Christmas Hiatus

Seeing as it is the Christmas season, I (along with most of the world) am getting into holiday mode.  Seeing as I haven't posted for a while, I'm thinking you probably already assumed I am taking a break.  This is my official notice to let you all know that I will be posting once again in January, when the holiday craziness settles down a bit.  Thanks, as always, for reading, commenting, and keeping the Freedom to Read in your thoughts.

Have a Merry Christmas Everyone!

_rob

Banned Books Advent Calendar: Day 1

Day 1, Banned Books Calendar from Entressen kirjasto on Vimeo.

Other Challenges to Literature [a case study]

This blog was created not only to explore specific and general cases of censorship, but other challenges to literature, including challenges to those institutions that provide literature for public consumption.  In this case, I am speaking about public libraries, and specifically in response to an opinion piece that the Vancouver Sun allowed to run a week or so back.  The article, titled "We should shut our libraries," was written by a british librarian who has not worked in a library since 1994.

Mr. McTernan attempts (and I say "attempt" purposely because I believe he does a terribly poor job of actually saying anything meaningful) to address reasons to keep libraries open, shooting them down one by one and finally claiming that libraries just aren't needed anymore.  The same was said when radio first started up and later when television became big and then when electronic books started coming out.  Has the library folded?  No.  Is it expensive?  Yes.  Does that mean we need to get rid of them?  Heck no!

In the week following the publication of Mr. McTernan's article, numerous letters were sent to the editors at the Vancouver Sun from outraged librarians from the BC Library Association and the Canadian Library Association.  Let's take a look at why librarians got so fired up about the issue (and why I got pretty darn upset as well):

Take reference services, once the core of the public library's educational role. Access to information has been transformed by the Internet. Google a subject and you can become ridiculously well-informed ridiculously quickly. Engrossing lectures from the planet's best minds are freely available on university websites, from the TED (Technology Entertainment and Design) conference series, or on BBC iPlayer. Channels such as BBC Four or Sky Arts provide a wide range of high quality documentaries across a multitude of subjects. We live in an information-rich society - so we should celebrate its availability, not yearn for a time when you had to go to the central library for it.

Perhaps Mr. McTernan has not been to a library recently, but in my area there is always a line-up of people asking librarians questions at the information desk.  The questions are most definitely different than they once were, but that does not change the fact that people still go to the library for reference purposes.  Yes, the average person might be able to find some information on the internet using Google.  But are they necessarily finding the best information?  Have they come up with good keywords and search terms?  Librarians are constantly helping people (students especially) formulate a good series of keywords with which to utilize internet searches to their maximum capacity.  The questions have changed, but the service is still necessary.

Then there's the argument that your local library is the gateway to a national and international network of literature and education. So it is - but so is your computer. Time was, to get hold of a particular book, you would have to go to a library and ask. Now, with AbeBooks and Alibris, almost all the second-hand bookshops in the world are available to search. This is as true for new books as for old: More than 130,000 titles were published in the United Kingdom in 2009, and 330 million new books were purchased.

Alright Mr. McTernan, I will concede that the using a computer at home is more convenient at times, but I cannot tell you how often I have used a library (from home) to access databases that I would otherwise have to pay hundreds of dollars per year to access.  How often does the average student actually spend money to access online databases to look for articles.  How many people in this day and age can afford to buy all the books they need instead of getting them for free?

The final defence of the public library is that it is a place for the pupil who has nowhere else to study and revise. Once again, this is the 21st century. Virtually every kid has a desk at home, even if it often has a games console on it. And libraries at secondary schools are, in my experience, uniformly good and open places for young people. Few institutions are timeless. Most reflect the period when they were created, and have to change as society changes if they are to survive. The crisis in our libraries is not because of the "cuts" - it's because they are needed less.

Let's get to some statistics now.  Perhaps the situation is different in England.  In fact, I know it is.  But the point here, is that Mr. McTernan's article was published in British Columbia, the most active and well-utilized library network in Canada.  And we are to believe that libraries should be cut?  Another article, published in the Vancouver Sun on November 4th took a good look at stats in relation to McTernan's claims and came up with the following:

About 2.7 million British Columbians hold public library cards. Hundreds of thousands more don’t have cards but visit the library regularly – in some cases, every day. Last year, B.C. libraries received more than 30 million in-person visits, a 10-per-cent increase from 2009. That is clear evidence of the growing and sustainable demand for libraries. Beyond that, there were 27 million virtual visits. For many people, losing their library access would mean losing a vital
part of their lives. 

True, not everyone uses libraries, but perhaps they don’t understand what they are missing. Libraries have been transformed with the times. A Rip Van Winkle who fell asleep in 1994 — the year McTernan’s career as a librarian ended — and woke up today would not recognize the thriving, wired libraries that are ready and able to serve an information-hungry population. With ebook readers, digital materials, and electronic reference transactions, libraries have kept pace and embraced the digital age.

