Book banning is back in fashion

The effort to censor or otherwise throttle free expression, as well as demonize those deemed as undesirable or unwelcome, has a long and storied history

     Book banning is back in fashion, although it’s always been a staple in some wardrobes.

     At its most restrictive, this garment of social interaction is like one of those whale-bone corsets the 19^th century ladies wore and at its most outlandish akin to the polyester leisure suits favored by gentlemen in the 1980s. Hardly the outfits you’d think would fit our sophisticated, modern tastes. But there’s no accounting for the impulse of some people to dictate what forms of art are deemed suitable for their fellow citizens

   Sexual content and profanity has been a favorite target. So too are books that give voice through a story and its characters in a sympathetic fashion to those who have been discriminated against, marginalized, ridiculed, or viewed with a hostile eye,.

   Likewise for writers who express an unpopular opinion, offer a different telling of the past than what’s generally accepted, or who are non-conforming with their take on the world or otherwise challenge the status quo.

    As for our current times, an article in USA Today noted that “Banned books are not new, but they have gained new relevance in an escalating culture war that puts books centering on racism, sexuality and gender identity at risk in public schools and libraries.

    The article further stated that “A dramatic uptick in challenged books over the past few years, an escalation of censorship tactics, and the coordinated harassment of teachers and librarians has regularly put book banning efforts in news headlines,” adding that “Would-be book banners argue that readers can still purchase books they can no longer access through public libraries, but that is only true for those with the financial resources to do so. For many, particularly children and young adults, schools and public libraries are the only means to access literature.”

    As noted, books dealing with LGBTQ characters or themes account for many of the recent challenges and bans, going hand-in-glove with an overall push back against the efforts of this community to be treated in a fair and accepting manner and to be afforded the same legal rights and protections as others.

    One of the most banned books is Gender Queer: A Memoir  written and illustrated by Maia Kobabe. A description of its contents noted that “It recounts the author’s journey from adolescence to adulthood and her exploration of gender identity and sexuality, ultimately identifying herself as being outside of the gender binary, or transgender.”

    The book includes a handful of sexually explicit illustrations.

    The pros and cons of whether it should be removed from school libraries or remain accessible—from what I’ve gathered—are that it details the reality of what some students go through versus being considered too explicit for a young audience.

     Having been a parent and now grandparent, I understand the reflex to protect our youngsters from ‘the real world.’ However, as I recall, I had a pretty good idea of what the ‘birds and bees’ really did by the time I was approaching junior high.

    I also remember the tug-of-war over whether sex education should be taught in schools, and at what age. There were those who put forth the proposition that understanding the ‘facts of life’ helped prevent unwanted pregnancies and treated sex or private body parts in a matter-of-fact manner , while opponents felt this was a ‘how to’ course that would pave the way to sexual promiscuity and lax morals.

     As for the claim that such instruction was the parents’ responsibility and prerogative, my father and mother never broached the subject in any direct or matter-of-fact manner. I assume they figured I’d gain the knowledge the old-fashioned way—from my older peers. Which is what happened, at least in my case.

    The topics dealt with in the book, similar to those addressed in other books on the ‘most banned’ list, are—let’s face it—the underlying cause for censorship. The ‘age appropriateness’ argument may have merit, but I suspect there’s an overall wish to not have this sort of material available to anyone, anywhere.

   I say that because the effort to censor or otherwise throttle free expression, as well as demonize those deemed as undesirable or unwelcome, has a long and storied history in the Land of the Free.

    That despite a founding document that regarded the equality of all men as a justification for political independence, along with a first amendment in the U.S. Constitution which singles out freedom of speech as being among our foremost basic rights.

   Presumably, ‘equality of all men’ would include what they say or write as well as who they are. And freedom of expression does not mean “free for me, but not for thee.”

   The Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, and the Bill of Rights are the by-products of the period in Western civilization known as the Enlightenment or Age of Reason and were created by a group of men who subscribed to the classic-liberal political and social philosophy that came out of this era.

    Better explained “The Enlightenment was a cultural and intellectual movement that challenged the authority of religion, tradition and monarchy in Europe. Inspired by the discoveries of the Scientific Revolution, Enlightenment thinkers used reason, observation and experimentation to explore nature, society and human nature.”

