This page shows the various types of public libraries in NY. You’ll notice that all of them are indeed headed by politicians of some sort. The trustees or board members are either appointed by and responsible to the municipal government or are themselves elected . The boards of library systems may be elected by the boards of the member libraries.
Now, it’s very likely that you are a civil servant, and covered by civil service law. I work for a NYS agency, and am covered by civil service law. But my supervisor isn’t , and her supervisor isn’t and so on. The governor probably won’t take it into his head to get rid of my supervisor or to tell her which decision to make . But if he did, all he has to do is tell the chairman of my agency (who will lose his job if the governor fails to reappoint him) and it will roll downhill from there.
It’s entirely possible that the library director is appointed by and serves at the pleasure of the mayor in Wasilla, just as it’s entirely possible that “library director” is not the same job as “head librarian”. Different places have different titles.
Every library has to weed books, although this doesn’t always happen as often as it should. I’ve heard some pretty funny stories from friends at small public libraries who’ve found outdated books from the '60s and before still on their shelves. For example, a “what to expect at the hospital” book for kids explaining that a nurse wearing a starched white dress and little white hat will come to put the ether mask over your face.
That’s the kind of book that needs to be tossed when space becomes an issue. Lack of shelving space isn’t an excuse for getting rid of books that have potentially controversial content. That should be the last reason for getting rid of a library book, well behind “no one’s checked this out in the past decade” or even “the cover is torn”.
The librarian.
In most cases, the librarian. The librarian would be answerable to the local library board, but the board members aren’t normally involved in collection management decisions.
It’s kind of touching that you think the community at large would know that the library had a lot of y and not much x. Individual patrons, like the one mentioned elsewhere in this thread, might make some observation like “the library has too many cookbooks”, but that’s about as far as it goes. Do you know the topic of every book in your local library? Would you ever notice that it needed more x and less y unless x were a particular pet subject of yours? But again, none of this has anything to do with Palin’s conflict with Emmons.
If you’re interested in reading about a case that really did involve a librarian who lost her job for her failure to reflect the tastes of her community, I recommend The Dismissal of Miss Ruth Brown by Louise Robbins. (Disclosure: Robbins was my advisor in grad school.) Brown was a small town librarian in Oklahoma from 1919-1950. She was fired for the offense of carrying “subversive” material in the library like The Nation and The New Republic. More to the point, many community members had a problem with the fact that Brown was, outside the library and on her own time, involved in a peaceful pro-integration organization.
I guess you would consider this story not a sad example of McCarthyism run rampant but rather the heroic tale of a community righteously carrying out its responsibility to guarantee that neither the library’s contents nor its librarian deviated from the opinions of the local majority. This is just what you’ve been advocating here. Thankfully, most people in a position to make decisions about library staffing and collection management do not share your views.
This is an overall fantastic thread, SDMBers, but most
are overlooking the reasons Palin considered this ban:
creationism.
Roughly translated, creationism really means,
“If you can’t think as small minded as me,
then I’m protesting.” In a small town office
of small town power, the small minded ideals
can be easily exalted.
I will also remind everyone that Alaska still
has the most in-use outhouses in the world.
Creationism was mentioned in passing as an issue separate from that which is the focus of the thread. And you are certainly speculating wildly about Palin’s motives, because there is no evidence whatsoever anywhere that she was targeting anti-creationist books. Heck, if you’d been paying one speck of attention to this thread you’d know we don’t even know what particular books she was even thinking about banning!
And before your noise was unapprciated; I was not offended. But your harebrained and slanderous insinuation that I would consider banning any book, now THAT is offensive to me. Your ‘apology’ is therefore roundly rejected.
I’m about as free speech as one can get and pretty much against the banning of any book, regardless of how offensive it might be (one of the things I ding our Euro buddies on is that THEY ban books…for the common good of course and it varies from country to country).
This seems…well, kind of thin though. But then, this seems like a lot of attacks lately on Palin…long on outrage, short on substance. If the shoe were on the other foot and Obama was being accused of something like this with this kind of ‘evidence’ being presented I have no doubts that the eyes would be rolling on one side…and the foam flying on the other.
It is certainly NOT a separate issue,
it is one to examine before electing.
I have read this thread religiously (snicker)
so I do not consider this to be harebrained,
but you call it what you like. You are entitled to your opinion.
If I’m a board member appointed by and responsible to the municipal government, then the municipal government (made up of politicians) can decide not to reappoint me. That doesn’t mean the municipal government gets involved in every day-to-day decision (they surely don’t-the board probably doesn’t), but the appointing authority has the ability to influence the overall operation of the library simply by who they choose to appoint , as well as the ability to influence board members individually with the (unspoken) threat of job loss. If the mayor appointed me, and he wants Sunday hours, I’d better do my best to make it happen - or maybe I won’t have a job when my term expires.
The other types of libraries have elected board members. Someone who runs for office and is elected is pretty much the definition of a politician.
I’m not sure about anyone else, but partisan politics doesn’t really have much to do with my dog in this fight.
I hereby vow that if any presidential/veep candidate ever gets nominated or put on the ballot of any party that has even remotely “hypothetically” asked about getting books banned or “hypothetically” wondered if it was possible or “hypothetically” brought up the subject of banning books that I will personally froth at the mouth with the vehemence of a rabid bull mastiff.
You see, I don’t care what party someone is, I deeply care that the fundamental principles of our nation are held up. The Bill of Rights is a righteous piece of paper, that I adore. As is our Constitution. No where does it specifically say what Librarians can or can not do. But the interpretation overwhelmingly favors against banning of books.
