publicity campaign.

It’s Banned Book Week again, and I wanted to say something about that. Actually, Jessamyn West said it better, so here it is:

Banning books is bad. Challenging books is an exercise in free speech and a totally appropriate way of giving community feedback on library selection policies. Lumping challenged and banned books together confuses two different issues, to my mind.

Anyway, I think that she’s exactly right. Taking something completely away (banning) not only deprives others of the book, it also takes away the possibility that they might read it and decide for themselves whether or not the material is of interest. Challenging something, on the other hand, is a form of protest that does not take away the rights of other people– it registers the displeasure of the challenger in a constructive way but does not remove the ability for others to look for themselves and come to their own conclusions. While I may not agree with the challenger’s views, I think that a book challenge done in a responsible, respectful fashion is a great way to begin a conversation about library selection policies, intended audience, and community needs.

In another vein, as noted by The Onion: Nation’s Teens Disappointed By Banned Books