Read Banned Books: Bag of Bones
- Dan
- 40 minutes ago
- 2 min read
Read Banned Books
Read the books "the man" says are dangerous. Be a rebel! Read banned books! Think dangerous thoughts! Read Bag of Bones.
Previous entries in this series:
Read Banned Books: Bag of Bones
Bag of Bones by Stephen King was banned in February of this year across the state of Utah. Seeing as I am a fan of King's novels and an advocate of banned books, I knew I had to read this one.
The yarn follows author Mike Noonan as he deals with the grief from his beloved wife's death. About a third of the book is almost entirely devoted to Noonan's grieving. Indeed, this book is in many ways a story about going through the stages of grief, with, of course, as it is by the King of Horror, a paranormal twist. During this opening third, I came as close to DNFing a Stephen King book as I ever have. In the end, I am extremely glad I didn't.
After the opening third, Noonan moves to his summer home in the back woods of Maine. This is where the story takes many bizarre and fascinating turns, introducing ghostly elements—his dead wife, a haunted house, and vengeful spirits—alongside friends and foes very much alive.  Bag of Bones is not my favorite Stephen King novel, but it's still darn good, highly recommended.
Which brings me to the question I have regarding every banned book. Why was it banned in the first place? Here's a quote from The Salt Lake Tribune's article: "Bag of Bones" was officially banned Friday after the Davis, Granite, Jordan and Tooele County school districts removed the title…State officials typically do not cite the details of a book's content when placing it on the statewide banned list.
Hmmm? No reason given? The law used to remove Bag of Bones, and over twenty other titles, is a "sensitive materials law." What aspects of this tale might the censors feel sensitive about?
Well, first off, there is a good deal of sex. It's not gratuitous, but there's certainly more of it than I typically desire in a book. Having said that, a good deal of the sex isn't particularly explicit and is horrific, as opposed to being pornographic in any way. I could see the sex being objectionable to sensitive censors. However, Utah went for Trump—who has bragged about grabbing women by the pussy and been found civilly liable for rape—by 22% in 2024. This leads me to believe sex isn't what the censors found concerning.
Perhaps it's the tale's paranormal aspect that led to its banning. If that's the case, the censors have scads more books to ban. No, I think the real reason is more insidious than that. You see, a black woman is raped and murdered. She returns as a vengeful spirit. In both life and death, she is stronger in will and spirit than her tormenters. I think that message, that being a victim of crime/oppression/whatever doesn't make you weak or even truly a victim, does not sit well with the book banners.