Censorship in Schools

and Libraries

Literature, Obscenity and the Court

The twentieth century enforcement of the Comstock law of 1873 subjected the literary efforts of James Joyce, D.H. Lawrence, Henry Miller and other authors to the moral scrutiny of the U.S. Customs Office and U.S. Post Office. For many years, works that are now regarded as classics were not permitted to enter the United States or be published here. American publishers were reluctant to risk the legal and financial consequences of publishing a book that had been confiscated at a port of entry.

A drastic change in censorship practices occurred in 1934 with a court challenge by Modern Library, which proposed to publish Ulysses by James Joyce. When U.S. Customs officials seized the book, which had been published in France. The publishing company tested the law in court. The federal court judge, after spending four months reading and evaluating Joyce’s novel, stated that he found Ulysses “a sincere and serious attempt to devise a new literary method for the observation and description of mankind.” He ruled that the book could be admitted into the United States. The government appealed the case to a higher court where the judges called Ulysses “a book of originality and sincerity of treatment” and a literary work that did not have the effect of promoting lust.” This meat that to find a work obscene, it must be derived from the work as a whole, not by evaluating the sexual content of isolated passages. The appeals court upheld the decision of the lower court; Ulysses could be imported and published in the United States.

In 1959, Grove Press, for the first time, published Lady Chatterly’s Lover by D.H. Lawrence in full. The book, which contained many four-letter words and explicit adulterous love scenes, had been censored for many years and banned from the mails. In defending their action in federal district court, the U.S. Post Office had claimed that the book offended contemporary community standards. The judge, in lifting the ban, pointed out that, “much of what is now accepted would have shocked the community to the core a generation ago. Today such things are generally tolerated whether we approve or not.” The appeals court agreed. It was evident that the courts were becoming increasingly lenient on the obscenity issue.

Tropic of Cancer, which Henry Miller, an American, had written in 1933 and published in France, was the target of censors for many years. When it was published in the United States in 1961, there was a number of state law suits in conflicting decisions as to whether or not it violated community standards of obscenity. In 1964, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in favor of Miller’s novel, noting it had artistic and literary value, and therefore had “social importance.”

In a more recent attempt to define obscenity, the U.S. Supreme Court in a 1973 case, Miller v. California, established the following standards: a) The average person applying contemporary community (local) standards would fine work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest. b) The work depicts or describes in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined b state law. c) The work taken as a whole lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

Obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Whether or not a work is obscene, however, is no longer determined by the whims of government officials serving as moral censors, but by a court of law applying the standards established by this U.S. Supreme Court decision.

Novels by Judy Blume

In 1984, the school board in Peoria, Illinois removed three novels by Judy Blume from the district’s school libraries on the basis of their sexual content and strong language. In the Peoria school system, which has no junior high schools, books on library shelves are available to students from kindergarten through the eighth grade. The school board, responding to a protest from a parent, had ruled that the books, Then Again Maybe I Won’t, Deenie, and Blubber, should not be read by children below the seventh grade.

Acting on behalf of the Authors League, eight authors of children’s books sent a letter of protest to the Peoria school board. They requested that the school board reverse its decision and stated, “It does not recognize the values protected by the First Amendment, the freedom to write, publish, and read—and the freedom to decide what to read.” They also noted that although the school board’s ban applies to children below the seventh grade, it deprives older students of books that concededly are “fit to read.”

A parent in the community also challenged the school board which then decided to review their decision. The members voted again, and by a 5-2 margin returned the three books to the library shelves. The books, however, would be restricted to older students and to younger students who have obtained parental consent. The school administration would be responsible for determining the cutoff age, as well as access to the books.

Censorship of Ms. Blume’s novels has persisted. In 1990, Blubber was removed from elementary school libraries in Leander, Texas, and another of her novels, Forever was eliminated from the collection at the middle school library in Truner, Maine.

Novels by Judy Blume have had tremendous appeal to pre-teenagers and teenagers, especially girls. At the same time, however, according to the 1991-1992 survey in Attacks on Freedom to Learn, conducted by People for the American Way, Ms. Blume’s books were the ones most frequently challenged during the ten year period, 1982-1992. In trying to find an explanation another author commented, “Ironically, concerned parents and critics read Judy Blume out of context, and label the books, while children and young adults read whole books to find out what they are really about and to hear another voice talking about matters with which they are concerned in their daily lives. The grownups it seems read for the ‘good’ parts more so than the children.”

Throughout the 1990s, challenges to Blubber, Forever, and other novels occurred with regularity. Judy Blume remarked that, “Across the country the Sex Police and the Language Police were thumbing through books at record speed, looking for illustrations, words or phrases that, taken out of context, could be used as evidence against them.” This was exemplified in the early part of 2000 when Blubber was removed from an elementary school in Arlingon, Texas when educators in the school district objected to what they considered to be “verbal, physical and sexual abuse of student upon student.”

