Banned Books Week

What Do These Have in Common?

/ rtrube54 / Leave a comment

Bible and Fifty

You might say both have very frank portrayals of human sexuality and some steamy reading (you have read Song of Solomon have you not?) and you would not be wrong. What may surprise you is that both made the top ten most challenged books of 2015 with Fifty Shades coming in number two and the Bible number six. Here is the list, including reasons challenged, which is compiled by the American Library Association’s Office of Intellectual Freedom each year and published during National Library Week:

  1. Looking for Alaska, by John Green
    Reasons: Offensive language, sexually explicit, and unsuited for age group.
  2. Fifty Shades of Grey, by E. L. James
    Reasons: Sexually explicit, unsuited to age group, and other (“poorly written,” “concerns that a group of teenagers will want to try it”).
  3. I Am Jazz, by Jessica Herthel and Jazz Jennings
    Reasons: Inaccurate, homosexuality, sex education, religious viewpoint, and unsuited for age group.
  4. Beyond Magenta: Transgender Teens Speak Out, by Susan Kuklin
    Reasons: Anti-family, offensive language, homosexuality, sex education, political viewpoint, religious viewpoint, unsuited for age group, and other (“wants to remove from collection to ward off complaints”).
  5. The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time, by Mark Haddon
    Reasons: Offensive language, religious viewpoint, unsuited for age group, and other (“profanity and atheism”).
  6. The Holy Bible
    Reasons: Religious viewpoint.
  7. Fun Home, by Alison Bechdel
    Reasons: Violence and other (“graphic images”).
  8. Habibi, by Craig Thompson
    Reasons: Nudity, sexually explicit, and unsuited for age group.
  9. Nasreen’s Secret School: A True Story from Afghanistan, by Jeanette Winter
    Reasons: Religious viewpoint, unsuited to age group, and violence.
  10. Two Boys Kissing, by David Levithan
    Reasons: Homosexuality and other (“condones public displays of affection”).

I was actually disappointed that no one complained about the sexually explicit or violent material in the Bible, which is honest about both. Basically, sexuality-related concerns, language, violence, and religious viewpoints dominate the list.

There are several things about the challenged book list that bother me both about the phenomenon of challenging books and compiling lists.

  1. It strikes me that this is another instance of manufactured outrage. This past year there was a grand total of 275 challenges, down from 311 the previous year. This is 5.5 challenges per state, and less than one challenge for every million people in this country. There are nearly 120,000 libraries of various kinds in this country. This is one challenge for every 436 libraries. While challenging books is just plain stupid, which I will say more about, this does not seem to be such a big crisis, and is decreasing in frequency. Compared to opioid addiction, gun violence, labor and sex trafficking, or our broken political discourse, this rates pretty far down the list.
  2. What one doesn’t hear is that a challenge is simply a request that materials be removed from a library or school because of content or appropriateness. I’m curious about whether any books have actually been “banned”. My suspicion is that a number of these complaints come when the books are assigned and there are no alternates provided, or when parents, students, and/or teachers handle such situations ineptly.
  3. I wonder if those who challenge books realize that they are probably vastly expanding the circulation of a book. This years list will certainly be featured in late September during “Banned Books Week” which I contend is a misnomer because books are rarely if never banned in this country, and in fact the books’ circulation and sales are enhanced during these weeks as the books are featured at bookstores and by online vendors. (For a person of faith like myself, I wonder if this will increase sales of the Bible as well, which I think would be cool.)
  4. I do think the attempt to challenge or ban a book is stupid and subject to the “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander” rule, illustrated by the inclusion of the Bible in this list. It is also stupid because books are so easily accessible through a variety of means including a few taps on the screen of a smartphone.
  5. Finally, this obscures the hidden ways books are “banned” by those who curate libraries and bookstores. New authors, or writers voicing an unpopular opinion may be “banned” even if their book is technically for sale on Amazon. All librarians and booksellers decide not to acquire some books, but there is no outrage about this. The only outrage is when a relatively popular book, or trending book among the literati, is challenged, even when it is realized that the challenge is futile.

