Richard Grenell Quotes

Being an author of banned books is cool, I've decided.

The objections to the purchase are generally its extent, the cost of the purchase, the nature of selection, embracing too many works in foreign languages, some of too philosophical a character, and some otherwise objectionable. Of the first description, exception was taken to Voltaire’s works, &, co., and of the other to Callender’s Prospect Before Us

Few things in life seem more sexy than a banned book.

Rohinton Mistry's celebrated novel 'Such a Long Journey' was pulled off the syllabus of Mumbai University because local extremists objected to its content.

The publishing of a book is a worldwide event. The attempt to suppress a book is a worldwide event.

Any book worth banning is a book worth reading.

In the main, there are two sorts of books: those that no one reads and those that no one ought to read.

One of the greatest threats facing book publishing, and the entire country for that matter, is censorship.

All the excitements of a prohibited book had their usual effect, one of which, as always, is to expose the fact that the censors don't know what they are talking about.

My books for adults had been previously challenged and banned so I'd had experience with it. I always find it sad and amusing: Sad to think that such archaic and potentially dangerous censorious beliefs still exist, and amused because these censors only make a book more powerful and seductive when trying to ban it.

I hate it that Americans are taught to fear some books and some ideas as though they were diseases.

Anyone aspiring to literary greatness should read 'New Grub Street' and weep.

I shall never be ashamed of citing a bad author if the line is good.

In 1935, Faber & Faber published an anthology entitled 'My Best Western Story' in which the genre's leading practitioners contributed what they considered their finest. Alas, literature the stories ain't; they appear more like fossils from a spent mine.

What is also strange to me is that public libraries have always been in the forefront of opposing censorship.

The test of literature is, I suppose, whether we ourselves live more intensely for the reading of it.

I think good books have to make a few people angry.

Local school boards may not remove books from the school library shelves simply because they dislike the ideas contained in those books.

Who kills a man kills a reasonable creature, God's image; but he who destroys a good book, kills reason itself, kills the image of God, as it were in the eye.

Before Hitler could kill 6 million Jews, he had to burn 6 million books.

To limit the press is to insult a nation; to prohibit reading of certain books is to declare the inhabitants to be either fools or slaves: such a prohibition ought to fill them with disdain.

Literature is a far more ancient and viable thing than any social formation or state. And just as the state interferes in literature, literature has the right to interfere in the affairs of state.

I see 'Eligible' as a homage, and I see 'Pride and Prejudice' as a perfect book. You can dispute whether this project is a good idea, but you can't dispute my fondness for the novel.

I'm thinking of sending out censorship packets: information to share with those who want to defend my books when they come under fire. I'll tell why I wrote them and include reviews and letters of support from children and their parents.

It's hard to judge literary merit.