This was written as the final part of a series of three papers, the other two do not need to be read for this essay, but if you want to read them, I can email them to you; just /msg me. The Sources used list is as long as it is because of the other two papers. On note about the sources - EBSCOhost is a database with almost any newspaper or magazine article published in the United States. I obtained access to this data base through my University and I do not know if it is possible to access it outside of this University or others that utilize the same data base.
Censorship (in Libraries) and an Argument for a Solution
For many years two opposing and bitter rivals have fought a pointless battle over books and the Internet. The materials that are being fought over are highly controversial for many reasons, those being of violence, sexual content, use of offensive language, promotion of homosexuality, and blasphemous ideologies. One group, represented by the national organization called Family Friendly Libraries, or the FFL, consists of two factions; one faction is calling for the banishment of these books, that is, removing them from public library shelves. And the other faction is calling for drastic reforms within the library system. And then there is the ALA, or the American Library Association, which runs the libraries, more or less, and believes that no books should be banished, and that no reforms are needed within the library system. Even though the two sides strongly disagree on many issues, it is essential they work together to find an answer to the plaguing question of how to take care of children, even in the case of the global phenomenon of the Internet. Censorship is not the answer, but it is inarguable that what children see and read has a profound affect on them, since the FFL and the ALA cannot agree on any terms, it is only sensible to continue granting free access to contested books and use of the Internet, but only with parental permission unless the child is past a certain age.
Censorship of books began when books were first published. The censorship was enacted out by the Catholic Church, usually by burning, the books of questionable nature, i.e. those that did not follow the teachings of the Church. In the American library system, free speech prevails, and no book can technically and lawfully be banished from public libraries. School libraries, however, have a sort of independence within this, and can pull books from shelves if the School Board agrees on it. This is often done within Public Schools, since Catholic and other private institutions can pick and choose based on their own ideologies. Parents of public school students have often grumbled and complained about the course material and beginning in the early 1980’s there has been an increased amount of contested books in an increased amount of public schools. These books range from the classic Adventures of Huckleberry Finn to the psychological thriller, and popular film, A Clockwork Orange, to the wildly popular children’s books of the Harry Potter series, one of this era’s most controversial books. This book series is about a young boy named Harry Potter who goes to a special school for wizards and battles evil. Nothing seems wrong with that, but many parents and Catholic organizations have called for the Harry Potter books to be pulled from library shelves and withdrawn from school teachings for its promotion of witchcraft and the dark arts. While there have been literally no reported cases of any of the millions of children who have read this book going off and practicing witchcraft, the parents and Catholic groups who have contested this book are relentless in their persecution of it. In 2000 alone, the ALA received 646 formal complaints about the series (“Harry Potter Series Again Tops List of Most Challenged Books.”). Since there are at least three more books in the series waiting to be written and published, this controversy will not die down any time soon, and will more than likely increase due to the recent releases of the movie versions of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone and Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. While it seems foolish and old fashioned to believe in witchcraft, the controversy this book has created will not easily be solved. Censoring or banishing this book will only result in a wide spread Pro-Potter movement, so the simplest answer is to require parental permission to borrow these books from public school libraries or to use them for school reports, which is happening more and more often with many books.
The method of parental permissions is even being used in the World Wide Web, especially within the homes of concerned parents. But libraries and school systems seem to be a bit slow on the upkeep of filtering, as it is called, public computers; public libraries more so than public schools. The reason for this is because adults also use these public computers, and should be allowed to access any information they desire. Internet Filter tools and programs seem to be the logical choice, and in many ways are. But there is a problem with such programs, as that they limit the use of useful internet sites, such as search engines, if the security is set to high. And if the security is too low, they allow “blocked” information to easily be accessed using links (“Mandating the Wrong Filters”). Constant supervision of internet usage seems to be the only way to prevent children from accessing web sites that are unsuited for them, but this is a timely and costly way of solving the problem. PC Magazine published an article in 1999 that shows a Pro/Con format and comparison of different filtering programs, and rated Cybersitter 2001 as the best in-home filtering software, but the choice of filters is really a question of what lies in the parents’ general interest for their child.
Filters in public libraries are also a source of controversy. Recently Congress passed the CIPA, or the Children’s Internet Protection Act. The filters restrict what websites are accessible from certain computers in the libraries, and thus restrict the freedom of speech. Many state governments are requiring libraries to comply with CIPA or risk loss of funding. Currently the law is being fought in courts by the ALA, but this isn’t going to protect children. One little known solution is to implement a sort of permit system for use of the libraries’ computers. Using a new library card, the card holder would be able to swipe the card to allow for different and appropriate security settings for use on the computer. Since many states require parental permission for a child to receive a library card, it would be a simple way to insure the protection of children at the consent of the parent.
