Last week the class discussed banned books through the decades. We saw examples of bans (removal of books or proscriptions against them); censorship (wherein someone who disapproves of the message in a book alters its content in some way or otherwise suppresses that content so that others do not have access to it); and challenges (wherein a book’s content is questioned). (Scales, September 2007) p. 30 and ("Intellectual Freedom and Censorship Q & A," 2007). But what lies at the base of our disapproval of these actions?
Librarians call it “intellectual freedom.” And intellectual freedom is the concept that “accords to all library users the right to seek and receive information on all subjects from all points of view without having the subject of one’s interest examined or scrutinized by others.” [emphasis in original] (Intellectual Freedom Manual, 2006) p. 3.
If the values expressed in that definition look familiar, it’s because they share the same philosophical underpinnings as the First Amendment. The thought is that if there’s a right to free speech, there must be a corollary right to free access to speech—in all its forms. As will be discussed in a subsequent blog this week, there has been debate on whether intellectual freedom should have some limits. (After all, freedom of speech has limits—for example, “fighting words” are not protected by the First Amendment, nor is child pornography, nor libel or defamation, nor “obscenity,” etc.) And that debate continues. But from it, more detail on the value of intellectual freedom has been garnered.
Specifically, as the American Library Association (the “ALA”) points out: “Intellectual freedom is the basis for our democratic system. We expect our people to be self-governors. But to do so responsibly, our citizenry must be well-informed. Libraries provide the ideas and information, in a variety of formats, to allow people to inform themselves.” ("Intellectual Freedom and Censorship Q & A," 2007) And it applies to children, too. The thought is that they need to cultivate critical skills needed to distinguish good ideas from bad by the time they come of age and become a part of the political process. (Doyle, July 2002) p. 7 of 15.
Further, free speech (and access to it) is important because it encourages a battle among ideas in which the best ideas survive, to everyone’s benefit; and even the most widely accepted ideas are subjected to opposing viewpoints in order to continue to test their validity—again, to everyone’s benefit. (Fricke, 2000) p. 474.
It is hard to argue with the above points. (Or is it?) But how exactly do they relate to a 12-year-old girl who wants to check out pornographic material—not child porn—but porn nonetheless? Under the notion of intellectual freedom, she should be allowed to take such material. But how exactly does this contribute to the world of ideas to which she is exposed?
Censorship infringes the autonomy and freedom of the individual person, preventing him from being able to make up his own mind on what to read or see. (Fricke, 2000) p. 474.
The ALA is the professional association that establishes guidelines and policies that all libraries are encouraged to follow. The ALA is a particularly prolific association, having generated a large number of policies and other statements. In its statements—which include among others, Libraries: An American Value statement (adopted Feb. 3, 1999); the Freedom to Read Statement (adopted in 1953 (during McCarthyism) and last amended June 30, 2004); the Freedom to View Statement (endorsed Jan. 10, 1990); the Code of Ethics of the American Library Association (adopted June 28, 1997 and amended Jan. 22, 2008); and, most famously, the Library Bill of Rights (adopted June 18, 1948, last amended Jan. 23, 1980, and inclusion of “age” reaffirmed Jan. 24, 1996) and its numerous associated interpretations—the ALA is consistent in opposing any restrictions on intellectual freedom.
For instance, with respect to labels and ratings systems, ALA is cautious about the former and opposed to the latter. (ALA believes that even though labels can be “viewpoint-neutral directional aids that save the time of users,” they might also be used as “attempts to prejudice or discourage users or restrict their access to materials.”) (Intellectual Freedom Manual, 2006) p. 171.
Even though historically there had been a tradition of libraries “guarding” their patrons from materials that weren’t deemed fit to be read, by the 1950s at latest, librarians—or at least the ALA—had begun to express rejection of paternalism (or being a parent by proxy). Libraries that adhere to ALA’s policies now simply do not censor. Period. But not all libraries, of course, adhere to ALA’s extremist (some might say) policies.
