It’s that time of year where every bookstore and public library in the nation sets up a display of books for sale that have been “banned.” This, of course, makes them more desirable to many. Ever since Adam and Eve human desire has always been aroused for things we are told not to touch.
Don’t press the big red button…
Now then, if you are done touching your screen, I will continue with the point of this little post.
The point of this post is to tell you that the “banned books” displays are complete nonsense. As Americans we have never really had a problem of book banning in any meaningful, systematic, or widespread way. Lord willing, that will not change. Banning books simply doesn’t mean what most people think it means.
For a book to be truly banned it would mean one of the following (or a combination thereof):
Publishers are not legally allowed to print a particular book.
Stores are not legally allowed to carry a particular book.
Individuals are not allowed to own a particular book.
In other words, an actual book ban would mean government interference in private businesses and in the private lives of citizens. There may be some incidents of this happening in America’s history but I am not personally aware of it. Regardless, the books that are usually on the “banned books” displays at libraries and bookstores are almost certainly not victims of any actual book ban.
What has been the case, in some instances, is the refusal of privately owned printers, bookstores, or even public libraries, to print or carry a given book for some reason. Those reasons might be good, bad, or completely silly, but in any of those cases this is not the same things as a book being banned. These are simply cases of companies, schools, libraries, and individuals using their discretion to decide what to spend their limited resources upon.
In the case of books like Harry Potter some Christians (I am not one of them) have refused to read it or buy it, some bookstores and libraries may have not carried it (although few indeed), but this is not a ban. In the case of books like Tom Sawyer, or Uncle Tom’s Cabin, the same holds true. Some find the material objectionable because of racial slurs contained therein and therefore they don’t buy it, sell it, or carry it, but this is not a ban. Likewise if a store chooses not to carry a children’s book called My Two Mommies, or a ridiculous book like White Fragility because the store owner doesn’t believe the message of the book is good for society, that is not a ban, it’s their discretion.
No store or library can carry every book (obviously) and they should be allowed to carry what they believe to be most profitable to their business as well as exclude what conflicts with their sense of moral decency. Obviously both would require selectivity. A publisher is just the same, there is no requirement for them to simply publish everything, which isn’t feasible anyway, and they are free to publish what they wish and not publish what they prefer not too. Deciding not to publish a book is not banning a book.
Book bans, real book bans, are enforced by civil authorities and legislation. NAZI Germany had real book bans. Christian literature, socialist literature, anything that didn’t agree with Hitler’s regime, was banned. It was actually illegal to write, publish, sell, or own such literature. In our own day China, as well as a number of other countries which generally oppose freedom of thought and religion, continue to actually ban books. We don’t have this problem in the U.S. Up to this point the United States of America has largely (if not entirely) avoided the error of truly banning books.
I would argue that we should be utterly opposed to the government censure of media. That being said, we should wholeheartedly affirm the right of private citizens, private businesses, and even public libraries and corporations, to carry what they believe is in the best interest of their company, share holders, family, and/or the public good. They, likewise, should always be free to not carry what they believe is detrimental to their company, family, or society as a whole. Such selectivity is NOT banning. It’s freedom. Yes, even publicly funded libraries can do this without it being a “ban.” As long as the government is not interfering with the freedom of individuals and their right to speak and write as they please, or with the freedom of publishers to publish and not publish what they please, or the freedom of stores to carry and not carry what they please…there is no ban!
This may mean that some of these same businesses will refuse to carry or print what you want them to. That’s just how it goes. Start your own printing business and/or store if you need to. You are free to do so.
Ideally the collective virtue of a society will eliminate there being a market for bad ideas or morally indecent media. In such cases there is not a ban, there is just not a market for garbage. Of course, as society declines into vice (sin) you will see the increase of garbage in media and companies who support it (because it is beneficial to their bottom line).
So next time you see a “banned book” display in America, just roll your eyes. You might also say a prayer that our country would never actually participate in such bans in earnest. Book bans really have occurred throughout the world and throughout history. They are still very real today in some parts of the world. “Banned Book” displays in America are, in my opinion, a gimmick and an affront to the reality of our freedom. They are a mockery of those who actually have endured, or are enduring, a true ban on the free trade of information.
I wholeheartedly agree!
Thank you for clarifying this matter! I admit to being misled by these characterizations of “banned books” and I appreciate you setting the record straight.