Book burning - just what are you ok with?

A book is only paper, and as such, excellent kindling. Free and individual thought is what we destroy when we burn or ban a book, and it is that, this most precious kindling of ideas, that we must never allow to be destroyed.

@Austinlad Even if you’ll die if you don’t get that fire started? Even if you have another copy?

Adding question: Are you ok with them being recycled?

I just associate book burnings with Nazi’s. Destroying knowledge as a tool of control. The symbolism alone makes me cringe.

Well, I was commenting on more a philosophical plane, @papayalily, because whether I’d be willing to die rather than burn a book is too hypothetical a proposition for me to consider. I can say this though—I certainly wouldn’t let the batteries on my Kindle run down.

Maybe it also depends on the book.

@Austinlad Ah. I was hoping you’d consider the hypothetical more.

@Deja_vu The criteria being… (ie if you agree with it, if it’s mass printed, etc)?

I feel that burning books as a demonstration is morally wrong. Unless its Mein Kampf, Mao’s Little Red Book, or the Twilight Series, then burn away.

@Winters But if it’s not a demonstration, then…?

@papayalily No, I don’t agree with it because of the stigma of it’s symbolism. Not only that the books can be donated. Why destroyed?

@papayalily well, it does make pretty good kindling as stated up above, but besides those two reasons, I don’t see why anyone would burn a book.

@Deja_vu Will you throw them out if they’re destroyed already ala the examples above?

@papayalily In that case, I’d throw it out, not burn it. There’s ammonia in cat piss. I would not like to breathe that in.

@papayalily, you’ve nudged me into realizing that I’m not very good at thinking hypothetically. Especially on life and death issues.

@Austinlad Eh, we all have our strengths and weaknesses.

I think I’d be more OK with burning paperbacks if anything.

I’m cold,need kindling and I will have to part with Britney Spears’ “Heart To Heart” ????
Oh,no. ;)

I would have a problem with burning books just for the hell of it. It just doesn’t seem right to burn words, even if it is now an ebook, because everyone doesn’t have access to them. I would rather donate books than throw them out. But I also know if I had to choose between freezing and reading, those books would become kindling.

I wouldn’t burn any of my books. If I want to get rid of books, I give them to friends or donate them to a local library or school. If the pages are messed up from water, I’d still keep it. The only way I would recycle a book would be if the words were gone from the pages. I wouldn’t burn them for kindling either.

As a political or religious statement it really appears stupid and ignorant to me. By burning a book I’m eliminating your view or your opinion? Not.

I would rather donate my books for people in need than burning them. There are many poor people that have the desire to read but they can’t afford to buy one. Burning books will cause pollution anyway.

A book is a very special thing, before books, when a person died they took their knowledge with them. Until books we had no way of passing on information except through what we could teach others, and no matter how good our students where, we could never pass on everything we knew.

Today we can treat cancer, we have the internet, aircraft, and all kinds of other technological wonders. A few centuries ago we did not have any of these things, but it is not because people back then where less intelligent, the human brain is practically identical to how it was thousands of years ago. We only live in such a technologically advanced era because we are able to stand on the shoulders of those who went before us. Books are one of the few differences between us and cavemen.

In my opinion, burning books is treason against humanity, and a way of advertising your ignorance and hateful nature. A book is much more than a collection of words, it is a window in to the minds of our predecessors, and a way of sharing and experiencing first hand their thoughts. With this in mind.

Would I burn a book to save my own life? Sure. We live in a world that has the internet and the printing press, the book can be replaced and does not have more value than my life. However, if the internet where destroyed, and humanity on the verge of extinction, say in some kind of ice age, and I had the last book on earth then I would not burn it, even at the cost of my own life. Even if it where a bad book, a poorly written book, even if it where a copy of mein kampf, the idea of books is so valuable that no ones life would justify its destruction.

Books are such powerful tools, that thanks to them i now live in a world where i can even afford to throw them out or burn them.

Lets face it, there is nothing wrong with letting a novel or two be destroyed. or even using them as kindling. but to destroy books with the intention of supressing the thoughts within is just barbaric.

I don’t think books are these magical pieces of technology as some would say. I actually just got done moving, and wrestled with keeping my somewhat massive library of books… but I ended up giving most of them away because (1) they’re heavy, (2) I’m never going to read them again, and (3) I read more stuff on my Kindle now. I think books may well someday become obsolete as current generations die off and the world becomes filled with digital natives who expect to read everything on computer screens.

I have no problems with people burning books if they are (for example) freezing to death and need kindling. I also don’t have a problem throwing away useless books (like outdated medical or legal texts), hopefully to be recycled.

Burning books to make an ideological point, on the other hand—as the Nazis did, and as the Florida pastor is doing with the Quran—is stupid on several levels. Now, I am not a fan of the Quran; I am not a fan of a great many books, especially religious books. I think their ideology should be forcefully argued against. But burning books isn’t a form of argument; it’s a symbol (and potentially a function) of censorship.

Oh i’d highly recommend it.

“Dort, wo man Bücher verbrennt, verbrennt man am Ende auch Menschen.”

I’m not okay with burning books. Not even a single copy in my fire place. If a book is seriously damaged (I’ve kept my waterlogged copy of Peter and Wendy for years), I will recycle the pages. Why waste paper? If there are other copies in circulation, it means the book is popular – not that it should be burned. I have five copies of Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland and intend on purchasing more – none of them should be burned. I have never thrown a book away. I have donated unwanted literature to libraries (both the public library and the local high school’s) and Goodwills.