The issue of ethics plays a large role in this area. First, ALA asserts that it is naturally the role of the library to enforce intellectual freedom, because only in the library can self-directed learning, with no outside-imposed limits, take place. With that said, ALA’s Code of Ethics states that “[e]thical dilemmas occur when values are in conflict. The American Library Association Code of Ethics states the values to which we are committed, and embodies the ethical responsibilities of the profession in this changing information environment.” ("Code of Ethics of the American Library Association," 2008)
But professional ethics aren’t the only kind that may affect a library’s responsibilities to its patrons. As one set of authors quoted, with minors in mind: ‘[n]or must we deprive [children] of the nurture, the helping hand, the guidance, the tools for seeking truth and knowing when it is discovered. We cannot simply turn them loose in our jaded information society without helping them understand that some of the information is false, is evil, is dangerous, is misleading, or is ambiguous…That may not be a legal obligation but it is clearly a moral duty for every librarian, every teacher, every parent and person in a free society.” (Fricke, 2000) pp. 485-6.
Is it true that libraries have no role other than the one articulated in the ALA documents—that is, to promote an atmosphere of intellectual freedom for the patron?
Children have access to far more “dangerous” materials now—particularly via the Internet—than they did in years past. Is this by itself reason for libraries to exercise caution in the materials that it makes accessible to children?
Numerous issues are being debated within the area of intellectual freedom. Below are the topics that we will be discussing throughout the coming week.
1. How Right is the Bill of Rights (along with all of its interpretations)? Attempts at censorship by individuals and organizations alike continue, and laws are passed (even if held unconstitutional) that attempt to restrict what children in particular may be exposed to. In this environment, the most called-upon ALA document to assert the ideal of intellectual freedom is—according to some observers—unrealistic in its virtually unconditional rejection of any form of censorship. Yashmyn will explore some of these claims and some responses made by Bill of Rights defenders.
2. Intellectual Freedom, Librarians, and the PATRIOT Act will explore the threat posed to the ideals of the information profession in regards to the passage of the PATRIOT ACT. Librarians and the patrons they serve are now subject to an unprecedented level of surveillance by the government. Holly will explore the librarian’s ethical responsibilities and objections to this infringement on intellectual freedom.
3. Censorship in the Schools will look at a specific case of school censorship in Grosse Pointe, Michigan, exploring the variables that affect what school libraries allow in relation to use of the Internet by students. Anne will explore how the problem can arise, who is in charge of addressing the situation, and how the situation is handled—as well as ask whether the outcome can be of benefit to the students, or whether their intellectual freedom is simply being repressed.
4. In the modern world, many people rely on the Internet to communicate with one another and to retrieve information. Libraries provide the public with access to the Internet, and must, therefore, consider issues that affect the Internet service they provide. In Has the Global Information Highway been Derailed? Kathryn will discuss how differing visions of intellectual freedom around the globe have caused Internet service providers to censor content both at home and abroad. As a result, American libraries today are, in effect, providing services that do not always respect or preserve intellectual freedom, an ideal that librarians are expected to protect and promote. This blog will conclude by exploring what the role of the librarian should be on this issue.
5. As Lester Asheim noted in his seminal 1953 essay “Not Censorship But Selection” (found at the ALA Web site), the librarian must be on guard against becoming a censor herself. Over fifty years later, in The Librarian as Censor, we examine the factors that must be carefully considered by the librarian before he may assert, “But I’m not censoring (nor am I simply passing the buck to someone else to act as censor).”
6. And on the last day, we’ll highlight the trends in the responses that the posted questions evoke.
Works Cited
Code of Ethics of the American Library Association. (2008, February 13, 2008). from http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/statementspols/codeofethics/codeethics.htm
Doyle, T. (July 2002). A critical discussion of "The ethical presuppositions behind the Library Bill of Rights" [Electronic Version]. The Library Quarterly, 72, 275-293. Retrieved February 9, 2008, from http://proquest.umi.com.proxy.lib.wayne.edu
Fricke, M., Kay Mathiesen, and Don Fallis. (2000). The ethical presuppositions behind the Library Bill of Rights. Library Quarterly, 70(4), 468-491.
Intellectual Freedom and Censorship Q & A. (2007). Retrieved January 20, 2008, from http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/basics/intellectual.htm
Intellectual Freedom Manual (7th ed.). (2006). Chicago: Office for Intellectual Freedom, American Library Association.
