One of my fellow posters noticed my signature and asked me to post a thread about Banned Books Week. I did a little research, and discovered that someone was kind enough to post a thread last year about the same subject. So, where to start…
This is my first semester as a library science student, but not my first exposure to Banned Books Week. I’ve read a number of banned books, but not because they were banned books; I was initially attracted to them because of their content rather than their controversy. While I was volunteering today, I asked my supervisor about our library’s policy toward books, and it’s as follows: if a book becomes “too objectionable” by a significant enough number of people for the children’s or teens’ section, it gets moved to the adult books. It’s rare, and there’s only one children’s/teens’ book in the adult section at this point. It’s still available, but they don’t restrict anyone’s access the information available throughout the library, as their job is to provide information rather than police who uses it.
In 1953, The American Library Association compiled a statement titled “The Freedom to Read Statement.” Within it, they propose the following ideas* in regard to the freedoms of readers and access to information:
[quote]
[ul][li] It is in the public interest for publishers and librarians to make available the widest diversity of views and expressions, including those that are unorthodox, unpopular, or considered dangerous by the majority.[/li]
[li]Publishers, librarians, and booksellers do not need to endorse every idea or presentation they make available. It would conflict with the public interest for them to establish their own political, moral, or aesthetic views as a standard for determining what should be published or circulated.[/li]
[li]It is contrary to the public interest for publishers or librarians to bar access to writings on the basis of the personal history or political affiliations of the author.[/li]
[li]There is no place in our society for efforts to coerce the taste of others, to confine adults to the reading matter deemed suitable for adolescents, or to inhibit the efforts of writers to achieve artistic expression[/li]
[li]It is not in the public interest to force a reader to accept the prejudgment of a label characterizing any expression or its author as subversive or dangerous.[/li]
[li]It is the responsibility of publishers and librarians, as guardians of the people’s freedom to read, to contest encroachments upon that freedom by individuals or groups seeking to impose their own standards or tastes upon the community at large; and by the government whenever it seeks to reduce or deny public access to public information.[/li]
[li]It is the responsibility of publishers and librarians to give full meaning to the freedom to read by providing books that enrich the quality and diversity of thought and expression. By the exercise of this affirmative responsibility, they can demonstrate that the answer to a “bad” book is a good one, the answer to a “bad” idea is a good one.[/ul][/li][/quote]
A lot of rational people would agree that these ideas put forth by the ALA are a great idea; however, there are still dissenters out there that believe that censorship (according to their own guidelines) is the best policy for public and school libraries to have. There are still court battles being fought for and against freedom of information through libraries, and there are still people stealing or checking out books (and refusing to return them) to restrict other people’s use of those books.
There are lots of reasons behind people wanting to ban books, and these days, many of them stem from trying to protect their children from things that are disagreeable to the parent: “I don’t like X and don’t want my child exposed to it, so nobody should have access to books that have X in them.” Book burning is not as prevalent as in the past, but it serves the same silly mission as stealing books that are deemed “controversial” or “inappropriate” by a group: the ultimate goal is to restrict as much access to the information that offends that group as possible. Recent history has shown, though, that drawing attention to books that are considered “controversial” only increase the number of people who access that information in the long run.
There are some recent articles dealing with individuals selecting to remove a book from circulation at their local libraries or over the placement of books aimed at children and teens. The following books have been involved:
Sandpiper
King and King
It’s Perfectly Normal
Fat Kid Rules the World (The author’s blog post about the controversy surrounding her book)
Here is an official site about banned books.
[sub]*I only quoted the main points and not the explanatory paragraphs after each point for the sake of brevity.[/sub]