"My question, then, is why do we do so much shielding of college students and other adults of all ages from ideas they consider “harmful” or “violent,” when simply proposing to *discuss* whether actual *pictures* of sex acts should be provided to children is considered censorious and hateful?"-- Good question!
Oct 31, 2022Liked by HxL Substack, Sarah Hartman-Caverly
I read Kerouac when I was in high school!
We never know why someone is reading a book-- whether they are "hate reading" it or reading it because they expect to love it. And of course, reading the book could change their mind.
Excellent piece that delivers chills at its conclusion!
#shamlessplug HxLibraries is so honored and excited to welcome Dr. Emily Knox as our spring symposium keynote speaker -- save the date of Thurs. 2/23 4pm eastern.
I have watched many Knox presentations. I value her strong stance on IF but struggle with her clear and obvious bias and ideological stances. See this video as an example. Her takes on book banning movements always label them all as right wing and conservative and go even further into outright outlandish accusations. It’s not possible to accept someone’s authority when in the same talk they show their ignorance. https://youtu.be/r1AzYwNCBBg
I saw the Penguin staff's letter--and yes, another harbinger of pre-censorship or something like that. I'm aware of other authors having publishing contracts cancelled because their manuscripts were too controversial.
Oct 31, 2022·edited Oct 31, 2022Liked by HxL Substack
An excellent article -- thank you for bringing attention to the fact that challenges happen from both sides of the spectrum. As an example, I've had to respond to challenges this year to both Gender Queer ("this book brainwashes children," according to the complaint) as well as Trans, by Helen Joyce ("a dressed-up call for genocide" [of trans people], according to the complaint). Both books will remain in our collection.
When acquaintances ask me about book challenges at the library where I work and I note that we get challenges from both the left and the right and all spaces in-between, people are generally surprised. They're so used to hearing about conservative challenges that they are unaware that challenges happen from the left as well.
It used to be said that a great library contains something in it to offend everyone. I lost track of the number of titles we've purchased that I find offensive or ridiculous, but I still want them in my library's collection. I want to understand the arguments made by those with whom I disagree. I hope we continue to live up to this ideal and to buy titles even if someone will find them offensive.
"Imagined" is such a great way to put it. Censorship and those who push for it have very powerful and paranoid imaginations, but wherever they fall on the political spectrum, they have some things in common, if one actually studies their arguments:
1. They all have visions of where society is, and it's always on the precipice of disaster (witness all these "America is on the verge of civil war!" or "Democracy is under attack!" stories). Thus, information has to be controlled to "cool things down."
2. They believe other people are paying close attention to all the same talking heads (both those they agree with and those they don't) that they are and that information moves people, uncontrollably, towards action, positive or negative.
3. They believe that more people will think and live and vote like they do if information is controlled so as to put the best spins on what "their" favored side is up to. They want more power and don't want to lose whatever power they imagine they have.
4. They believe that JUST the right information at JUST the right time can convert people, both positively and negatively. In their imaginations, they seem to think people can be convinced by surprise. Also, they underestimate how discerning other people are (because they often have a hyper-inflated sense of their own intelligence and discernment). Thus, "wrong" information is dangerous and people like them should have more say in what gets disseminated.
5. They believe information damages people, emotionally or spiritually. This is a belief that seems to be based on the anecdotes of people who would be emotionally fragile at any rate.
In Canada, in 2021, the most challenged book was Irreversible Damage. Even set a record in the history of the survey. 19 challenges. Gender Queer was in second place with 3 challenges. Are we sure Gender Queer was the most challenged book in the US? http://cfla-fcab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/2021-Titles-List-Fnl-E.docx-1.pdf
Well, we are only "sure" insofar is this is based on reporting gathered by ALA. The data on challenges relies on self-reporting. I suspect Irreversible Damage has encountered opposition in American libraries, but I don't know any official data sources on it.
And the largest Canadian bookstore chain refused to put the number one best seller on Amazon Canada this summer on the shelves: https://tnc.news/2022/07/20/indigo-book/
"My question, then, is why do we do so much shielding of college students and other adults of all ages from ideas they consider “harmful” or “violent,” when simply proposing to *discuss* whether actual *pictures* of sex acts should be provided to children is considered censorious and hateful?"-- Good question!
