<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Chicagoist: Chicagoist&apos;s Favorite Banned Books</title>
<link>http://chicagoist.com/2008/10/03/chicagoist_favorite_banned_books.php</link>
<description>All comments for Chicagoist&apos;s Favorite Banned Books</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>2008 Marcus Gilmer</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2008 09:00:00 -0600</lastBuildDate>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
<managingEditor>marcusisabadass@gmail.com</managingEditor>
<webMaster>marcusisabadass@gmail.com</webMaster>
<ttl>60</ttl>
<item>
<title>smussy</title>
<link>http://chicagoist.com/2008/10/03/chicagoist_favorite_banned_books.php#comment-1479086</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://chicagoist.com/2008/10/03/chicagoist_favorite_banned_books.php#comment-1479086</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2008 15:11:47 -0600</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;your child&apos;s name is holden?  that *rules.*&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item><item>
<title>L. Stolpman</title>
<link>http://chicagoist.com/2008/10/03/chicagoist_favorite_banned_books.php#comment-1479083</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://chicagoist.com/2008/10/03/chicagoist_favorite_banned_books.php#comment-1479083</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2008 15:09:29 -0600</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;This is Awkward - 

Well, I think that&apos;s because we chose books that were our &quot;favorites&quot; so I chose something in recent memory that I enjoyed, not necessarily searched my memory for something tantalizing. :)

This isn&apos;t a book but it&apos;s certainly interesting, if you&apos;re sort of into things that were banned and maybe we&apos;ll redeem ourselves a bit to you. ;)

There was a documentary shot in 1967 called Titicut Follies.  It was about patients at the Bridgewater State hospital for the criminally insane.  The film showed horrible treatment and the Massachusetts government tried to prevent the film from showing.  Anyway, a legal case ensued and it went to the Supreme Court and the S.Ct. banned it and it was the first time in U.S. history that a film &quot;was banned from general distribution for reasons other than obscenity, immorality, or national security.&quot;  Admittedly, I pulled that quote from wikipedia but it&apos;s easily confirmed from the many web pages about the video.

It was allowed to be shown in 1991.  I saw it on PBS and it was unlike anything I&apos;d ever seen before.  In one scene, a patient is strapped on a bed and a doctor feeds a tube in through his nose, down into his stomach. It has a funnel on the top. The doctor poured what looked like pancake batter into the funnel to feed the patient.  The doctor&apos;s cigarette was dangling over the funnel.  I can still picture it - now, 19 years later.  Nuts, huh?

Anyway, I think it&apos;s actually available to the masses as of just a couple of years ago.  I actually studied medical ethics because of it.

So!  There&apos;s something banned - not a book, admittedly - that was always fascinating to me.

How about you? Any good books you like that were banned?  I&apos;m sort of curious about more of these, too!

-L.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item><item>
<title>This is Awkward</title>
<link>http://chicagoist.com/2008/10/03/chicagoist_favorite_banned_books.php#comment-1479011</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://chicagoist.com/2008/10/03/chicagoist_favorite_banned_books.php#comment-1479011</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2008 14:36:11 -0600</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Wow....so these people basically just mentioned books you may have been required to read in a non-book-banning high school like The Giver or Catcher in the Rye and then many many shout outs to Harry Potter. 

I thought this post might be interesting but half of these books are things I would&apos;ve yawned over in junior high. Nothing more exciting than these? &lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