Scales, P. (September 2007). Ain't that a shame. School Library Journal, 53(9), 30.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
I think that for the most part, the purpose of the library is the one articulated in the ALA documents. I believe that a library should "challenge censorship in their fulfillment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment" (Intellectual Freedom Manual 1996). I think that this should be a primary goal, especially because once censorship begins, it can easily snowball. We may begin by censoring something that we understandably wouldn’t want anyone, especially children, looking at, such as pornography, and we may end up censoring so many other materials. This is a little bit of an extreme example, but I think it illustrates my point. I think that the snowball effect is part of what can make censorship such a threat to the information seeking environment that libraries are envisioned as.
At the same time, librarians can help libraries meet this role in morally and ethically responsible ways. They can select materials for the library, and in this manner get materials into the library that are morally and ethically appropriate. The importance of a materials selection policy is also mentioned in the “Intellectual Freedom Manual” . Such a policy can also help librarians deal with complaints.
As far as children go, I agree that there is a lot of dangerous and inappropriate material out there. I think that part of the job of a children’s librarian should be selecting and guiding children towards high quality, ethically appropriate materials. As far as the internet, I think that they need to entertain caution in this area because it has the potential for children to access material not just from the library, but from outside the library as well. There should be software to keep children away from the most objectionable sites. This may conflict somewhat with the libraries goal of not censoring, but because the content of the internet is beyond a librarian’s control, I think it is necessary. At the same time, neither software, nor guidance of a librarian can substitute for a parent monitoring what their child is being exposed to. Parents should know what their child is reading and viewing, whether from the library, or someplace else. I think that with this help from parents, children can be exposed to the intellectual free environment of the library in a morally and ethically responsible way.
Bibliography
Intellectual Freedom Manual. Chicago: Office for Intellectual Freedom, ALA, 1996.
But what are "high quality, ethically appropriate materals" as suggested by Kelly that a children's librarian should be selecting? "Ethically " already suggests a bias of some sort because a librarian has to decide on what is "ethical". This brings up so many questions and conflicts of value which offer unending sources of debate. Should a librarian guide a child towards what he/she thinks is religiously appropriate as opposed to the child's seemingly overinterest in Satanism? Maybe the child has questions about his/her sexual identity but the librarian knows that child's parents would not like that kind of information to be supplied. Is the librarian undermining the rights of parents by supplying that information? If the interest of the child is ethically inappropriate or dangerous in the librarians eyes, what happens? Should parents be notified so that their children can have the opportunity to be guided? The circumstances and questions vary with each situaion and can take some guidance from the ALA's
III Article in its Bill of Rights -" Libraries should challenge censorship in the fulfillment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment". Enlightenment is the key - to provide high quality materials as defined by educators and professionals as well as the community it serves and is supported by with tax dollars. According to Roger J. Theiss in "Encouraging Values Over Filters ", "nowhere in this process can we turn to cold, impersonal, valueless technology and expect that to help define the moral element of our global civilization".
ALA Bill of Rights, Article III
From http://www.ala.org//ala
Theiss, Roger J. "Encouraging Values Over Filters". Especially for Young People and Their Parents. (Revise May 31, 2007). http://www.ala.org
This topic intrigues me yet scares the hell out of me at the same time! Going into this profession I never realized how involved I would have to be with intellectual freedom or censorship, but it seems that this topic is at the very core of being a librarian.
I was amazed at the statement made by Lester Asheim in the essay Yashmyn noted “Not Censorship But Selection” found at the ALA Web site:
"While we are willing to defer to the honest judgment of those in special fields whose knowledge, training, and special aptitude fit them to render these judgments, we demand that those to whom we delegate such authority shall demonstrate the virtues which are the basis of that trust. In the last analysis, this is what makes a profession: the earned confidence of those it serves. But that confidence must be earned, and it can be only if we remain true to the ideals for which our profession stands. In the profession of librarianship, these ideals are embodied, in part at least, in the special characteristics which distinguish selection from censorship."
WOW. Just wow. Is there a class I can take on selection vs. censorship or how to become a trustworthy librarian?