Boards and their relationship to municipal governments are a pit in which any discussion can be lost. This one is in danger of that happening. I’ve worked in three different environments in two countries – Alberta and Ontario in Canada and Massachusetts in the U.S. Because (as well as being a librarian) I’ve sold major capital assets to libraries in six provinces and at least 30 states, I have some idea about where the ultimate authority lies, both in reality and statutorily.
In some places, a library board is a separate corporate entity from a municipal government. In some of those cases, the board is self-perpetuating – it votes on its own composition – in others it’s appointed by whatever the normal municipal procedure is (the mayor appoints in a strong mayor system, the council appoints in a strong council system, or it can be directly elected). In other jurisdictions, the library can be a city department, with the librarian having the same relation to the mayor/council as other non-elected civil servants (the head of the Parks and Recreation Department, for example.) I’m unaware of any environment in which the local librarian is elected. (As a Canadian, the thought of an elected judge strikes me as equally ridiculous, but, hey, I’ve got no dog in that fight.)
Trying to generalize one’s experience with library governance (especially “This < must be the way it works in the places I’m familiar with” is a snare and a delusion. Even within the same statutory framework, different municipalities do thing differently.
I have no idea how things worked in Wasillia, AK when Sarah Palin became mayor. I’d guess from the stuff that has come out over the past few days that she thought that she had power where she only had influence. If that’s the case, it’s a good mistake to make (and learn from) early in one’s career. A lot of people can die if you make it as POTUS.
I admit I’m using a hypothetical to explore the issue. I really don’t know how it works, so I’m asking questions. But it seems to me that a community should have a voice in their library. If you look at 100 qualified Librarians, some of those Librarians would be a better fit in some communities than others.
I would like to read more about that. Thanks. I wonder of there’s an online recount.
Well, I do not see I’ve advocated much. As I’ve said, I find the issue interesting and have been exploring it. But if you feel the need to be condescending, knock yourself out.
Oh, you may want to check one or two of the books in your library. McCarthy wasn’t elected to the senate until 1950, the year your teacher was fired. The hearings that made him famous, and from where the charge “McCarthyism” comes, didn’t begin until 1954.
Your implication seems to be you had better bend over for your employers.
Realistically this makes sense. Philosophically this is awful.
Certainly a librarian should be sensitive to the wants of their community to some extent. But overall I think librarians are of a distinctly philosophical bent. Almost religious in performing their duties. And that religion mandates a generally balanced collection. Censorship and bannings are anathema to them. Anything to break that notion has to be on a case-by-case basis and exceptionally compelling (e.g. the NAMBLA handbook as a made up extreme [at least I hope there is no such thing]).
Libraries would be a disaster, to the point of near uselessness, if every municipality inflicted their own prejudices on the institution.
I think most people realize this and accept books being in the local library they may personally disagree with. Indeed it seems a fundamental extension of free speech which is so revered by most people in the US.
When ANYONE wants to stomp on that in my view they are un-American and, frankly, should in no way be eligible for political office and CERTAINLY not VPOTUS. If there is a God they should be struck by lighting when they take an oath to uphold the Constitution and they try this shit.
Clearly they just do not get even the most basic fundamentals of a democracy.
They do. Any community is going to have a Friends of the Library group, and there are many other ways community members can get involved in the library. They don’t get to elect the librarians by popular vote though, and you’re the first person I’ve ever heard suggest that such a thing would be desirable to anyone.
The same could be said of any profession. I’m puzzled as to why you think librarians alone should be hired based on their personal beliefs. Or do you think this should be a major factor in all hiring decisions in every field? Were you grilled on your political views before you were offered your current job?
You’re hardly in a position to call me condescending, seeing as how you’ve spent most of this thread telling librarians how libraries should be run. You’ve been quite explicit in your suggestions that no one should be hired as a public librarian unless he or she holds the same tastes as the local community, and that the community has the responsibility to fire any librarian who fails to pander sufficiently to these tastes.
McCarthy was elected in 1946 and his senate term began in 1947. He first gained prominence in 1950 by making claiming that the State Department was full of secret Communists. He was formally censured by the Senate at the end of 1954.
The Dismissal of Miss Ruth Brown notes that McCarthy’s first gained national attention just over a week before Brown was accused of Communist sympathies. McCarthy himself was of course not personally involved, but usage of the term “McCarthyism” is not restricted to the practices of Sen. McCarthy himself. We’d hardly need a word for it if it was.
Oh, and Ruth Brown died before I was born. I said the book’s author, Louise Robbins, was my advisor (not my teacher). It’s not really that confusing, the two women have completely different names.
I don’t. And not for Librarians. I was simply exploring who should have the final say if there is a major disconnect between a LIbrarian and the community as a whole.
If I’ve been so explicit, you should find it easy to point to it. I’ve explained why I’ve offered up the hypotheticals I have. You can insist on ignoring that if you must, but what you write here does not express my views. Sorry. It is my position that if there is major tension between a community and a Librarian, that the community has the right to have its library serve its interests. But just so you don’t mischaracterize my position, libraries should not be biased. In fact the more single-minded the community, the more important and valuable a broad and diverse collection.
Whoops. I stand corrected. Thank you. I think 1950 stuck in my head because that’s when he made the speech that launched him into prominence.
True, but surely McCarthyism can’t expand to before his actions that coined the term. There was no “McCarthyism” before 1954, definitely not before 1950. Many try to tie him to the House UnAmerican Activities Committee, which started it’s famous work way before his time.
The letter has been published for four or five days now. Have any members of the City Council come forward to deny her account? Have any of the others who were asked to resign taken exception? Kilkenny doesn’t claim that her disagreement with Palin was kept a secret. Surely someone else would have spoken up by now if her accusations (as published in the NYT) were untrue.
Political leaders who demand “loyalty” give me a sinking feeling. Being a mayor isn’t supposed to be all about the royal treatment. It’s supposed to be about public service.
