Brought to book : Censorship and School Libraries in Australia (Chapter 6: Preparing for the censor).

Date: 20/12/2023

Authors: Claire Louise Williams and Ken Dillon (1993).

Format: Book

Time: 1 hour

Level:  Librarians, members of the Australian Library and Information Association (ALIA)

Subject Area: Literacy, censorship, information access, right to read freely, young adult literature, adolescent development.

Objective: Research on censorship within YA literature

Reason for attending: Comprehension of censorship of texts deemed detrimental to YA readers from the perspective of the librarian.

What was learnt:

Williams and Dillon investigate the perpetrators of, and reasons for censorship in school libraries, and the importance of information professionals in consideration and advocacy of children’s and  youth resources and access. They cite research by McClure (1983) into justification of the aspiring censor pertaining to three pretexts (pg. 95):

• “The moral argument” in which decency and integrity are discernible through the lens of religious principles, and cultural, political and societal standards.
• “The psychological motive” where, based on traditional convention, censorship is used as a rampart to protect the mental and emotional welfare of the young individual.
• “The sociological motive” which serves to elevate and cultivate consideration of specific sociological facets within the community (sexism, racism, homophobia, genderphobia) over other alternatives.

 These apprehensions were viewed in 1983 as the prohibitive foundation primarily for parents, the “primary complaint initiators” (pg. 97), but also library faculty, teachers, administration and, to a lesser extent students. The “moral guardians of the young” (pg. 96) were determined to defend the school library against negative societal issues beyond the school gates through collection and promotion of resources with only meritorious and virtuous content. All the better if it opposed any staff spruiking endorsement of radical “minority” cause materials viewed as “repellent” (Vandergrift, cited by Williams & Dillon, pg. 96). This practice was achieved through overt measures of rejection, removal and destruction of reading matter, and covert tactics of avoidance or influenced “pre-censorship” in selection of resources.

The authors offer specific examples of censorship with identifiable alternatives including  purposive inclusion instead of intentional exclusion; advice and encouragement vs control;   edification rather than indoctrination; augmented information access vs restricted, and  correlation of book context  in contrast to  separation.

Williams and Dillon provide pertinent professional advice in confronting censorship within the school environment. This is established upon cognizance of resource selection guidelines and best practice, documented administrative policy, community relationships, and empathy and transparent communication with the censurer to reach a balanced outcome.

Relationship to work or study

Considering Williams and Dillon’s article is now 30 years old, information resource guidelines and best-practice are today far more pro-active in tolerance and emancipation. The International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) 2020 Guidelines for Library Services for Young Adults report states  “Teenagers need special attention since many abandon voluntary reading at this stage in their lives. Their introduction to a wide array of books, compatible with their changing interests, should be encouraged by librarians and others who are aware of their psychological and emotional growth”  (International Book Committee and International Publishing Association 1992, cited by IFLA, pg. 2).

IFLA refers to freedom of information and right of ingress for YA readers in “the mission of the library: to assist the individual in achieving a successful transition from childhood to adulthood by providing both access to resources, and an environment that meets the specific needs of young adults for intellectual, emotional, and social development” (2020, pg. 3). This should be endorsed via transparent right to free access policy, appropriate resources and services within a diverse selection of cultural, educational and social interests. Young adult representation and communication require collaborative measures and demonstration of support for patron values. Rather than censoring and curtailing resources due to fear of potential consequence, the IFLA states “Involving young adults in decision making, planning, and implementing programs for themselves is highly recommended as a best practice that contributes to positive youth development. Young adults should be recognized as the experts on what will be appealing and useful to them”. (pg. 6)

The CSU Children and youth units of INF330 (services), INF205 (resources) and INF329 (leadership) are pertinent in exploration of traditional censorship practices and contemporary restrictive potential. In the school and public library sphere I have had experience of parental suppression of reading material. Knowledge of concern underpinning censorship assist in respectful communication with both parent and adolescent in the pursuit of compromise and successful service.

 References

International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). (2020). Guidelines for library services for young adults https://archive.ifla.org/VII/s10/pubs/ya-guidelines-en.pdf

McClure, A. (1983) Censorship. Children’s Literature Association Quarterly, 8 (1) , , p . 22.

Williams, C.L & Dillon, K. (1993).  Ch 6: Preparing for the censor. In Brought to book : censorship and school libraries in Australia. In CSU Library for ETL503. https://primo.csu.edu.au/discovery/delivery/61CSU_INST:61CSU/12131784960002357.