Censorship in libraries

Elegran One accidental side effect of publishing a FB link to the review is that we now know the titles of six books that could make interesting reading.

Indeed, I've read three of the titles, so may well look at the three I haven't read.

If a book may be lawfully sold in the UK then I do not agree with a library effectively banning it.

If you censor books it is the thin end of the wedge . It is never the right thing to do. Having said that, I wouldn’t allow children to read anything pornographic . If we can’t read about what some historical figures have done ( thinking Stalin, Hitler, Khmer Rouge) how will we ever learn ?

Glorianny

My first response was "No censorship" then I considered that we have some things which are considered to be unacceptable. A book which denied the Holocaust, for example. Speech doing such a thing is strictly regulated, so perhaps books should be as well. I'd prefer not to see any but I'm afraid it may sometimes be necessary. I'm still wavering however.

If you read the library's link you will see that it was emphasised that one of their criteria is/was the law.

"Calderdale Libraries and Information follows the guidelines laid down by the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals (CILIP 2005):

Access should not be restricted on any grounds except that of the law. If publicly available material has not incurred legal penalties, then it should not be excluded on moral, political, religious, racial or gender grounds, to satisfy the demands of sectional interest. The legal basis of any restriction on access should always be stated.

We aim to provide, within budgetary limitations, a wide range of stock that promotes all aspects of life and reflects all shades of opinion. Each item will be evaluated and judged by the standards and selection criteria set out in this policy.

I agree Grantanow.

Absolutely no censorship by librarians please. They should not give in to those with a political or religious axe to grind. Adult readers are capable of making up their own minds about the content of books they read. It's a slippery slope to banning books about Gallileo.

Glorianny

My first response was "No censorship" then I considered that we have some things which are considered to be unacceptable. A book which denied the Holocaust, for example. Speech doing such a thing is strictly regulated, so perhaps books should be as well. I'd prefer not to see any but I'm afraid it may sometimes be necessary. I'm still wavering however.

Surely people should be able to read the idiocy that some people are spouting?

A few weeks ago I watched an interview with Jodi Picoult whose books have been banned in several states. I found it rather shocking.

Here's a link: www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvGhQXGMWuw

Absolutely not. People can choose which books they wish to read and which they don't. These books should never have been removed from the open shelves to begin with.

I run a small library here and we had a children's book with pictures about where babies come from. One library member was horrified by this and kept asking me to take it off the shelf. Needless to say I didn't.
I wouldn't put out books inciting hatred etc or pornography ( eye of the beholder)
Otherwise I don't see my role being that of censor.

My first response was "No censorship" then I considered that we have some things which are considered to be unacceptable. A book which denied the Holocaust, for example. Speech doing such a thing is strictly regulated, so perhaps books should be as well. I'd prefer not to see any but I'm afraid it may sometimes be necessary. I'm still wavering however.