Well, I think the rebuttal pretty much knocked Mr. McTernan's arguments to the ground without much hope of standing up again.  Of course, part of the problem was the Vancouver Sun thinking it was a good idea to publish an article specific to the United Kingdom over here in BC in the first place.  In any case, this post is to show how important libraries are, as places of learning, knowledge, and as social spaces.  And of course, let's not forget the important work of libraries as spaces that hold high the idea of Freedom to Read!

Thanks for listening...

Defend the Freedom to Read: It's Everybody's Job

I'm back from the dead!  Okay, maybe not, but it feels like it after finally finishing up about 10 projects that I had on the go.  And now that I'm back, what better way to start than with a movie!!  This short video comes from the ALA's Office for Intellectual Freedom, which requests that we all do our part to bring attention to book challenges to Defend the Freedom to Read.  After all, it's everybody's job...

So, now that you've seen that (hopefully) enlightening little video, it's time to talk about specific book challenges.  In Borger, Texas, a book was recently removed entirely from the Borger Intermediate and Middle School Library.  The book in question?  Carolyn Mackler's Tangled.  The book follows four young people as they vacation in a Caribbean resort.  The reason that it was banned from the school district?  This passage:

"I looked up and my heart plummeted, I swear, into my colon. Because there, standing above me and ripping off his shirt was the guy. The guy from the diving board. The guy with the muscular calves and, oh god, the swimsuit riding low enough for me to conjure up some serious imagery."

Really, is this so bad?  I mean, okay, so a younger student might not be the best audience, but you can't tell me that middle school students are not thinking in these terms and that this passage is somehow so overly explicit that it's going to ruin a child for life.  As one commenter on the ConnectAmarillo article wrote:  "thats all the book said, pretty much? Newsflash, boys have penises and girls have vaginas. And I am about 99.9% sure that most middle schoolers know this."  Is this passage really enough to have books completely removed from libraries these days?  Apparently.  Are we so easily offended by sexuality?  Apparently.

It angers me that books are taken away from students for so little in this day and age when access to books should be celebrated and enjoyed.  Why is it that suddenly anything remotely sexual is too much for teens to handle?  Well, it's not, really.  It's parental discomfort.  Most of these concerns are from parents who, it seems to me, are much more afraid of sexuality than their children.  Please, parents, let your children read and ask questions!!  It doesn't help to shelter them when they already (probably) know more about sex than you do.

Anyway, thanks for listening.  Let me know what you think.  And keep your eyes peeled for challenges in your area, wherever you are!  Remember, defending the right to read is everybody's job!

posting pause

Apologies for the lack of posts recently!  I am just finishing up my current degree and trying to get a few other projects sorted out.  Until then, I am having to take a short hiatus from posting on this site.  I will be back, however... I promise!  Until then, keep reading those books!!

_rob

Books for Prisoners: What's allowed and what's not?

The American Library Association asserts:

When the prison gates slam behind an inmate, he does not lose his human quality; his mind does not become closed to ideas; his intellect does not cease to feed on a free and open interchange of opinions; his yearning for self-respect does not end; nor is his quest for self-realization concluded. If anything, the needs for identity and self-respect are more compelling in the dehumanizing prison environment.

An article in The Huffington Post the current problem is a disconnect between what is constitutional and what prisons and wardens feel is allowable for inmates in terms of reading materials and access to information sources.

The Federal Bureau of Prisons regulations state that publications can only be rejected if they are found to be "detrimental to the security, good order, or discipline of the institution or if it might facilitate criminal activity." That description is generally understood to include content such as explanations on how to make explosives, martial arts training manuals and books containing maps of the prison and its surrounding area. 

Yet according to a list compiled by the Prison Books Program, and seen by The Huffington Post, many correctional institutions censor materials far beyond these guidelines. Central Mississippi Correctional, for example, is stated as refusing to allow any books whose content includes anything legal, medical or contains violence, while Staunton Correctional in Virginia is claimed only to allow its inmates access to "non-fiction educational or spiritual books."

A 1980 US Supreme Court ruling states that "[p]rison walls do not form a barrier separating prison inmates from the protections of the Constitution," and that "a warden may not reject a publication 'solely because its content is religious, philosophical, political, social or sexual, or because its content is unpopular or repugnant.'"

Personally, I don't see books and access to general information as a problem, no matter what the crime committed.  I believe that there should be consequences for inmates depending on what they have done, but keeping them away from books and the internet should, again in my opinion, only be a short term punishment, like denying access to television for a child's misbehaviour.  Of course, this is me speaking from a restorative justice standpoint as opposed to a retributive justice model, such as is currently being utilized in North America.