My books are, by no means, in pristine condition. I always have a pen on hand to mark them up. I highlight passages that are utterly beautiful, or might work well in an academic paper, or words I don’t understand but want to look up in a dictionary when one is available, or something that made me laugh that I want to share with a friend. The spines are crinkled with wear – the same as our faces wrinkle with age. My books age with me. They become an extension of me as I read them. I cannot intentionally, with any good conscious, completely and utterly destroy them.

The only event in which I would permit a book to be burned by my hands, is in an emergency when no other materials are available to start a fire. I doubt I will ever be in such circumstances. My books are safe.

I even get mad at my brother when he jokingly suggests “this book is SO awful I want to burn it”. I wouldn’t even burn books of authors whose writing I loathe. It’s just an excruciating idea to me. The very thought of seeing books burning makes me sad. I wept during the book-burning scenes of The Book Thief. I just don’t understand why someone would want to destroy books.

Book burning is fine, it’s a good way to get rid of old worn out and especially moldy books. It is NOT ok however when it is used as a means to keep “dangerous ideas” from the public. But that is something that was more of a concern in the pre-Internet era, when books were among the primary means of spreading ideas and philosophies.

Personally, I hate it and think it’s completely stupid.

I don’t pick and choose which constitutional rights I support though, so as long as it’s the people’s doing and not a sanctioned government event, people should be able to do what they please.

Like @Qingu , an upcoming move (from the US to England) led me to the decision to purge the house of many items, including most of my book collection. Some were given to friends who wanted them (such as all cookbooks) and the rest were donated to the local library. Only one went into the recycling bin because it was well loved by me and pretty much destroyed by a classmate who thought it would be okay to underline and write in it. The few I kept have either sentimental value, probably cannot be found in England, or my SO and I both want to read it.

As for burning, only if it was a last resort for survival…and then I’d prioritize. And when it comes to book-burning demonstrations, I’ve never understood them. They hit the news, and it only makes people, including me, want to read them. It just seems like a lose-lose situation.

A couple FYI’s for some of the rabid anti-burners:
1) Crumbling yellowed old paperbacks can not be recycled into new paper. Only supple fresh long paper fibers are suitable for recycling.
2) Moldy books are “contagious.” The mold will spread to other books, so if you have moldy smelly books, do NOT donate them or give them to friends or you will be sabotaging the other books they already have.
3) Burning old moldy books not only stops the mold but also makes more ecological sense (if for instance it is done in a heat-stove) than burning virgin wood.

I would destroy a book only if it was damaged but I’d more likely throw it in the recycling or the trash than burn it. We’re not really supposed to burn stuff in this neighbourhood. If a book is still in reasonable condition I’d rather give it to a charity shop. No sense destroying something that somene else can get pleasure from. The only book-burnings I object to on moral grounds are those where all copies of a certain book are destroyed for reasons of censorship.

It seems to me like what is being asked here is more of a metaphysical issue. Is a book a physical thing or intellectual property? Of how much value is the actual physical paper construct as a means of conveying the intellectual property compared to other means of doing so?

As medium for intellectual content, there is nothing special about a book.

As physical artifact with associated memories, it can be as special as any other artifact.

As a way of securely storing data for long periods of time, it has it’s advantages and disadvantages.

As something worth protecting with ones life: forget it! Life before books, not the other way around. In the end, it’s just a thing, no matter how much value anyone assigns to it. It’s value is situational. There is no one rule that fits all books in all situations.

Things come, things go. Books are but things.
Paper burns, but words, stories and messages cannot be destroyed.

I am one of those very unsentimental types, maybe it is my maturity and awakenings over the years, but ‘stuff’ of any kind just does not evoke any neurotic clinging within me. I can part with anything without a backwards glance. Just ‘stuff.’ lol

Feel free to burn. Just STFU when I make fun of you for doing it. Free speech goes all ways.

maybe they should burn Everyone Poops

@Pied_Pfeffer said: And when it comes to book-burning demonstrations, I’ve never understood them. They hit the news, and it only makes people, including me, want to read them. It just seems like a lose-lose situation.

That reminds me of the hullaballoo when Al Franken came out with his book “Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right.” Fox News sued for copyright infringement. Franken sat back, thought about the free publicity, and said “Bring it on.” :-)

Fox dropped the suit a week later when they realized the same thing.

It doesn’t bother me one bit, and i don’t see how some make such a big issue out of it. Obviously if it’s limited edition or a particular book that you prize or has sentimental value or something, then it’s not cool to burn it. But as for books in general….who cares about the odd book being burned?
Those who burn books to prove some point though, are just silly to say the least. That just annoys me. People sometimes protest in the stupidest of ways. However, burning books promoting evil doings (during a protest or otherwise) is ok, because crap should be burned and removed from the earth.

“What if it’s been “destroyed” – was in a flood/your child barfed on it/your cat peed on it?”
That is definetly a good reason to burn or throw it out.

I don’t have a problem with people doing whatever they want to their private property (which I assume is what these hypothetical books would be).

If I had books too damaged to donate them to the library or charities collecting books for distribution in rural areas, I send them to be recycled.

I do have a problem with any kind of public book-burning-as-statement-affiliation. After the library at Alexandria was burned, it took us 1500 years to get back up to the knowledge we had then. 1500 years. What a waste of everyone’s time.