Here in libraries, we're used to the stereotypes. We're all dull intellectuals with the sense of humour of a damp lettuce sandwich, and can possibly be incited to murder by the sight of a book shelved out of sequence. Just try it sometime.
Either that or we fall vaguely into one of these categories:
1) Sci fi and fantasy geeks who come to blows over whether Anne McCaffrey's books really count as fantasy when the dragons are genetically engineered.
2) Repressed madams who just want a man to unleash our inner tiger.
3) Beaming freaks who address everyone like a class of kindergarteners, clap our hands a lot and think everything is "woooonderful"!
No one -
no one - ever views us as crusaders for social justice, or defenders of your freedom to speak. But we're that too.
There was a piece in the
Daily Mail recently that really pissed me off. Ha. I can say things like that because I'm a librarian and we don't censor. Here's the link (with thanks to Syfygirl):
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2256356/The-sick-lit-books-aimed-children-Its-disturbing-phenomenon-Tales-teenage-cancer-self-harm-suicide-.html
You may remember me having a go at Sherryl Jordan for criticising violence in teen fiction, particularly
The Hunger Games. Well, would you believe it, this author deplores books like
The Fault in Our Stars by John Green (and presumably the likes of New Zealand's own
See Ya, Simon) that feature dying teenagers. They're "distasteful", apparently. Kaayyyyy. Furthermore, the argument goes, they are preoccupied with sex and swearing. I would posit that the author knows few teenagers. And if she does, that she doesn't recognise that they too are capable of wanting more than mere escapism.
I'm the first to admit that I don't like books like John Green's. While I admired
See Ya, Simon, and would recommend it to anyone, it's not the sort of book I would normally go for, either. Terminal illnesses, teen pregnancy, self-harm, abuse and doomed love - I avoid them all like the plague. But why should I stop others reading about them? The people who say that teens aren't ready for such books are also the ones who then complain that teenagers care about nothing but themselves, live in a fairyland, and want only to be famous (or marry someone who is). Which is it? Do we "protect" our kids from reading about real issues - and these
are
real issues - and then curse them for not understanding?
I think teens read what they are ready to read. If a book disturbs them, they won't read any more like it - but they will have learned. Like the child psychologist says at the end of the piece, parents' role is not to ban them, but to be there for them, and support them in their questioning. Or do we stop them asking questions too? I would suggest that a lot of society's worst problems are the ones that happen in silence. It's sad that some teens feel inspired by books about suicide and self-harm - but the double standard Carey talks about between newspapers and books is there for a reason. The books are generally about fictional characters, or, obviously, by survivors warning of the dangers of adolescent life. They're about misery.
Newspaper articles are about real people. Bans on reporting suicides prevent fingers getting pointed at grieving families. Also, think of the public reaction, and the vast outpouring of grief. It is
this that can cause copycat behaviour among teens, seeing the love and remorse that are released after someone takes their own life. They think: "They'll be sorry too when I'm dead".
Reading about others' misery is cathartic - especially if you talk it over with adults. Reading about what could be perceived as a triumph is far more dangerous. The important thing to remember is not to let your kids read in a vacuum.
At Auckland Libraries, any borrower can borrow any book, unless there is a strict, official censorship rating. You may not be aware that children are perfectly free to wander the shelves checking out books of borderline art or illustrated bedroom manuals. With the use of self-check machines, we can't even always catch them and ask to check with parents first. If this bothers you, watch your children in the library. Taking your kids with you and showing an interest in what they're reading is also the best way to encourage them to read - it's a win-win. But it's not our job as librarians to lock ideas away.
So don't blame publishers for publishing books that challenge the reader. Don't blame libraries for stocking them, either. We believe in letting kids be kids - and that includes asking uncomfortable questions.
.jpg)
