Book censorship, and consequently the censorship of intellectual freedom, is not a modern construct. Long before Gutenberg developed his press around 1439, books, pamphlets and any other materials that were hand-written and later copied, were often burned or destroyed when it was felt that said materials were deemed dangerous, immoral, unsuitable or even heretical. The ones who usually would bring up these charges would be religious or governmental authorities, typically when said works were reactions against the current ideologies or policies of the time.
The suppression of intellectual freedom even goes so far back to Plato, whom in 360 B.C.E. is quoted as saying in regards to his building of an ideal Republic, “Our first business will be to supervise the making of fables and legends; rejecting all which are unsatisfactory…” (Mullally, 2008 ¶ 2).

Thus, as long as there has been printed material available for the consummation by the masses, there has been a centuries long war on the idea of just what is acceptable and what is not acceptable for the general public. History has a long and detailed account of book censorship that encompasses rulers such as Henry VIII enacting a licensing scheme in which all books were to be submitted to the Church of England for approval before publication to the Roman Catholic Church forming the Index Librorum Prohibitorum in 1559 as the first published book containing a list of forbidden and banned publications. The Index was kept active, totaling over 5000 entries, until it was eradicated in 1966 by Pope Paul VI.

In the 21st century, book challenges and banning, and yes even book burning, is still as prevalent in society as it was when Gutenberg developed his moveable type. In 2003, in Greenville, MI, Pastor Tommy Turner of the Jesus Non-denominational Church organized a book burning specifically for the Harry Potter series. But what was to be a local event, became nationwide media. The reason for the burning, according to Pastor Turner, was to save the souls and that the Harry Potter series in particular, “glorify wizardry and sorcery will lead people to accept and believe in Satan” (WZZM, 2003 ¶ 3). Other items, including CDS, that did not glorify God were also burned.

According to the American Library Association (ALA), more than a book a day is challenged and or removed from U.S. public libraries and schools (ALA). The reasons for the challenges tend to fall in one of four categories:

  • 1. Family values.
  • 2. Religion.
  • 3. Political views.
  • 4. Minority rights.

In the ALA’s Library Bill of Rights, Article 3 states, “Libraries should challenge censorship in the fulfillment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment” (ALA, 1996). Even the landmark case of Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District No. 26 v. Pico, in 1982 in which the students of Island Trees sued the school district for access to challenged and banned books, in which the students won by a 5-4 vote in the Supreme Court, has not seemingly created enough of a headway to allow students (and consequently, the public) the freedom to read what they like, when they like.

Topic questions:

  • 1. One way that libraries are working towards making their collections accessible to everyone is by making their collections prevalent to the community that they serve. This could mean that some topics that may not be considered as something that will circulate (and thus taking up valuable shelf space) may not be included in their collections. Is this a good compromise? Why or why not?
  • 2. The Federal Anti-Obscenity Law, also known as the Comstock Law, came into being in 1873 and remarkably, still remains on the books. The Comstock Law bans the mailing of materials that could be deemed “lewd, indecent, filthy or obscene.” One could interpret that using ILL to transport a book that could fall into one of those categories is illegal. Should libraries make patrons aware of this? Why or why not? Also, should libraries (and subsequently, the ALA) works to getting the law abolished? Why or why not?
  • 3. One topic that kept coming up was the cleansing of books to make them more politically correct or modernized. Several examples were used such as the Tin Tin graphic novels, which have been often challenged as being racist due to the artists depiction of Africans and African-Americans. One perspective is that one has to take into consideration of when the book was published, the political climates and the culture of the times the books were written in. Do you think that books that are not, today, considered “politically correct” should receive this treatment? Why or why not?

References

– (1982). Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District No. 26 v. Pico by Pico (No. 80-2043). Retrieved October 11, 2008, from http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0457_0853_ZS.html

– (2003). Church Burns Harry Potter Books. Retrieved October 11, 2008, from                   http://www.wzzm13.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=8041

– (n.d.). American Library Association. Retrieved October 11, 2008 from http://www.ala.org/ala/aboutala/offices/oif/bannedbooksweek/bannedbooksweek.cfm

– (n.d.). National Coallition Against Censorship. Retrieved October 11, 2008 from http://www.ncac.org/action_issues/Books.cfm

