Instead of Donating, Queens School Dumps Books

A number of staffers at Queens Intermediate School 73 became upset when they discovered "new or slightly used books tossed into a Dumpster" outside. The Daily News has a photo of the books, which include "Little Women," "Sarah, Plain and Tall," and "Treasure Island," and one staffer said, "Those books, you open them up, they still crack, they're so new. Why not give them away or hold a book drive at least?"

It's unclear why the books were thrown out: Though Principal Patricia Reynolds had one book room cleaned out due to mold, "it does not appear that the nearly new books came from there." An investigation is reportedly under way, but PTA Treasure Patti Schick told the News, "I'm sure there was a logical reason. They wouldn't just toss them. There's got to be a good reason." We can all hope.

There are many donation options for books. There's Housing Works, the Salvation Army, and Good Will. The city has a list of some places where you can donate books, like Children for Children, Books for Freedom, and the Prisoners' Reading Encouragement Project.

Photograph of the statue of Peter & Willie, from the Ezra Jack Keats book A Whistle for Willie, in Prospect Park by pjcoleman on Flickr

Contact the author of this article or email tips@gothamist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

By Jen Chung in News on March 17, 2008 5:29 PM

Comments [rss]

petebfd

why throw the books out? laziness. investigation solved.

MFer

Why throw them books away when they could be warming some bums in a bonfire? No?

But really it's not even all about quality versus quantity. It is perfectly ok to discard "Little Women". It's a horrible book. "A Confederacy of Dunces" is toilet paper material. Anything by the late William F. Buckley doubles as sleeping pill-equivalent and cat litter. "On the Road"? Roll and smoke. Ayn Rand? It ain't even toilet paper. It's shit. Flush it down. Maya Angelou and Toni Morrison? Tampons.

It's time to recycle.

Spiny

These books are not "beat up copies," they're brand new. And regardless of what price they would fetch at the Strand, the fact remains that there are libraries in underfunded public schools which could add these books to their shelves for the use of their students. There are sick children in hospitals who could receive these books for free. Who cares about the monetary value of these books? They're still useful, as long as the words are legible.

Comparing newspapers and magazines (which provide news, something which changes on a daily basis, and can quickly become outdated) to classic works of literature is comparing apples and oranges. Newspapers, magazines, and blogs are typically not kept, reread, and shared, but novels are. And the fact that very few people read anymore doesn't mean that we should throw away books instead of donating them to children and encouraging those children to read.

No one's throwing a hissy fit here; they're looking into why these books were unnecessarily wasted.

emilydickinson

Those books are basically worthless. I also feel the pang somewhere, that books shouldn't ever be thrown out. However, a bunch of beat up copies 'Sarah Plain and Tall' won't even get you fifty cents at The Strand. Neil will take one look at that box and tell you to beat it. Sometimes, and not because of content or quality, books are worthless. Do you know how many copies of 'Little Women' are floating around? Arguably, issues of the Times, Juxtapoz and quite a few blogs have reading material just as valuable as 'Little Women' that no one throws a hissy fit when people toss them on a daily basis (blogs not withstanding).

Please remember to factor in the truth that very few people read anymore.