Book Banning: The Dystopia in Our Reality

Book Banning: The Dystopia in Our Reality

By Kate Flood, SS Law and Business

Book banning evokes images of oppressive dictatorial regimes and harrowing dystopian novels, such as Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451. And yet, recent events in America come as a sobering reminder that censorship is omnipresent; a persistent dystopian stain on modern, democratic society. Over recent months there has been a flurry of book bans across many US states, as a plethora of books have been removed from schools and libraries alike. The American Library Association reported an “unprecedented” increase in book ban requests during Autumn 2021, as 330 books were challenged, compared to just 156 challenges in the entirety of 2020. This form of censorship has become so prevalent that Vanity Fair reported conservatives as “just openly endorsing book burning now,” a sentiment that has been vindicated in light of the fiery scenes seen in Tennessee in early February 2022. With this surge in the banning of books, it is important to consider how, or indeed if, these practices can be justified and the potential for their success.

Explaining away Book Banning

Many attempts have been made to justify the removal of books from library shelves and the banning of books from schools. Perhaps the most far-reaching book banning regime has been seen in Texas, where some 850 books have been removed from schools. The main instigator of the regime, Rep. Matt Krause, maintained that the offending books were removed so as not to make students feel “discomfort, guilt anguish, or any other form of psychological distress because of their race or sex or convey that a student, by virtue of their race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously.” Some have contended that the protection of students from discomfort is an admirable motivation and one that ought to be accepted and respected. However, it has been suggested that it is an unconvincing excuse and one that goes against the very aim of education. Passing judgement in the case of Island Trees Union Free School District v Pico by Pico, the US Supreme Court maintained that accessing diverse ideas “prepares students for active and effective participation in the pluralistic, often contentious society in which they will soon be adult members.” The purpose of the education system aside, as Timothy Snyder notes, “[d]iscomfort is part of growing up … teachers in high schools cannot exclude the possibility that the history of slavery, lynching and voter suppression will make some non-black students uncomfortable.” Whether one is convinced by the ‘discomfort’ argument or not, when one considers the content of the banned book list, it becomes clear that while discomfort is perhaps the front of the issue, the real driving force of the regime is likely something quite different.

Censorship is a practice which, according to Richard L. Darling, “must be as old as recorded literature, perhaps older.”

While it would be nice to think that we have evolved considerably with the passage of time, the reality is that the motives for banning books have remained constant.

Stalin banned Doctor Zhivago by virtue of its unbecoming portrayal of the Russian revolution. Mickey Mouse comics were forbidden by communists in East Germany, as the cartoon character was perceived as being an anti-red rebel. It was feared that Lady Chatterley’s Lover would lead to the breakdown of social divides in 1920s Britain. Each of these examples show pieces being banned out of fear; a fear of disrupting the social order. The recent book bans in America target works concerning race theory, sexuality, and upsetting historical

fact. It is contended that the fervour with which book banning is being pursued in the US, perhaps speaks to the fragility of the American social order, and a Republican desire to avoid, or at the very least limit, social dissent. So, while those inciting censorship advance seemingly laudable justifications, they are most likely being motivated by a fear of marginalised views seeping into the mainstream and becoming dominant.

The Potential Success of Book Banning

By virtue of the internet, book banning – or the more dramatic burning of books – cannot hope to have the same impact as in 1930s Nazi Germany. Now, removing books from library shelves will not block access to new ideas, historical facts, or expressions of human sexuality. So what purpose can book banning serve in today’s world? The ongoing Republican agenda appears to be aimed at retaining and galvanising party power by appealing to the fears and preferences of conservative groups, such as ‘Moms for Liberty.’ The support of such bodies can be leveraged in elections, as was seen in the case of Matt Krause in Texas, and Glenn Youngkin in Virginia. It is interesting to note that censorship was similarly employed by the Vatican in 1633, in an attempt to ban the work of Galileo Galilei, and to harness the power and sanctity of Catholic teachings.

History has shown us that censorship is often ineffective, particularly where people are willing to fight against it.

With regard to the ongoing censorship programme in many parts of the US, history has repeated itself and rebellion has taken place. For example, librarians in Texas have launched the #Freadom initiative, which is itself reminiscent of the words of Dwight Eisenhower, who, in 1952, encouraged a graduating class to “[g]o in your local library and read every book.” Similarly, in September 2021, Pennsylvanian students protested against the removal of books from library shelves, wearing black t-shirts to class, reading excerpts from banned books on Instagram, and staging protests every morning at 7.15. Their efforts were rewarded as they succeeded in securing the temporary removal of certain book bans.

Conclusion

The Republican agenda in the US with regard to censorship is an affront to the educational system and to freedom of expression generally. It has been marketed as a protective measure, as a means of saving students from feelings of discomfort. However, censorship of this variety is nothing, in the words of Toni Morrison, but an elementary attempt “to appease adults rather than educate children.” It, like all book banning, is inspired by a fear of change. However, the endeavours described above inspire hope, and add credence to the sentiments of Dennis Aftergut, who maintained that “[w]ith enough opposition to book banning, it never succeeds, at least not in the long run.”