On Saturday, Feb. 28, Whitman’s Penrose Library collaborated with the Walla Walla Public Library (WWPL) and sponsorship from PBS Indie-Lens Pop-Up to host a free public screening of “The Librarians” documentary directed by Kim A. Snyder.
Snyder’s documentary frames book bans as potentially limiting to First Amendment rights, and prompted discussion about book bans and parental rights after the event. These conversations about book banning often question what kinds of books are appropriate for kids and where parental rights to select or control children’s literature maintain sovereignty.
The practice of censoring books has been ongoing for centuries, but some have noted a recent rise in the frequency of these bans in the US. Every year since 1982, the American Library Association (ALA) has held a Banned Books Week to highlight targeted books. Some examples of frequently banned books include Orwell’s “1984,” Bradbury’s “Fahrenheit 451” and more that provide warnings to society of the dangers of information censorship. Others describe the challenges of growing up or diverse characters and cultures.
While some books may not be directly banned, experts have identified the practice of soft-censorship, or removing books from public access out of a fear of negative response, as another way to prohibit certain reading material.
Librarian of Adult and Teen Services at the Walla Walla Public Library, Joshua Armstrong, explained the potential effects caused by soft censorship.
“It really helps people, at least librarians, when they are ordering [books] to not have any of these subtle things where it’s like ‘Oh don’t buy this topic because it’s controversial,’” Armstrong said. “It’s usually [librarians or] people buying books that [think] ‘Well, I don’t want to buy this because it’s just easier for me not to.’ That’s soft-censorship.”
Emily Pearson, a librarian at Whitman’s Penrose Library, was in accord with the pressures of soft censorship. She described a hypothetical scenario of what librarians could think when choosing books to purchase in a school context.
“We have a limited budget, do we need to be spending money on these types of books that maybe aren’t getting checked out [that much] and it’s just easier, right?” Pearson said.
The documentary also explained how librarians become powerful figures when choosing books because of the work they put into curating a diverse collection.
According to the film, many of the books targeted by censorship involve LGBTQIA+, BIPOC characters or stories depicting sexual education or puberty.
Pearson discussed how books featuring LGBTQIA+ or diverse characters may be censored due to concerns that representations like these are age-inappropriate for young adults and children.
“A lot of these challenges end up being [in the books] there are gay characters, so [some think] that means it’s sexual and therefore it’s pornography,” Pearson said.
President of the Whitman College Republican Club, David Dunbabin, supports some of the limitations that parents might apply to topics like these.
“The term ‘bookbanning’ is inaccurate [… ] it’s just saying ‘Hey, these kids should not be reading this stuff,’” Dunbabin said. “When you have kids, you wouldn’t want your kids reading PornHub.”
Dunbabin also explained how he thinks kids could be influenced by the books they read.
“Part of [the issue] is introducing ideas that may influence kids and may have a negative impact on society,” Dunbabin said. “Kids’ minds are easily able to be influenced.”
Armstrong rebutted this idea, proposing that kids often watch movies with bad guys and villains, and they don’t immediately decide to become villains themselves. Armstrong also noted how there may be a divide in the belief of whether or not children are easily molded by their reading materials.
“People who do this kind of thing [book banning] think that if you see something, that’s what you’re going to mirror, that’s what you want to be,” Armstrong said.
In Armstrong’s view, many people learn or gain empathy from reading about people or characters who are different from themselves. For him, book banning can diminish opportunities and access to learning.
Armstrong suggested that there is no issue with parents wanting to ensure their kids read books that they declare appropriate. Instead, he questions attempts from parents to control other people’s kids.
“Most people, the vast majority, if they don’t want their kid to read a book, they’ll just say, ‘hey kid, don’t read this book,’’’ Armstrong said. “What [people who want to ban books] are trying to do is not just say, ‘My kid can’t read this book.’ It’s more, ‘Your kid can’t read this book,’ or ‘All the kids can’t read this book,’ which is when it becomes problematic.”
A screening of “The Librarians” at WWPL prompted discussion about book-banning. In turn, some people debate what reading material is appropriate for kids, and many agree that parents can decide individually what their children read. However, opinion varies on how far that parental right extends and whether the presence of a book in a library is as impactful as someone reading it.