Going back to my first statement, perhaps what intrigues me so much about this profession, yet what scares me the most, is that there is no black and white when it comes to censorship. It is a completely gray area. It is a topic that you will never have a right or wrong answer for. Kind of like the fact that art is subjective...what is really art? For librarians, what is really obscene or objectionable? What one person might believe should be censored, another might believe is perfectly acceptable.
Furthermore, every librarian is going to be influenced by their own history. How they were raised, their life events, even geographical area they were raised in. How do you stay true to your profession when internally you want to stay true to your own beliefs? How do you standardize ethics? The more I think about it the more my heads spins.
I am really looking forward to the rest of the posts and discussion regarding this topic!
Works Cited
Asheim, Lester. "Not Censorship, but Selection." [Electronic Version]. ALA. Retrived on February 17, 2008 from
http://www.ala.org/Template.cfm?Section=basics&Template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=109668
I read the above comments, then I went back to my notes. And now here's a question for everyone (which I confess doesn't exactly address any of your own questions).
You're the director of an extremely well-used library--the librarian's dream. Patrons don't make a bee line to the DVD racks or to the Internet. Yes, they use those things. But they also go to the periodical section and catch up on current events. They participate in the monthly reading-club discussions. Students pull books from the shelves for research projects, and adults peruse the latest novels to read for pleasure.
Now. You need to hire a new librarian. Are you going to choose the one whose proven herself to be extremely well-organized--an ace cataloguer, good employee manager, and can find the answer to the toughest Ready Reference question in 4 minutes or less? OR the one whose shown himself to be the most devoted to intellectual freedom? He doesn't just scout for books that will open minds. He scouts for books that will open minds, eyes, and sometimes make the reader wince.
The answer can't be, "Well, it depends on what my community needs," can it? That seems just too easy. Don't librarians have a responsibility to present to patrons what there is to choose from--and then let all patrons decide for themselves what they want? Or maybe that's wrong. Maybe if you're a librarian in an EXTREMELY homogeneous community, and everybody wants exactly the same plain-vanilla type of books, then it's your responsibility to provide only that kind of material?
Yashmyn,
I think as a parent and aspiring librarian, it is safe to say that I will be leading a double life. If I was a librarian in a public library and came across a child viewing pornography, the parent in me would make them log off. What would the librarian in me do the one that follows the Bill of Rights? In this situation, would I be a parent by proxy? I guess I have a lot to learn about the ethics of the profession as it relates to the Bill of Rights.
If children are allowed access to all ideas and no boundaries are put in place, I think we run the risk of influencing behaviors that are destructive. I have to say that what I may have thought to be valid as a teen doesn't seem valid at 37. Does exposure to all ideas at an early age prepare a child to make the right decisions? There was an article in Metro Parent Magazine two summers ago which reported that when children started listening to sexually suggestive music during their pre-teen years, it is likely that they will have their first sexual experience within two years. Unbelievable. It is sad to say that after sharing this article with others, the parents and families of teens, who have had sex agreed that they allowed children to listen to the radio without censor. Pre-teen runs from ages 10-12. So anywhere between 12 and 14 children are engaging in sex, unprotected no less. Producing babies having babies, is this the productive adult behavior, we are charged to encourage?
I agree with you that there is a contradiction. There is some parenting by proxy going on. If not, why would the library profession be concerned about preparing a child for productive adulthood. If we are going to be exposing them to destructive behaviors or ideologies, how can we expect to contribute to the preparation of a socially responsible adult? As librarians, will we be required to set aside the morals and values taught to many of us by our parents or beliefs obtained from our faith?
You almost have to be a parent, a scholar, the police, a counselor, and the relative that lets you do anything, all at the same time. This alone suggests that librarians should earn higher salaries. This job is more involved than I imagined.
Work cited:
Metro Parent Magazine, 2006. Article title and author unknown.
The reference to "what is art?" is a great analogy to this topic. I have been through that discussion so many times, and it makes my brain ache. The point is, there is no flat and simple set of rules for censorship. It does depend on the views of your community. If a community's core is extremely religious, there's probably a high demand for religious-related texts. If a library serves a neighbourhood of young families, there may be an emphasis on children's programs. Is this censorship? Is the failure to carry things that are not in demand grounds for bias? If a library insists on matching every text with an opposing text, would that be enough? Would minority viewpoints be left out? If libraries are supposed to cater to their public in a responsible, unbiased manner, how do they decide what is right for their public? Do they base their standards on their patron's needs, or the suggestions of other libraries in other areas?