I read Kerouac when I was in high school!
We never know why someone is reading a book-- whether they are "hate reading" it or reading it because they expect to love it. And of course, reading the book could change their mind.
An example of a progressive "book banning"--https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/books/story/2020-11-12/burbank-unified-challenges-books-including-to-kill-a-mockingbird
Excellent piece that delivers chills at its conclusion!
#shamlessplug HxLibraries is so honored and excited to welcome Dr. Emily Knox as our spring symposium keynote speaker -- save the date of Thurs. 2/23 4pm eastern.
I have watched many Knox presentations. I value her strong stance on IF but struggle with her clear and obvious bias and ideological stances. See this video as an example. Her takes on book banning movements always label them all as right wing and conservative and go even further into outright outlandish accusations. It’s not possible to accept someone’s authority when in the same talk they show their ignorance. https://youtu.be/r1AzYwNCBBg
Did you see the Penguin staff's letter, "We Dissent" about Amy Coney Barret's book?
Sometimes the books won't even make it to the library
https://kathleenmccook.substack.com/p/amy-coney-barrett-book-protested
I saw the Penguin staff's letter--and yes, another harbinger of pre-censorship or something like that. I'm aware of other authors having publishing contracts cancelled because their manuscripts were too controversial.
An excellent article -- thank you for bringing attention to the fact that challenges happen from both sides of the spectrum. As an example, I've had to respond to challenges this year to both Gender Queer ("this book brainwashes children," according to the complaint) as well as Trans, by Helen Joyce ("a dressed-up call for genocide" [of trans people], according to the complaint). Both books will remain in our collection.
When acquaintances ask me about book challenges at the library where I work and I note that we get challenges from both the left and the right and all spaces in-between, people are generally surprised. They're so used to hearing about conservative challenges that they are unaware that challenges happen from the left as well.
It used to be said that a great library contains something in it to offend everyone. I lost track of the number of titles we've purchased that I find offensive or ridiculous, but I still want them in my library's collection. I want to understand the arguments made by those with whom I disagree. I hope we continue to live up to this ideal and to buy titles even if someone will find them offensive.
"Imagined" is such a great way to put it. Censorship and those who push for it have very powerful and paranoid imaginations, but wherever they fall on the political spectrum, they have some things in common, if one actually studies their arguments:
1. They all have visions of where society is, and it's always on the precipice of disaster (witness all these "America is on the verge of civil war!" or "Democracy is under attack!" stories). Thus, information has to be controlled to "cool things down."
2. They believe other people are paying close attention to all the same talking heads (both those they agree with and those they don't) that they are and that information moves people, uncontrollably, towards action, positive or negative.
3. They believe that more people will think and live and vote like they do if information is controlled so as to put the best spins on what "their" favored side is up to. They want more power and don't want to lose whatever power they imagine they have.
4. They believe that JUST the right information at JUST the right time can convert people, both positively and negatively. In their imaginations, they seem to think people can be convinced by surprise. Also, they underestimate how discerning other people are (because they often have a hyper-inflated sense of their own intelligence and discernment). Thus, "wrong" information is dangerous and people like them should have more say in what gets disseminated.
5. They believe information damages people, emotionally or spiritually. This is a belief that seems to be based on the anecdotes of people who would be emotionally fragile at any rate.
New Zealand Funders cancel Shakespeare.
https://kathleenmccook.substack.com/p/shakespeare-a-canon-of-imperialism
In Canada, in 2021, the most challenged book was Irreversible Damage. Even set a record in the history of the survey. 19 challenges. Gender Queer was in second place with 3 challenges. Are we sure Gender Queer was the most challenged book in the US? http://cfla-fcab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/2021-Titles-List-Fnl-E.docx-1.pdf
Well, we are only "sure" insofar is this is based on reporting gathered by ALA. The data on challenges relies on self-reporting. I suspect Irreversible Damage has encountered opposition in American libraries, but I don't know any official data sources on it.
A Canadian author had publishing employees try to censor before the book could even be published:
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-pathetic-attempt-to-cancel-jordan-peterson/
And the largest Canadian bookstore chain refused to put the number one best seller on Amazon Canada this summer on the shelves: https://tnc.news/2022/07/20/indigo-book/