What is fascinating is that we rarely hear of books banned as part of the systematic suppression of human rights in others countries. Nor are those the books featured in the Banned Books Week promotions, in most cases. So while I will admit to being a fan of libraries and think banning books to be stupid as well as unconstitutional, I wonder if the ALA and all who care about literacy might spend more time during National Library Week and throughout the year talking, not of “banned” books but better books. We can read only so many books in our lives and associations like the ALA can serve us by pointing us to things worthy of our attention (and in fact many libraries are doing just that). Those are the lists I want to see!

Some Questions About Banned Books Week

/ rtrube54 / Leave a comment
Artwork courtesy of the American Library Association.

Artwork courtesy of the American Library Association.

This is Banned Books Week (September 27 to October 3). Schools, libraries, and booksellers are proclaiming the evil of attempts to ban books, publishing lists of the top banned books of the past year (here is one), and featuring these books prominently for lending or buying.

Please understand: I think attempts to ban access to any books are both unconstitutional and stupid. Unconstitutional because of the First Amendment, which provides broad protections of speech, even speech which is offensive. Many call this our First Freedom and for good reason.

It’s also stupid. Nearly all challenges to books fail, and only spotlight the very books people are trying to ban. It strikes me that attempts to ban books take the focus off the quality of the book and make the author something of a “martyr” and give the book the allure of forbidden fruit.

But I have some questions about the “banned books” phenomenon, which strikes me as “the outrage of the week”.

  1. Is this really the big deal it is made out to be? In 2014, there were 311 reported challenges of books. That is less than 1 challenge for each million people in this country and only a bit over 6 per state. Yes it could be argued that any challenges are too many but is this really a big deal?
  2. How many books are actually “banned” in the US? I am unable to find statistics on this. The American Library Association’s Banned Books website indicates that “most” challenges are unsuccessful and most materials remain accessible. At very least, it might be more honest to call this week “Challenged Books Week” because I suspect that is mostly what it is–although I understand the alliteration and rhetorical value of the term “banned”.
  3. It is striking to me that a number of the “challenges” are by parents to school curriculum. I would observe that curriculum may be distinguished from libraries in public discussion. Curriculum is what students must read, study, and intellectually engage to accomplish educational objectives. Every curriculum includes–and excludes–certain materials based on these educational objectives and this is not regarded as censorship because those materials excluded are still accessible in libraries or via booksellers. Parents, whose taxes or tuition support the schools, are stakeholders in these decisions, along with educators, and local and state boards of education. Are all questions by parents about the educational merits of books to be labeled as “censorship”–particularly if the effort does not seek to ban access to the book in question in school or public libraries? Access implies choice of what one will read. Curriculum is generally mandated, with some opportunities for “opt outs” or “alternatives”–a very different thing.
  4. I would argue all attempts to challenge and ban books in libraries are wrong. Period. But I would also observe the librarians make decisions about the acquisition of materials and the suitability of materials, particularly for children. In acquiring materials, I suspect librarians weigh a combination of factors including community preferences as well as some basic values that probably result in excluding materials that are blatantly racist, intolerant, or simply represent inferior aesthetic or intellectual value. There is only so much “shelf space” in any library. Are the librarians themselves using their institutional power to “ban” books in what they decide not to acquire? Most of us would say “no” but this argues for a legitimate form of discrimination in selecting what librarians deem the “best” books for their clientele.
  5. Finally, I wonder if both those who attempt to ban books, as well as those who vehemently defend them divert us from the more important discussion, which is an assessment of the quality of a given work. And I suspect that in the “banned” lists there are both works of great artistic excellence and those which time will judge as mediocre.

What I would propose is that the focus on banned books (by ban-ners as well as defenders) may keep us from focusing on better books. Granted, we may have different ideas of what is better, and we should allow the difference, and access to the different choices. But that discussion might just elevate, even a bit, the choices we make, which might just elevate us as people. Better books, not banned books–now there’s an idea…

[Postscript: The issue of banned books and limits on free speech is a real issue in many countries. I also wonder if a more constructive use of the energy that goes into a week like this would be to work with legislators, those who administer foreign policy, the press, and others to press for greater speech freedoms in these countries, a basic human right.]