The Calls are Coming from Inside the Library! By Dr. Nicole A. Cooke (Augusta Baker Endowed Chair and Professor, School of Library and Information Science at the University of South Carolina) <NCOOKE@mailbox.sc.edu> <Scene, 2018: Overheard on an American Library Association (ALA) shuttle bus after the Newbery-Caldecott-Legacy Banquet> Librarian: I don’t care what award it won; I still won’t add it to the collection. It only won because it’s “diverse” and the committee is being “politically correct.” <Scene, 2023: White librarian in a large public library system who dislikes the diverse books being sent to her branch by the centralized collection development department> Librarian: Can you put me back on the list for the white books? <Scene, 2023: The Pinellas County (FL) school district decided to hold 87 titles for “further review.” These books predominately include stories by Black, Latine, Native, Asian, Muslim, and LGBTQIA+ authors. Targeting these titles sets a terrible precedent and message that diverse books need to be further scrutinized and censored, just because they are by and about marginalized creators (PEN America, 2023).> Houston? ALA? Someone? Anyone in librarianship, we still have a problem. Even with an amazing array of diverse books with Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPoC) authors and characters, there are still barriers keeping them out of library collections. And materials currently in collections are being unfairly targeted, scapegoated, maligned, challenged, and not defended. This is absolutely not the way to diversify collections and elevate voices from marginalized communities. And many of these barriers are internal to library organizations. Even as ALA’s mission statement clearly states: The mission of ALA is “to provide leadership for the development, promotion and improvement of library and information services and the profession of librarianship in order to enhance learning and ensure access to information for all (italics added by author)” the profession is still plagued by soft censorship (or self-censorship). In an increasingly fraught time, featuring a steep uptick in book challenges and bans (Juarez, 2022), continued discussions about personal library insurance for library workers (Carson, 2006; Texas Library Association, n.d.), and escalating harassment and threats to librarians (Harris and Alter, 2022; Kingkade, 2022), soft censorship is even more dangerous as it weakens the profession and its fights against censorship, racism, homophobia, ableism, religious discrimination, elitism, and xenophobia. Cooke and Harris (in press) describe soft censorship as: The practice of a library, or library worker, not selecting book titles based on a litany of reasons. These reasons can include but are not limited to the fear of retaliation, potential pressure from publishers, and concerns in determining which titles are age appropriate. Libraries engage in soft censorship by not including or quietly removing books from their shelves because they believe the books have racist, sexual, or homosexual themes. Rooted in implicit bias, fear, and various levels and types of resistance, soft censorship is an often unacknowledged, yet deeply personal issue for library workers in addition to it being a significant professional dilemma. Soft censorship is in direct opposition to the library profession’s core values, the ALA’s Freedom to Read Statement, and the ALA’s Library Bill of Rights. This opposition is wholly detrimental to library collections and offerings. How can the profession deal with
32 Against the Grain / November 2023
issues that its workers have yet to fully address? Fear is a legitimate concern; fear of lawsuits, harassment, and mental and physical threats should not be taken lightly. However, they cannot hinder or destroy everything libraries have in place and have achieved over many decades. Other reasons for soft censorship, implicit biases, ignorance, and resistance, cannot be tolerated inside our own houses. They must be addressed internally before they can be addressed with our communities. We must have personal transformations before we can have community and societal transformations. Chopra said, “unless there’s a personal transformation, there can be no social transformation” (2006, p. 255). And when there are biases and resistance, their progeniture, soft censorship, burgeon when there is a lack of selfreflection, cultural competence, and intellectual and cultural humility. Banning, challenging, and censoring materials is a response to a lack of understanding and/ or feelings of discomfort and fear (Cooke and Harris, in press). In a series of essays, Cooke (2020a, 2020b, 2020c) discusses the ways in which personal transformation can be achieved; it is a multi-faceted and ongoing process of reflecting inward and putting newfound insight into action. Specifically, library workers should ask themselves: • Can I see myself in my library’s collections and services? — What other things do I take for granted that aren’t afforded to others? • Does my library reflect the community it serves? • Why do books with diverse characters and voices make me uncomfortable? • Why do I want to keep certain titles away from other people? Do I have that right? • Why am I hesitant to speak up in defense of diverse books in the collection? • How can I better diversify and defend a collection that amplifies marginalized voices and narratives? Library workers, and everyone else, must do the hard work of critical self-reflection (2020c); this is an internal process that involves asking ourselves: • Am I intellectually and culturally humble? — What do I know and understand about people who are different from me? — Why wasn’t I taught about others in a substantive way? • Am I culturally competent? — Do I celebrate other cultures? — Do I use my knowledge of others to enhance my life? • If I’m not, how do I acquire the necessary knowledge and empathy to develop critical consciousness, and how do I remain competent and humble?
<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>