At a meeting of the National Coalition Against Censorship, Judy Blume expressed her views on why censorship occurs: “Censorship of their reading materials shows a basic disrespect for children. Censorship grows out of a fear of ideas. Usually, they are topics adults don’t feel comfortable talking about but that are of paramount interest to children.”

Harry Potter

In 1997, Harry Potter and the Sorceror’s Stone by J.K. (Joanne) Rowling was published in England followed by its worldwide distribution. This book was introduced as the first of a series, and in a few short years skyrocketed to the top of the best seller list in the United States. Three other Harry Potter books, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, and Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, have been published and quickly enjoyed similar success in the United States and throughout the world.

Harry Potter, an eleven-year-old boy with magical powers, is the creation of Ms. Rowling, who endows him with special powers and sends him to the Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. There he joins with his contemporaries in creating a unique academic environment, as well as extra-curricular activities that intrigue readers of all ages. He develops close friendships with several of his peers; in each of the books they encounter difficulties and display the talents of their wizardry. J.K. Rowling plans to have the students return to the Hogwarts School each year for a total of seven years. In each book they will be a year older, and will be faced with a new set of challenges and opportunities to use their special talents.

It is no surprise to librarians and classroom teachers that the Harry Potter series would face challenges from individuals and organizations concerned about the books’ contents. In the past twenty years, the Religious Right and its supporters have increasingly opposed children’s books that describe magic, wizardry and witchcraft. Prime examples of this include the writings of Shel Silverstein, Rhoald Dahl, and the reading series, Impressions.

In January 2000, the Newsletter on Intellectual Freedom, published by the Office of Intellectual Freedom of the American Library Association, reported that in the previous year there had been opposition to the Harry Potter books in eight states. Six months later, there were reports of challenges from seventeen states. In 1999 and 2000, the Harry Potter series headed the list of the most challenged books reported to the Office of Intellectual Freedom.

Censorship of Harry Potter has taken several forms. In Tampa, Florida, administrators at the Carrollwood Elementary School will keep the first Harry Potter book in the library, but will not order additional ones. The principal stated, “It was because of the witchcraft themes. We knew that we probably had some parents who wouldn’t want their children to read these books.” In Moorpark, California, parents removed their son from his school because the Harry Potter book was being read. One of the parents stated, “It was a horrible book. It talked about death and killing. It talks about drinking animal blood. That is witchcraft, and as a religion it doesn’t belong in school.” In Saginov, Michigan, a religious objection resulted in the first reported removal in the United States of Harry Potter books from a classroom. The parent who initiated the complaint commented, “I read a couple of chapters and felt like God didn’t want me reading it. My daughter shouldn’t have to be subject to that.” In December, 2001, Reverend Jack Brock, the pastor of the Christ Community Church in Alamagordo, New Mexico, led a church group of 500 members in burning Harry Potter books and some other books and magazines. The pastor said the books were “a masterpiece of satanic deception” and quoted from the Bible: “Do not let your people practice fortune telling or sorcery… or engage in witchcraft.” As the books burned, 1500 people protested and chanted, “Stop burning books.”

Judy Blume, the popular author for children and young adults, whose books have been censored over the last thirty years, commented, “I knew this was coming. The only surprise is that it took so long-as long as it took for the zealots who claim they’re protecting children from evil, to discover that children actually like these books. If children are excited about a book, it must be suspect. In my books, it’s a reality that seems corrupting. With Harry Potter, the perceived danger is fantasy.”

A unique grass-roots organization called “Muggles for Harry Potter” (Muggles are people identified by J.K. Rowling as being non-magical) has been formed to keep Harry Potter in the schools. In Zeeland, Michigan, the organization held public meeting to protest the restrictions on the Harry Potter books in the local schools, and is recruiting membership world-wide on their website, www.KIDspeakonline.org, formerly www.muggles.harrypotter.org.

The seventh book, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, joins the six other books in the series facing censorship challenges.

 
Mainstream Loudon/Children's Internet Protection Act

In October 1997, the library board in Loudoun County, Virginia adopted a rule that would equip all library computers with software designed to block access to Internet sites containing “offensive sexual material.” With the introduction of this policy, all computers in the library, including those used by adults, would be equipped with filters. A board member stated, “The potential detriment and harm of obscene material to the community outweighs the potential for some protected speech not to get through.”

Judith Krug, the director of the Office of Intellectual Freedom of the American Library Association, said to her knowledge "no other library system has imposed Internet restrictions on all users all the time.” The ALA, along with several other intellectual freedom organizations, opposes the use of screening software in the libraries. Opposition to the board’s policy also came from Kent Willis, the director of the ACLU in Virginia, who stated, “It is an invitation to a lawsuit. They simply cannot do that. That’s an outright violation of your First Amendment rights under the Constitution.”