Another controversy spawning from a child’s access to the library is inappropriate books. The most contested of these books, other than the Harry Potter series, are usually is contested due to sexual explicitness and content. More specifically are sex education books. Sex education is offered in public schools, I personally received my formal sexual education in the 5th grade. But like many, I was still clueless about the subject until well into High School, by then I was fully sexually developed and had plenty of hormonal male friends. Lucky for me, I decided not to heed their advice on the myths of sex. But many children simply do not have friends as well educated as mine were, and usually children are too embarrassed to talk about sex with their parents, and even if the child did, what would the parent say? “Well, it’s like this screwdriver is the guy, and this sock is the girl, and the screwdriver goes into the sock, I mean girl, and that is how you make babies….” Books are a healthy alternative to a child learning about sex, especially when compared with learning through unguided experience, possibly with the help of peers. But sometimes enough is enough. Books that encourage children to experiment sexually with pets are morally wrong, but the sex education book, Boys and Sex (which allegedly does encourage sexual experimenting with pets), is commonly placed in the children’s section of the library (“Parent Alert: Beware the Public Libraries”). In the very least it should be moved to the young adult section, but under no circumstances should it be banished from the library. Another sex education book, It’s Perfectly Normal, has come under attack, especially in recent months (“Censorship Watch” 32). The book uses illustrations, as so many others do, to teach children about their reproductive organs, birth control, and even homosexuality, which is a whole different controversy in itself (“Laughing in the Face of Puberty”). The difference between the acceptance of sex ed books is their approach to the subject. Those books that use humor and illustrations are more often attacked than no-nonsense text books, but a curious child is more likely to read a funny book than a text book. Sexual education books should require a parent’s permission to be checked out of the public library system, the same as my sex education in the 5th grade required my parents’ permission.
Homosexuality and homosexual rights have been a fierce controversy ever since gays and lesbians really became known in the eye of the general public in the early 70’s. The ALA is officially Pro-Gay Rights, and the content of their libraries reflects it. A self adopted Gay History Month is celebrated every June, where the libraries make large displays showcasing books that are about homosexuals and their experiences, or about educating people about the lifestyle. Conservative ‘counter attacks’ to the pro-gay publishing industry are slow and ill judged (“Homosexual Ideologies Within the Library System”). The main concern with groups opposing the ALA’s attitude is that these conservative therapy, cure-the-"disease" books are not as well promoted as pro-gay books, which has a profound impact upon children. Books that educate children about homosexuality and how to deal with it are also constantly under attack. Daddy’s Roommate and Heather Has Two Mommies are two such books. As with the other controversies, parental permissions seems key, if a parent wishes their child to be shielded and protected from gays, which would promote intolerance, then that parent has every right to do so simply because it is their child.
Some contested books are contested for a simple reason, explicit language. The language could be a mild use of the word ‘nigger’ or grossly obscene language commonly found on today’s streets or in rap music. The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn has been contested many times because its use of the sacred ‘N’ word. Many agree, however, that the use of the word was reflective of the time period of which the book was set, and written in, and should not be taken in the light of which it is sometimes used today, even if today’s meaning of the ‘N’ word is up to debate (“PC Crowd Bans Huckleberry Finn Because Mark Twain Used the ‘N’ Word”). Other books contested for language are not as well known or praised as Twain’s Huckleberry Finn, but nevertheless are good books. In the Sep. 1998 American Libraries magazine, the article, The Dangerous Modern Library List lists the 100 best English language novels, and why many are contested. Amongst those contested for language are The Great Gatsby, The Grapes of Wrath, Slaughter House-Five, Invisible Man, Native Son, Lord Of the Flies, Deliverance, The Catcher in the Rye, and A Clockwork Orange, almost all these books have been read by personal friends of mine below the High School level, and all seem to be morally good young adults, or adults as time should have it. The teenagers I know who have not read any of these books are the ones that have a gutter mouth and would easily fit the stereotype of a ‘menace to society’ in the eyes of a christian conservative. Again, as in the case with books contested over sexual content, parental permission to read books that have been banned for obscene language should be required.
While many books have legitimate reasons to be contested, there are many that do not have such an honor. A few of these books are The Chocolate War, Anne Frank: Diary of a Young Girl, and Lewis Carroll’s Alice In Wonderland. The Chocolate War was banned because it encouraged children to “Make their own decisions;” Anne Frank was banned because of the sentence “What a silly ass I am!” And Alice In Wonderland was contested because of the talking animals within the book. My personal favorite reason to ban a book comes from a 1998 contentment in Michigan over the book The Stupids Die; “Once you allow ‘stupid’ as a word to call people, who knows what they’ll come up with?” (“New Silly Reasons to Ban Books”) Many will agree that even parental permission should not have to be used to ban these books as long as they are kept in an age-appropriate place within the library, but parental permission based library cards will certainly ease the tension created by such ‘stupid’ reasons to ban books. “Who knows what they’ll come up with next?”
Censorship is not the answer to raising children using the public libraries. Totalitarian governments censor books. The ideal solution to the problem of raising children would be to have at least one parent with the child at all times, yet this is near impossible. Therefore, using a system of parental permissions on the Internet and in the library would be second best. All that would be required to implement the system is a few simple policy and law changes along with some inexpensive software installation in some cases. To think, there are law suits going on right now about what to do about indecency in the library system, and there are law suits that needlessly attack the ALA’s judgment on how to run the libraries, which it has done for 135 years now. Bitterness between the library and the citizens won’t result in anything, they must work together to find a common solution. And the best solution is parental permissions.