In any case, I agree with the following guidelines from the American Library Association.  According to the ALA "these principles should guide all library services provided to prisoners:"

• Collection management should be governed by written policy, mutually agreed upon by librarians and correctional agency administrators, in accordance with the Library Bill of Rights, its Interpretations, and other ALA intellectual freedom documents.
• Correctional libraries should have written procedures for addressing challenges to library materials, including a policy-based description of the disqualifying features, in accordance with “Challenged Materials” and other relevant intellectual freedom documents.
• Correctional librarians should select materials that reflect the demographic composition, information needs, interests, and diverse cultural values of the confined communities they serve.
• Correctional librarians should be allowed to purchase materials that meet written selection criteria and provide for the multi-faceted needs of their populations without prior correctional agency review. They should be allowed to acquire materials from a wide range of sources in order to ensure a broad and diverse collection. Correctional librarians should not be limited to purchasing from a list of approved materials.
• Age is not a reason for censorship. Incarcerated children and youth should have access to a wide range of fiction and nonfiction, as stated in “Free Access to Libraries for Minors."
• Correctional librarians should make all reasonable efforts to provide sufficient materials to meet the information and recreational needs of prisoners who speak languages other than English.
• Equitable access to information should be provided for persons with disabilities as outlined in “Services to People with Disabilities.”
• Media or materials with non-traditional bindings should not be prohibited unless they present an actual compelling and imminent risk to safety and security.
• Material with sexual content should not be banned unless it violates state and federal law.
• Correctional libraries should provide access to computers and the Internet.

Nabokov Under Attack in Russia; Teenage Awkwardness Under Attack in Bakersfield

In Russia, there's trouble brewing for the works of Vladimir Nabokov and Gabriel Garcia Marquez, an article in the Globe and Mail states. "A senior Russian Orthodox official claimed Wednesday that novels by Vladimir Nabokov and Gabriel Garcia Marquez justify pedophilia and said they should be banned in the nation's high schools."  While I do not want to get into a church vs state discussion, mostly because those against and those for will practically never be convinced to abandon their views, I do want to point out an interesting fact about the Orthodox Church that is working so hard to ban these books.  According to the article, "polls have shown that only about 5 per cent of Russians are observant believers."  Moreover,

Church and state are officially separate under the post-Soviet constitution, but Orthodox leaders seek a more muscular role for the church, which has served the state for much of its 1,000-year history. 

Some nonreligious Russians complain that the church has tailored its doctrine to suit the government, which has justified Russia's retreat from Western-style democracy by saying the country has a unique history and culture.

If so many Russians do not observe the Orthodox Church's doctrine and there is a separation of church and state in Russia, then how is it that this group thinks it has the right to decide what books are appropriate for everyone on the country?  I understand the Russia has a very different social and political structure than Canada or the USA, and I do not claim that I know how to solve the problem, but at the core, freedom to read should be the same anywhere.

People deserve the right to read books and those who don't agree with the content can choose not to read the literature.  Granted there are certain texts that go beyond common decency (the Pedophile's Guide to Love, for example), but these books are the exception to the rule and should be treated as such.  Not every book about incest or pedophilia needs to be banned, because in the majority of cases, these themes are usually treated carefully by authors, and are usually not showing them as a "good thing."

In other news, a book in Bakersfield, CA is under attack by a few parents who believe the book is much too erotic to be on the shelves of school or public libraries.  The book is What My Mother Doesn't Know by Sonya Sones and she writes about her disappointment in these attacks in the LA Times this week:

"Our young people should not have to be exposed to your erotic thoughts and feelings," one irate parent from Iowa wrote. "Your book should be removed from all junior high media bookshelves. That's what we will attempt to do here in Algona. We strive as a community to keep high morals and values." 

And there were many other letters, including this one from a Texas woman: 

"I am a 6th grade teacher, and had the unfortunate experience this past week of having your book discovered by a student in my classroom library. On any given page, vulgarity and filth can be found!... Freedom of speech and press doesn't give anyone the right to corrupt young, impressionable minds! I feel sorry for your children. Please stop writing such filth!"

The part of the novel that is being attacked most is about a young girl who presses her newly grown breasts against a frosted window.  She is exploring her new body and feeling new sensations.  It may be unorthodox to some, but is this really enough to consider a book filth?  Sones writes about how she put such content in her novel because she wanted young girls to see that experiencing new sensations in a post-puberty body is normal and part of growing up.  Of course many parents seem to find this offensive, to which I say, "then don't read this book.  And don't push your boobs against frosted glass!"  Sones finishes up her article succinctly and with no real need for further explication, so here it is:

One mother of a 12-year-old daughter wrote me to crow about her success in having "What My Mother Doesn't Know" banned in Virginia. "I saw to it that the school took this book off the shelf, as well as all the others that you have written," she wrote. "I am not a book burner, but this book does not belong in middle school and maybe not even in high school!" 

I don't have a problem with her forbidding her daughter to read my book. But imposing her personal beliefs on every child at the school makes her no better than a book burner. As the playwright and journalist Clare Booth Luce once put it: "Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there."