Maxwell, Ronald F. (2008). Sweeping Questions: On banning books and hunting witches. Retrieved October 11, 2008, from http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OTgwNTdiZTNjNjdlMThlNDExZmZiYWQ0MGUyYTM4ZjE=#more

Mullally, Clarie (2008). Banned Books. Retrieved October 11, 2008, from http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/speech/libraries/topic.aspx?topic=banned_books

Ockerbloom, John Mark (n.d.). Banned Books Online. Retrieved October 11, 2008, from       http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/banned-books.html

Ockerbloom, John Mark (2008). Why Banned Books Matter. Retrieved October 11, 2008, from http://everybodyslibraries.com/2008/09/29/why-banned-books-week-matters/

For Fun
Guardian’s Banned Book Quiz.

Academic Freedom

 

In 1948, the American Library Association established the Library Bill of Rights.  Just a few months later the United Nations published the Universal Declaration of Human Rights Doctrine.  Article 19 of the doctrine serves as a broad definition for Intellectual Freedom, “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers” (Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Website, 2008).

 

Staunch supporters of this basic human right, the American Library Association in its Issues and Advocacy section of their website write:

ALA actively advocates in defense of the rights of library users to read, seek information, and speak freely as guaranteed by the First Amendment.  A publicly supported library provides free and equal access to information for all people of that community.  We enjoy this basic right in our democratic society.  It is a core value of the library profession.

 

While access to information has always been the highly guarded Intellectual Freedom topic by libraries, another interesting Intellectual Freedom sub-topic of potential importance to librarians is that of Academic Freedom

 

One simple definition of academic freedom comes from Professors Richard Danner and Barbara Bintliff (2006), “Academic freedom can be defined as the atmosphere of free inquiry and discussion necessary to find and teach “truth” as the faculty member sees it” (pp14-15). According to the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure put out by the American Association of University Professors:

Institutions of higher education are conducted for the common good and not to further the interest of either the individual teacher or the institution as a whole.  The common good depends upon the free search for truth and its free exposition.  Academic freedom is essential to these purposes and applies to both teaching and research.

Simply put, academic freedom is the doctrine that allows professors to research and teach without fear of retaliation, even if the subject matter may be considered controversial or unpopular. According to the 1940 Statement tenure is the appropriate tool to protect academic freedom.

 

As stated by Danner and Bintliff (2006)

Tenure is a condition of employment, granted by the university to an individual faculty member, that is used both to protect and promote academic freedom and to provide enough economic security to make university teaching attractive as a profession. A tenured faculty member is given an indefinite term of appointment in return for meeting certain qualifying criteria and specified continuing performance requirements. The dismissal of a tenured professor requires cause and significant due process, with the involvement of multiple layers of peer review and university administration.

 

It is important to note that academic freedom is not an inherent right, but rather a privilege granted by the individual university, with accompanying limitations and responsibilities.  For example professors need to be careful of not teaching controversial material not related to their designated subject.  According to the 1940 Statement, a university may place clearly defined limitations on academic freedom based on “religious or other aims of the institution” (American Association of University Professors Website, 2008).

 

References

 

American Association of University Professors Website (2008)

            Retrieved October 15, 2008 from

            http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/pubsres/policydocs/contents/1940statement.htm

 

American Library Association Website (2008)

            Retrieved October 15, 2008 from

            http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/intellectualfreedom/index.cfm

 

Danner, Richard A. and Bintliff, Barbara (2006) Academic Freedom Issues for Academic Librarians. Legal Reference Services Quarterly, 25 (4). pp. 13-35.

 

Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Website (2008)

            Retrieved October 15, 2008 from

            http://www.unhchr.ch/udhr/lang/eng.htm

 

Questions for Discussion: (Respond to any ONE)

 

Should academic libraries require their librarian positions to be tenure-track or “tenure-like”, requiring intensive evaluation of performance similar to those of the same University’s professors?

 

Is a librarian’s ability to support the teaching mission of the university and the research required for professors hindered without the protections of tenure?

 

Does librarianship as a “profession” suffer by not requiring tenure or tenure-like requirements for academic librarians?

 

What foreseeable issues could arise if the same academic freedom protections are not afforded academic librarians?

If you have not discovered indexed yet, you should. Jessica Hagy puts together via graphs, diagrams and charts, everyday ideas that seem simple enough but sometimes cannot be expressed in words. Monday’s topic is on book censorship, my new specialty, and I thought it was appropriate for the first post. ;)