“Since this objector has not read the entire work, then it is not possible for them to have considered the value of the work in its entirety.” “The removal of books from the library is a serious matter and they should not be removed based on selected words, phrases and illustrations that are taken out of context,” Uberti said. Uberti added that the one objector to “Blankets” complained that it was sexually graphic, but admitted they did not read the entire book. “This raised concerns that some of the objectors may not have read the entire book although they indicated on the form that they had,” she said. Uberti said, however, that most of the “Flamer” complaints used identical wording. “All objectors (to ‘Flamer’) believe the theme of the book is pornography and sexually explicit,” Uberti said in a summary of the committee’s report. On March 28, nine complaints were logged against “Flamer,” and two days later one against “Blankets,” according to Uberti. The middle school removal, Uberti said, was based on the listed reading age of “Flamer” as 14 to 18 years. That complaint led to the removal of that book from the middle school library, but not the high school library. The Special Review Committee was formed after a citizen complained about “Flamer” in late March. Book banning has no place in Connecticut,” she concluded. “Our students deserve to find themselves in the books on the shelves in their library. “And as we shape that view, we understand the need for representation.”īysiewicz said that 41% of books targeted for bans are LGBTQ-oriented, and 40% had a protagonist of color.

Books are a critical part of the way we learn about ourselves and the world around us at any age,” Bysiewicz said in the video. “Book banning is dangerous and anti-democratic. Susan Bysiewicz sent the Newtown Democratic Town Committee a video, which they also posted on Facebook.

The library book by susan orleans