Censorship & Libraries
Historical Considerations
The institution of the library has been a long standing symbol of power because of the books it contains and the wide access to information it offers patrons. With this comes debate about who has the right to control what is in the library and who should be able to access it. Libraries have evolved over many centuries and have seen many iterations of the common patron. Starting as private collections for the elite (e.g. kings and nobles) or for select groups (e.g. monks), libraries gradually became more open to a wider number of readers in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. That’s when borrowing books became common as subscription and circulating libraries became more popular. While having the ability to pay access and subscription fees was still a barrier to many, it was no longer necessary for everyone to own every book they desired to read. The subscription library required that people pay a fee periodically to be able to access the books. Open to a broader public than subscription libraries, circulating libraries generated debate about who was responsible for social morality because what they held in their collections significantly impacted what people could read. Certain topics or genres such were seen as scandalous. For example, there were movements to keep women from reading fiction in order to not jeopardize their purity. At the turn of the twentieth century, Carnegie libraries revolutionized the institution of the public library and provided opportunities for more people to read without the cost of purchasing books or subscriptions. Carnegie libraries are the model that we see today as centers for learning and community spaces. (Pettegree & Der Weduwen, 2021).
Censorship & Libraries
While libraries are wonderful community centers that provide information for patrons, serving this role in society can sometimes raise questions about how collections are assembled, including many debates about issues of access and censorship, past and present. Librarians are viewed as responsible for making available texts that accurately remember or explain things about which there is much debate. Because people occupy many the parts of political and cultural spectrum and consequently have many perspectives and agendas, agreeing how to provide wide availability of information can be a difficult task.
Censorship and Blumberg’s actions have a similar effect in restricting access to certain books by removing them from the public sphere, however the motivation behind them was different. Censorship was typically more about an ethical debate about the power held in access to information and the implications of possessing such power. Blumberg felt that he was saving books from endangerment. He believed that he could preserve and cherish books better than libraries and the public could.
Legal and Professional Guidelines
In the United States, there have been many debates regarding censorship in libraries, especially in school libraries. Censorship may occur due to political affiliation or a lack of training for librarians in addition to pressure from parents or school boards. Opponents of censorship argue that it comes at the cost of eliminating works of immense educational or cultural value. The 1982 Supreme Court case Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District No. 26 v Pico by Pico dealt directly with book banning in public schools. Ultimately, the Court ruled that the right to read is protected by the first amendment. (Kim, 2022; Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District No. 26 v. Pico by Pico.).
The Library Bill of Rights provides guidelines to help librarians act in opposition to censorship. Some people believe librarians should sanitize history so people are not disturbed or offended by reading certain materials. Others believe that librarians should do the opposite. Ultimately, the Library Bill of Rights articulates that librarians should work for intellectual freedom. It suggests that many perspectives be made available so that individuals expose themselves to different opinions and views at their own discretion.
The American Library Association offers specific expectations for the library’s role in protecting intellectual freedom. The ALA clarifies that the library’s job is not to cater to particular interests but rather to maintain intellectual freedom. There are a few categories of works not protected by the First Amendment according to the Supreme Court including obscenity, child pornography, defamation, fighting words, and information pertinent to national security. Commonly censored material tends to involve contested cultural and political topics, including but not limited to questions of identity and religion. The ALA reminds members and patrons that any media present in a library “does not imply endorsement of the ideas expressed in those materials. The library is simply doing its job as a neutral provider of information from all points of view” (American Library Association).