To answer your question Yashmyn...
Sadly, I think it does depend on what a community wants/needs and therefore the answer really is that simple. I struggle with the ethics of this myself as I, personally, would want to choose the librarian devoted to intellectual freedom- regardless of community values..but know in practicality that if my job were on the line I would have to go with someone who is more sensitive to the community's needs, who wouldn't "rock the boat." (or I would have to find a new job elsewhere!)
Growing up in a very conservative small town I can see the uproar it would cause if you chose a librarian who pushed the envelope and who made people think and open their eyes...because that itself is the problem. In some backward thinking communities, people don't WANT to think! They want to conform! Thinking outside the box is forbidden unless you want to risk becomming a social pariah!
What a great question you have posed to us! Really makes you think and questions our core values as soon-to-be librarians!
Intellectual freedom is a core value of librarianship and documents like The Library Bills of Rights and The Freedom to Read Statement help support free access of information to anyone seeking it. Librarians should be the stewards of this mission, right? Do librarians have free speech too? It seems paradoxical that the librarian’s role is to provide excessive opportunity for explorative ideas to others but they themselves are to remain neutral, and silent on non-library issues.
Sanford Berman, “perhaps the most legendary library persona of the second half the 20th century (pg120)” attempted to lobby for the right of free speech for library employees but was rejected by his state library association and the ALA. Eventually, he was forced to resign from working with the ALA. You can find out more about him at http://www.sanfordberman.org.
Right now I am struggling with the question, “What is the real work of librarians?” I wonder if it isn’t more important to keep our personal affirmations out of our professional agendas. I can’t imagine how difficult it would be to work in a small library in a conservative town AND be an envelope pushing librarian. As for living a double life, like Anissa proposed, I think that is most healthy and sane way to succeed in the library field. It means we need the ability to compartmentalize ourselves and recognize the value of the duality of this profession. To be able to balance our own social/ethic/political/religious mores with those around us and still function in the role of librarian is an outstanding feat, and one that may ensure our survival.
Works Cited
Roberto and West. "Revolting Librarians Redux." (2003): pg120.
Bethany and Roby,
I'd like to just get it out there: Before I started this program, I thought that the hardest thing I'd be learning is how to effectively use databases for ready reference questions. I really did.
Here's the problem for me. That the profession--or at least the ALA, which claims to speak for the profession--calls out "Intellectual Freedom. No excpetions!" And there are all these librarians who just sit quietly and let the ALA shout out like this. Yet, those librarians know very well that their actions contradict the ALA. They have Internet filters. One librarian I spoke to recently said that he asked a young man to leave the library because he was watching a pornographic site and the patron next to the young man was "offended by it."
Let's just be consistent, people! Let's walk the talk. And that includes walking the talk that the profession's spokesgroup is talking, too!
Otherwise, we're setting ourselves up for quiet self-conflict that WILL--and I don't think I'm dramatizing--cause us to take less seriously ANY value that our spokesgroup asserts on our behalf.
I totally agree with you, Yashmyn, that the ALA should include librarians in its doctrine of intellectual freedom. When I think about being a librarian, sitting quietly behind a desk is not what comes to mind. I will choose my battles. Of course, I am going to work as a radical within the traditional library profession. I have never been a status quo kind of girl and I’ve always been skeptical of authority. As of right now, I have no experience with lobbying for librarians rights to the ALA or any library board of directors. First, I have to get a job and then I have to do my homework, figure out how things work in my library and what paths or roadblocks exist. Since I have no experience with such matters, I feel inept talking about them.
I do think the role of a librarian extends outside of the library and that we can make progressive changes that do affect how our libraries operate within a community.
As a librarian I plan on engaging in long-term struggles for social change that may or may not concentrate within the walls of a library. Fighting censorship, promoting diversity in collections and advocating intellectual freedom for everyone can take place outside of the job, which at times may be more influential at a grass-roots level because it is directly affecting the social or political climate outside of the library- its community.
