Library Chat: The freedom to read is under threat, even today

By Ken Feser on February 28, 2020.

The week of Feb. 23-29 is Freedom to Read Week, a time for Canadians to think about and hopefully support intellectual freedom. You might wonder why we need such an event, in an age when everyone seems quite empowered to have whatever opinion they like on social media and everywhere else. I believe we do need to stand up for the freedom to read, and think, and speak, because even today this freedom is under threat.

Many books have been challenged in Canadian libraries, so many that most libraries have a form for book removal requests. (We rarely if ever remove books, but we accept complaints and give them fair consideration.) Libraries collect books on a variety of subjects, from a variety of perspectives, so readers can consider all sides and form their own opinions. A good library, they say, should have something in its collection to offend everyone. Unfortunately, not everyone likes it when they encounter something that doesn’t fit their existing opinions.

I am amazed by the range of books that are challenged. Even Dr. Seuss’s “Hop on Pop” offended someone at some point in time (apparently hopping on Pop undermines parental authority.) Many classic works of Canadian literature – “The Handmaid’s Tale,” “Lives of Girls and Women,” “The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz,” “The Diviners” – have been challenged. To me, this undermines the very idea of censorship. So many books are challenged, how could we censor them all?

Beyond books, internet access is often challenged. The fact that someone could access, for example, pornography prompts some to assert that the internet should be filtered. The problem is, there are no good filters. By default we get the entire internet and there is no product that effectively filters out the “bad” and leaves the “good.” Legitimate searches about breast cancer or LGBTQ issues have been blocked. We don’t censor content with an algorithm. We do look to our patrons to be civil and respectful of those around them.

Book challenges have often been launched by social conservatives, but progressives also seek to suppress books and speech. Canadian author Lawrence Hill had the cover of his work “The Book of Negroes” burned by a group which found the title offensive. Libraries in Vancouver and Toronto and, well, Medicine Hat have been criticized for allowing meetings that discussed issues like LGBTQ rights and vaccination in controversial ways. Perhaps there is a lesson in this equal opportunity intolerance. Defend the unpopular expression that you don’t agree with today, because someone will be coming for your opinion tomorrow.

In the words of Lawrence Hill: “I can’t see any good coming out of banning or burning books. Let’s talk, instead.”