Sources:
Bannan, Karen J. “Clean It Up.” PC Magazine. 20 (1999): 101. EBSCOhost. <http://ehostvgw11.epnet.com/ehost.asp?key=204.179.122.140_8000_747693045&site=ehost&return=y>
Block, M. “Afraid of Harry Potter”. Library Talk, 14 (2001): 9.
Blume, Judy. “Is Harry Potter Evil?” New York Times 22 October 1999: A27.
“Censoring School Literature in the Cyber Age.” Education Digest 66 (2001): 32. EBSCOhost. <http://ehostvgw20.epnet.com/ehost.asp?key=204.179.122.140_8000_522189662&site=ehost&return=y>
“Censorship Watch.” American Libraries. 32 (2001): 23. EBSCOhost. <http://ehostvgw11.epnet.com/ehost.asp?key=204.179.122.140_8000_747693045&site=ehost&return=y>
Charter For “Family Friendly Libraries” System. 24 Apr. 2000. Family Friendly Libraries. 9 Dec. 2001. <http://www.fflibraries.org>
Cunningham, Andrew. “Catcher Cast Out.” Times Educational Supplement. 5 Oct. 2001. pg. 19
FFL Home. 24 Apr. 2000. Family Friendly Libraries. 7 Nov. 2001. <http://www.fflibraries.org/>
FFL Vision Document. 24 Apr. 2000. Family Friendly Libraries. 9 Dec. 2001.
<http://www.fflibraries.org>
Gounaud, Karen. “The Battle Of Bawdy Books: Returning the Decency Standard to Public School Literature.” 7 Feb. 1998. Family Friendly Libraries. <http://www.fflibraries.org>
“Harry Potter Again Tops List of Most Challenged Books.” ALA News Release, Jan. 2001. <http://www.ala.org/pio/presskits/midwinterawards2001/challenged.html>
Heppermann, Christine. “Laughing in the Face of Puberty.” Horn Book Magazine. 76 (2000): 162. EBSCOhost. <http://ehostvgw17.epnet.com/ehost.asp?key=204.179.122.130_8000_-1399731238&site=ehost&return=y>
Hurwitz, Howard. “PC Crowd Bans Huckleberry Fin Because Mark Twain Used ‘N’ Word.” Human Events. 15 Sept. 1995. EBSCOhost. <http://ehostvgw5.epnet.com/ehost.asp?key=204.179.122.130_8000_-1828411744&site=ehost&return=y>
L.K. “The Dangerous Modern Library List.” American Libraries 29 (1998): 68. EBSCOhost. <http://ehostvgw20.epnet.com/ehost.asp?key=204.179.122.140_8000_522189662&site=ehost&return=y>
“New Silly Reasons to Ban Books.” Teacher Librarian 26 (1999): 26. EBSCOhost. <http://ehostvgw20.epnet.com/ehost.asp?key=204.179.122.140_8000_522189662&site=ehost&return=y>
“Parent Alert: Beware the Public Libraries.” Family Friendly Libraries. <http://www.fflibraries.org>
Ramienski, D. (2001, October 29). “Censoring books is for dummies.” The Diamondback. Pg. 4. (The Diamondback is the school newspaper for UMCP and can be found online at http://www.inform.umd.edu/Diamondback/)
Rodgers, Michael; Oder, Norman; Oder, Norman. “SF City Supervisors Ban Adult Filters.” Library Journal. 126 (2001): 24. EBSCOhost. <http://ehostvgw11.epnet.com/ehost.asp?key=204.179.122.140_8000_747693045&site=ehost&return=y>
Schell, H. “Homosexual Ideology within the Library System.” Family Friendly Libraries. Unknown Location. Oct. 21, 1995. FFL. <http://www.fflibraires.org>
Weir, John. “The 10 Most Hated Books.” Advocate 24 June 1997: Issue 736 pg 91. EBSCOhost. <http://ehostvgw20.epnet.com/ehost.asp?key=204.179.122.140_8000_522189662&site=ehost&return=y >
Welcome to ALA. 15 May 2001. American Library Association. <http://www.ala.org/>
Welcome to the ALA: FAQ. 15 May 2001. American Library Association. <http://www.cs.ala.org/faq/faq.cfm>
Wiegrand, Wayne. “This month, 95 Years Ago.” American Libraries Sep. 2000: pg 108. EBSCOhost. <http://ehostvgw20.epnet.com/ehost.asp?key=204.179.122.140_8000_522189662&site=ehost&return=y>
Wolinsky, Art. “Mandating the Wrong Filters.” Teacher Librarian. 29 (2001): 26. EBSCOhost. <http://ehostvgw11.epnet.com/ehost.asp?key=204.179.122.140_8000_747693045&site=ehost&return=y>