An example of librarian activism outside the library would be attending an anti-globalization protest, or check this out…"in 1999the ALA held its summer meeting in New Orleans and decided to make its keynote speaker, Colin Powell, which prompted a good amount of controversy in libraryland. A group of librarians put together a picket outside. The police finally asked them to leave, but not before the crowd was greeted with signs that read “Books Not Bombs,” “Dead Iraqis Can’t Use Libraries,” “Don’t Militarize ALA,” “Down with $70,000 Volunteers.” –pg 150 (Revolting Librarians)
Personally, being a librarian will be an extension of my life as a visual artist. I am also obsessed with writing and the etymology of words. I choose library science as another vignette to live progressively and help employ myself in all three areas of pure, unadulterated social activism.
As for being consistent, I do agree with you that we need to walk the talk and not amputate our values from our actions in order to work within the library system. I just haven’t the “know-how” yet to put my mouth where my book is. I’m still figuring this all out.
Here are two websites that I implore everyone to investigate!
Radical librarians and infoshops
www.geocities.com/SoHo/Cafe/7423/radlib.html
Anarchist Librarians - The Revolution Will Be Cataloged
www.infoshop.org/alibrarians/public_html/
Yashmyn J.
I found your scenario about which librarian to choose very interesting because in the end, I think it is the culture in the community you will be working in that is the deciding factor on how you will order and display materials. That is not to say that there aren't things that you will have to fight for. Back when I worked at circulation a woman got upset because there was a book on gay and lesbian weddings in a wedding planning display. Only one book and this woman was livid. By the time she left we found the book wrapped in papertowel and thrown in the garbage in the children's bathroom. However, it was my feeling and the feeling of the rest of the staff that that book needed to be in the display.
What I am talking about with addressing the culture of the community is that you do have to take into account what books patrons will actually read. If you buy continually jaw dropping books but no one checks them out (even if they don't protest them) you just wasted your budget on items that aren't going to be used. In a year when you print out a list of books to be weeded because no one has checked them out, those materials will be on the list. To me the idea of intellectual freedom isn't about picking out the most shoking and perverse material I can and make it available, but to do my best to make a fair representation of topics in my collection from gay and lesbian rights, to Darfur, a variety of religions, and the debate surround pornography. You can't have every book in the world in a library but you can make a representation.
Saying that, I have found other libraries can be very different. I worked for a short time at Ann Arbor District library and let me say, some of the graphic novels in the adult collection were pretty eye catching. However, Ann Arbor is a very liberal area. Those materials were not only purchased for the collection but circulated frequently and in the time I was there, no one ever demanded to know why their tax dollars were being spent on those items. Ann Arbor also has a very specific set of rules of behavior, but it was pointed out in a training session that language is not one of them. The culture between Independence Twp and AADL is very different in regards to collection building and intellectual freedom in general and I have to think that most libraries vary in this respect.
As far as children and intellectual freedom goes, I feel I don't have a problem with ALAs liberal stance on information freedom in that regard. Maybe its because I don't have children or maybe its because my mother never censored me. While all my friends would whisper questions to eachother about sex or whatever because it was too taboo in their family, I would ask my mom and she would go get me a book. I know this is different for other though. A few weeks ago a mother reading at a table with her eight year old child in the YA section asked a librarian to tell the teens on the teen computer to stop talking about myspace because she didn't want her child to know it existed. While I find that request startling and very bold, I think it illustrates exactly what the standard has to be when it comes to children and intellectual freedom. It is only the libraries job to provide the materials, but it is the parent's job to decide what is appropriate.
I think it is a real danger for librarians to fall into the trap of being intellectual police for children and teens. If we fall into the trap of taking on the responsibility of deciding what is moral and even if we do our best to select materials we will always find someone who has fault with us. Take last years Newberry Book for example. "The Higher Power of Lucky" won that award, meaning it has a good bit of merit, yet it was challenged because it contained the word scrotum in reference to a dog.
While I agree the internet can be a danger I still feel it is ultimately a parental responsibility to guide their children in this respect. Libraries can assist in this perhaps by having classes for children and teens on internet saftey or perhaps a handout for parents with sites that can give them tips on how to keep their kids safe on the internet. While my library does have blocking software in the teen computers only, other libraries like AADL only have one bank of computers for all patrons and they are not protected. As far as I am aware, that is acceptable in that community.