   A different time, with a different set of ‘movers and shakers’ at the helm—not to mention a different outcome in the Revolutionary War—and those founding principles, whether inscribed or not, might not have carried as much weight as they have, and as they still do.

     Of course, as we well know, there’s often a gap between these stated principles and what’s actually practiced or tolerated. That’s been true of our past and remains true to this day. Along the way there’s been plenty of backsliding and rationalizing, plus a large dose of hypocrisy, when it comes to extending equality to everyone and defending the right free expression for all each and all.

* * *

  Maia Kobabe noted in interviews that, while her book had won an award, which brought it to the attention of a larger audience than anticipated and this, in turn, led to it being placed on many library shelves, the censorship, including attacks on its contents, have actually increased sales and gained her a broader following.

   The same has been true for other authors who have had their works targeted.

    While few of us wish to be disliked, let along vilified, modern-day storytellers who run afoul with certain segments of the populace might take comfort in being part of an esteemed group that has included the likes William Faulkner, Toni Morrison, George Orwell, Alice Walker, and Ernest Hemingway.

    Many of the literary classics that they and other notable authors produced, with some of these esteemed works taught in the classrooms, were banned at some time in some place, and for similar reasons.

    One of the more famous examples was Ulysses by the Irish writer James Joyce. The novel, published in 1922, is now regarded as a masterpiece of modern literature, but was banned for over ten years in the United States for being obscene. A passage depicting some of the characters masturbating, including a woman fantasizing about having sex were the basis for this judgment.  As a result, copies could not be legally mailed through the U.S. Post Office and distributing it  was considered a criminal act.

   That’s not to say it went unread in America. Apparently bootleg copies were made available, enriching the publishers working in this black market, but not Joyce who did not receive any royalties.

   After a number of legal challenges, a U.S. District Court judge ruled in December of 1933 that the novel was not obscene, but rather a work of art with redeeming qualities.

   In the Foreword of the authorized edition published shortly afterwards, it was noted that “The ‘Ulysses’ case marked a turning point, It is a body-blow for the censors. The necessity for hypocrisy and circumlocution in literature has been eliminated. Writers need no longer seek refuge in euphemisms. They may now describe basic human functions without fear of the law.”

   The introductory piece concluded with a prediction that “Under the ‘Ulysses’ case it should henceforth be impossible for the censor legally to sustain in an attack against any book of artistic integrity, no matter how frank and forthright it may be.”

    Well, as we’ve seen, this analysis proved to be overly optimistic. While frank and forthright literature did occur as a result of the court ruling, so too did the efforts to censor and vilify.

   Those efforts have been aimed at the content as well as the author, but also in many cases at the marginalized or oppressed group the book—with its story and characters—sought to spotlight.

    I won’t argue that every book, no matter its contents, should be put on the public shelf or that children, not matter how young, should be subject to all of life’s details and descriptions. But the historical record shows that throttling free expression and having a restrictive view of equality usually are done with a broader approach in mind, rather than a limited one.

   I’d add that accusations of ‘corrupting the young’ as well as ‘disrupting the general welfare of the community’—whether done by writing or verbal comments—also has a long and storied past. Perhaps most famous was the case against Socrates, the ancient Greek philosopher accused by the Athenian authorities in 399 bce of impiety and inspiring disrespect of the young men towards established authority with his teachings. Convicted of these charges, he was sentenced to death.

    As for the latter accusation, thousands upon thousands, perhaps even millions of young people across the world have been reading of his words ever since.

    The struggle between free expression and being ‘who you are’ versus those who wish to censor or condemn has been a long one; a journey marked by ebbs and flows. And who’s on which side is not always clear or easily determined, given our human frailties and often subjective nature as well as a tendency to embrace the founding principles on our behalf, but not for others.

   Literature helps us better understand the consequences of  the struggle and what’s at stake. It does so by charting some of the personal journeys, testing the boundaries of social comfort, and illuminating the dark corners of human behavior and experience.

Steve Horton is a mid-Michigan journalist and editor-publisher of the ‘Fowlerville News & Views’—a weekly newspaper.