Tonight at 7 pm Central/8 pm Eastern, there is a free workshop/training to help people learn how to make book résumés for highly targeted books. These would then go on the Unite Against Book Bans website.

Quote from the UABB website on what a Book Resume is:

Book Résumés help teachers, librarians, parents, and community members defend books from censorship. They detail each title’s significance and educational value and are easy to share with administrators, book review committees, elected officials, and board members.

Their goal is to create a process for sourcing these résumés from the community because the ALA cannot keep up with demand (and is drowning with budget cuts).

The registration link for the training is here:
https://givebutter.com/R0SVw9

I’m jumping off of the controversy about the release of Harper Lee’s Go Set a Watchman mentioned here.

Regarding the question: it means that something stood in the way of that particular book “getting out” but, for better or for worse, it did. This could be the author’s direct wishes, government or publisher censorship, it being found or leaked, etc.

• What are some of those books?
• Are they worth looking into?
• Does the fact that we weren’t “supposed” to read them change how we understand or appreciate them?
• If the author themself didn’t want their works published (such as Kafka), what do we have to take into account when deciding to go against those wishes?
• What do we gain/lose by respecting/ignoring those wishes?

Also, I’m open to answers that involve parts of books rather than the whole books themselves, since I know there are many books out there that were partially censored or edited and have since been restored.