The board selected a filtering program called X-Stop which blocks more than 50,000 sites that researchers for the company have evaluated as inappropriate because of their sexual content. One of the members of the library board noted they had received tremendous support from the community. She stated, “We listened to the public and over two-thirds of them said, ‘It’s our money, it’s our budget,’ and we gave them what they wanted, a safe place for their kids.”

Mainstream Loudoun, a non-profit, grass roots membership organization whose purpose is to preserve personal and religious freedoms, responded to the library board’s action. Under the leadership of Jeri McGiverin, co-founder and Elaine Williamson, its president, and represented by attorneys for People for the American Way, Mainstream Loudoun filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in December 1997. The plaintiffs charged that the county library’s decision to equip library computers with software that filtered out sexual content violated the First Amendment rights of residents using the six branch libraries of the Loudoun County system. Elaine Williamson commented, “This policy relegates adults to the electronic version of the children’s reading room and denies them access to information available to all other D.C. area library users.”

The following November, the federal judge struck down the Loudoun County’s policy of using filtering software on all computer terminals. In her decision, Judge Brinkema wrote, “Although defendant is under no obligation to provide Internet access to its patrons, it has chosen to do so and is therefore restricted by the First Amendment in the limitations it is allowed to place on patron access.” The judge issued a permanent injunction against the filtering policy pointing out that “a defendant cannot avoid its constitutional obligation by contracting out its decision-making to a private entity.” One of the results of the controversy in the community was a number of personal attacks on the leadership of Mainstream Loudoun by some board members and supporters of the filtering policy. After they had been labeled as “battleaxes” by the head of the library board, Jeri McGiverin and Elaine Williamson created a button for their supporters proclaiming, “Battleaxes for First Amendment Rights.”

At a meeting in December 1999, the Loudoun Library board voted to allow adults using the county libraries to determine whether they wanted to use unfiltered or filtered computers. The board also urged patrons to make use of privacy screens that fit over the computers’ screens to insure privacy. They instituted a policy that grants children access to the Internet in the library if their parents sign a statement specifying whether they may use it with or without filters.

However, the efforts of Mainstream Loudoun and the ruling by the federal court to permit access to unfiltered computers in the library met a new obstacle when a law passed by Congress came before the United States Supreme Court. In June 2003, the Court upheld the Children's Internet Protection Act requiring public libraries, as a condition for receiving federal aid, would be responsible for installing filters on all computers that provide Internet service. Some public libraries have decided to forego federal aid and not install filters, while other libraries have accepted the terms for receiving federal aid and have placed filters on all of their computers.

 
The Catcher in the Rye

In 1951, The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger was selected as one of the main choices of the Book of the Month Club, a group whose membership consists primarily of adult subscribers. Ten years later, the book became very popular among high school and college students, and it began to encounter censorship problems in libraries throughout the country.

In his novel, Salinger depicts a troubled teenager, Holden Caulfield, who in telling his own story seeks to understand himself and others. Those critics who were interested in banning or limiting its availability were concerned about his use of four-letter words and his caustic comments on religious hypocrisy, educational values, and parental roles. Adult critics were fearful that Holden Caulfield would influence adolescents who read the book and adopt his values. Critics who defended the novel were impressed by its literary quality, readability, and understanding of teenagers. They praised the moral character of Holden Caulfield and commented on his respect for the worth of the individual and sensitivity in relationships with other people.

Although the original controversy occurred in the early 1960s, Salinger's novel continues to experience censorship problems. In Libby, Montana in 1983, The school board, reacting to the complaint of one parent, decided that parents would be told when their children would be reading the book in class. If students objected to the novel, they would be permitted to read an alternate selection. The book had been part of the English curriculum for fifteen years, without experiencing any problems.

In 1985, the school board in DeFuniak Springs, Florida, removed the novel from a suggested reading list for high school English classes. A board member objected to the presence of obscenities, and in his efforts to have the book eliminated from the reading list, secured the support of a number of parents, ministers, and students, The county school superintendent, in opposing the ban, stated, "The concept of burning and branding a book is not good for public education. I have a firm commitment to share with youngsters the truth." The ban, however, has remained in effect.

The superintendent of schools in Marysville, California in 1997 removed The Catcher in the Rye from the required reading list of the schools. Criticism of the book came from a member of the community who was opposed to the profanity and sexual situations in the text. A review committee was established to evaluate the complaint. The committee recommended, with reservations, that the book remain in the junior level curriculum.

Through the years, the criticism of the two principal characters in Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and The Catcher in the Rye have been the targets of the censors based on what is perceived to be their failure to provide appropriate role models for teen-age boys. Both novels have the dubious distinction of being among the most censored books in the United States during the 20^th century and this continues in the 21^st century.