Censoring Ourselves? The Charlie Hebdo Lesson

The events in Paris surrounding the Charlie Hebdo slayings has  caused many to rethink and challenge the idea of whether it is better to remain silent then to draw, write or say something that may spark an angry outburst from certain groups or organizations.   Charlie Hebbo's depiction of the Prophet Mohamad was deemed offensive by two Muslim men.  They took it upon themselves to be judge and executioner of those in and around the publisher's office, whether these individuals were directly involved in the cartoon publishing, it didn't matter.  The objective of these men was to have revenge on anyone who crossed their path because they were offended.  It won thought or remorse the pleas were ignored.  What does this violent act have to do with libraries?  More than one can imagine.   Especially when considering  "offensive" materials in a library's collection.  Should libraries remove books that may be too controversial or spark rage? Should libraries subscribe to publications like Charlie Hebdo?   These questions can be viewed as complex with no right answers.  That might be true if librarians didn't believe in the ideals of Intellectual Freedom.  Thankfully, the profession has been on the forefront of Intellectual freedom and hopefully will stay the course.

Now is not the time to ban books, burn magazine or destroy cartons because they have a view of the world that is different than our own.  It is also not the time to kowtow to a specific group who is easily offended and threatens violence in retaliation for printing materials that are offensive.  In recent history, there have been no incidences of Christians, Buddhists, or even Atheists who have killed in the name of being offended.  They voice their objections.  They may even ask for the removal of "offensive" material but they don't respond with violence.   In the past, librarians who promoted Intellectual Freedom and protected the "freedom to read"in their libraries,  felt their biggest threat would come from groups with the Religious Right, but reality is setting in that the true enemy to Intellectual Freedom is political correctness.

Christopher Hitchens is not a stranger to controversy for his written works and debates.  When reading this statement attributed to him, one has to admit his observation is spot on.    “I'm very depressed how in this country you can be told "That's offensive" as though those two words constitute an argument.”  Anyone who is reasonable will agree with that statement.  However, not everyone is reasonable, especially one with a semi-automatic weapons. However, this is exactly what political correctness has done to debate in our country and around the world.  If words are spoken that are offensive or pictures are drawn that inflame emotions the knee jerk reactions is to quickly denounce the publication and censor it.  Really?   What was the response when protests were made against Harry Potter books based on the theory that the spells were "real" and satanic?  Librarians and educators alike defended the work stating that it encouraged children to read.  To censor the book was  considered radical.  Agreed it is radical. It's just as radical to censor books and magazines due to their satirical expression.  Isn't satire suppose to make people think?  To show readers a view of   absurdity and reality at the same time?   Librarians in every library, small or large, public or private, should not be afraid to continue to defend their patron's  right to read.   Not only that  but political correctness should be tossed out on it's ear to allow for honest,  thoughtful debate about the issues.

Censor ourselves at this time?  Nope. Not now. Not ever.   The freedom to read is too important to lose because if it is lost, all freedoms are lost.   Come to think of it... libraries will be lost too.

Banned Book Week 2011: Part Two Intellectual Snobs vs. Parental Rights

It’s the middle of Banned Books Week, the world has not crumbled, at least for the moment. The Freedom to Read is still alive and well in this great country of ours. From the looks of it will be for a long time to come. Why should another blog be written on censorship and freedom? Simply put, the debate will not end because of two ideological forces are colliding like two ships that have missed the lighthouse signal.

First let’s examine intellectual snobbery for a moment. Let’s face it everyone who holds a degree in any field of study has a touch of the “snob” syndrome. When it comes to earning a higher degree than the traditional four-year Bachelors, the “snob” syndrome become almost incurable. A college degree does not guarantee common sense, but it can cause someone to look down at others as unable to understand the complexity of literature and thus can not form any valid debate against a piece of work. This type of thought should be changed and quickly for the sake of saving literature of all genres.

On the other hand, there is a knee jerk reaction from the other side that believes all books that have bad language, sex and drugs are bad. There has always been a school of thought that has insisted that books for children can only be valuable if its clear, clean and comfortable. In other words, it doesn’t rock the boat that will lead teens to ask uncomfortable questions. Those who hold onto this school of thought are often thought of as living in the past, not civilized or just don’t get it when it comes to the world, especially as it relates to teens. Like it or not, there is validity to this point of view. Just as there is validity to the point of view that teens should be exposed to different types of genre and writers. Both sides lay claim to wanting what is best for children, and neither side is willing to concede that the other might have a good idea. Why is that?

Recent titles that have been published in the Young Adult section have caused alarm and scrutiny by many groups. Authors who want to push the envelope are doing so with topics such as drugs, suicide, sex and gay life styles. It seems these topics are becoming more prevalent in the plots, causing some to wonder if every book has to have a gay person, a suicide, drugs or all of the above to make a good story? For every intellectual freedom snob who stands up for these books, the question has to be if the plots make the books more enticing to them personally? If the answer is yes, perhaps their bias is guiding them to censor anyone who is against these titles. If the answer is no, and all books with great plots enthrall them perhaps there is room to communicate that to the other side. The opposite question can be asked of parents who want to ban “bad” books in schools. Censorship from the government is never a good thing. Having said that, parents' rights are just as important if not more so than their minor chidlren. Every teen should have a good home, great education and the basic needs of life. Those needs do not include reading everything under the sun. There are just some topics that families should discuss together in their own time, in their own way,

Celebrating Banned Book Week should be the celebration of living in a free society that allows for all types of books to be published and read without fear of punishment. It shouldn’t turn into a political hijacking. In the whole scheme of things, teens are looking to adults to help them along the way in life. Once becoming a teen does not mean that they are free to explore the world without adult aid. It simply means they still need a hand once in awhile to guide them through the maze of information. Teens deserve nothing less than great books, good role model and a little advice to help them sort it all out. That should be what everyone should strive to achieve.