After all of that rambling I have to say that yes, it ultimatly does come down to the community you are serving, but even then I feel it is a real trap and exactly what ALA is against for librarians to take on the responsibility of a parent for children patrons. It is our job to provide materials to the best of our ability and even to look at suggested age levels, it is a parent's responsibility to decide if they want their child to have access to it.
AADL Rules of Behavior
http://www.aadl.org/aboutus/policies/behavior
Wow, this is a lot of information to take in. Very thorough, group 2!
From what I've understood from our class's discussion of intellectual freedom and book banning, it seems that librarians and the information profession take a lot of responsibility on themselves, which I think is very admirable and inspiring. When I think about all the different gateways that information must pass through to get to those seeking it, it's awesome that libraries and librarians have resolved to adopt this policy of total access, even if it isn't always put into practice. For example, for a book to even get to a library shelf in order to be challenged it has to be rendered in a final draft by the author in a form that preserves all of its controversial ideas. For an idea of how this can go wrong, just remember one of the ethical scenarios that we have to choose from for our class assignment. An author might be persuaded by a critic to tone down or eliminate elements of sexuality, explicit language, or politically controversial ideas in order to make his or her work less objectionable. Even if an author sticks by his or her original vision, finding a publisher is incredibly difficult. And once found, an editor might encourage or insist that some part be smoothed over or omitted. Once published, bookstores and distributors also make decisions about what they will choose to stock. Finally, near the end of this chain are the librarians. They get to choose the books that will fill out their collections. Many times they can anticipate which books will balance out what they already have and which books their community will want to read. Despite the guidelines for collection development that state that controversial books should not be passed over for inclusion in collections, I suspect it happens fairly often and fairly quietly. In the end, for a book to pass through all of these tests and make it to the library shelf to be read and enjoyed and challenged by those who it has offended - well I think it's amazing.
One question that came to mind while I was reading through this post was about labeling. What constitutes a label? Right now I am looking at a stack of children's book that I checked out of my local library for my Children's Literature class. On the spine of each book is the expected, author and call number information, but there are also stickers that inform me what section of the library this book belongs in (juvenile), awards the books have won (Newbery, Printz, etc.), what genre they might be categorized into (sports, historical fiction, etc.), and so on. I think most of us might agree that these labels are pretty unobjectionable, however what if books had a label "BOY" or "GIRL"? Would that be perceived as steering library patrons towards a particular category of books? Well, I definitely think so, but does proclaiming a book's subject matter on its spine do that just a tiny bit as well? What about putting books on a display as recommended? It seems to me that the ALA may take a hard line on labeling, but in practice it's fairly benign when used as simple categorization. It's when there is an implicit judgment that is made that labeling gets into trouble (such as boy books versus girl books.)
I've been thinking a lot about this labeling thing too. One of the questions on the intellectual freedom test we took last week implied that having sections based on age (Juv, YA, etc) is a violation of said intellectual freedom even if these sections are not restricted to patrons within the specified age group. This does not really make sense to me, provided that the librarian does not try to use it for purposes of restriction. The average eight-year-old that picks up a book targeted at teenage readers is probably not going to have much luck reading it. It seems to me that this type of label primarily serves as a time-saver and a guide to finding the book that is appropriate based upon what the patron is literally capable of reading at his or her age.
I've also been considering those little genre labels that are so popular in many public libraries, particularly in the juvenile and young adult sections. In the past, I took them for granted as directional cues for people in search of a mystery, fantasy, etc. On the one hand, these can help people interested in a certain genre find it more easily. It might, for example, encourage kids to read more books that share a fantasy label with Harry Potter. On the other hand, it might also cause them to jump right over other books they may otherwise have looked at simply because they lack this label. In a small, conservative community, fantasy and horror labels might even serve as the catalyst for public protest. Further, are these labels often unfair to the author's works? Should libraries categorize and compartimentalize works of fiction? Isn't the industry already too genre-oriented because of the efforts of mainstream retailers? Are titles that straddle the fence between genres immediately placed at a disadvantage in terms of the attention they will get? These are just some of the thoughts I had in regards to labeling.
Post a Comment