Lawmakers speak boldly about banned books
By Francisco Omar Fernandez Rodriguez
Associate Editor
The Education Department and the Henry Whittemore Library held a talk on book bans, “Speak Boldly, Learn Freely: Say No to Self-Censorship,” in the Forum on Oct. 6. Massachusetts State Representative Sean Garballey and Massachusetts Secretary of Education Stephen Zrike Jr. spoke at the event, sharing what they have done about book banning. The main topic of discussion was the “Freedom to Read” act, recently signed into law. According to Zrike, the law establishes “important protections for access to books in public and school libraries while also creating a fair and transparent process for considering challenges to library material.” Their speeches were followed by a question-and-answer session with a panel mostly of professors and students. Garballey introduced himself as chair of the committee of Tourism, Arts, and Cultural Development. One of the bills that has been in the committee for a couple of sessions pertains to the process a book goes through to be removed from a library, he said. He does not like how the process currently works. “The idea that anybody off the street or a politically motivated group from out of state can just walk into a school library or a municipal library and challenge intellectual conversation, or challenge a book being on a shelf, I found extremely disturbing,” Garballey said. However, he had to be impartial in the matter as chair of the committee, he said. From a public hearing, the bill received enough support to move forward, he said. The “Freedom to Read” law was passed in July and signed by the governor in August, he added. Garballey said challenges to book selections in libraries are damaging to librarians, who have the academic credentials to decide what books are on the shelves. “These are individuals who are accredited, who are experienced in terms of what goes on the shelf, and we’re going to have someone for ideological reasons come in and try to pull a book off the shelf,” Garballey said. People with unknown credentials who challenge books are mostly acting out of political and ideological motivations, he said. He said 91% of book challenges are from politically motivated out-of-state groups. The new law creates a clear process on how a book is challenged and removed, he said. “The foundation of this bill is grounded on protecting the author and the librarian of those books - to make sure that their judgement is first and foremost in any decision that gets made,” Garballey said. The Mass Freedom to Read Coalition and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) both supported the bill by organizing thousands of people across the state to involve their lawmakers, he said. “This was a civil rights piece of legislation from the very beginning,” Garballey said. When the bill went to the House of Representatives, every Democrat and most of the Republicans voted yes, and only three voted no, he added. When the bill returned to enactment, two of those Republicans changed their minds to a yes vote, he said. As chair of the committee, his plan was to meet with every lawmaker in order to explain why the bill was important, he said. “I met with both Democrats and Republicans, progressives and conservatives, about why I believe that this bill was so important and why it was so important to do it now,” Garballey said. The discomfort some books can cause is something people need to get comfortable with, he added. Several other states have passed similar laws, but Massachusetts’ is more comprehensive, he said. “I’m really proud of what we’ve accomplished,” Garballey said. Zrike offered his thanks to the librarians and educators. He said he’s seen their important impacts firsthand. Before becoming Secretary of Education, Zrike was the superintendent of Salem Public Schools, and that’s only the most recent school district he’s led. Educators introduce students to experiences and ideas they may have missed otherwise, he said. “At its heart, the ‘Freedom to Read’ is about something fundamental to our educational system - giving young people the opportunity to learn, explore ideas, ask questions, and ultimately develop the ability to think critically for themselves,” Zrike said. Massachusetts was the first U.S. state to have public education, and now our school system is one of the strongest in the country, he said. Books are crucial to that development, he said. “They can spark curiosity, challenge assumptions, and yes - sometimes, and it’s OK - make us feel uncomfortable. That’s something we all have to be comfortable with,” Zrike said. Education shouldn’t be about shielding students from ideas we disagree with, but rather to prepare them to face these ideas thoughtfully and distinguish facts from opinions, he said. Not every parent, student, and educator will agree on what books should be in libraries and schools, but that is to be expected, he said. “The question is how we navigate those disagreements,” Zrike said. A transparent process is needed to allow concerns to be heard without ignoring the judgment of educators and librarians, he said. Educators and librarians should be able to decide if a book goes on the shelf or not “without fear that using their professional judgement and expertise will make them the target of personal or political attacks,” Zrike said. He found it concerning that many librarians and educators, even in Massachusetts, were afraid and anxious because of these issues. He said he could only imagine how people in other parts of the country felt if the fear was already so materialized here. “No professional should feel attacked when they’re doing the job,” Zrike said. When that fear determines what books students are allowed to have access to, they lose out on experiences and opportunities to learn, he said. In terms of the “Freedom to Read” law, Zrike said he likes how it strikes a balance. He wants the voices of community members, especially parents, to be heard without subjecting books to being removed out of fear, he said. “Community members have a voice. Questions can be raised. Concerns can be heard and considered, but through a very thoughtful and deliberate process. It can’t simply be because of political pressure, or the personal beliefs of any one individual,” Zrike said. What is taken into account is educational value and age appropriateness, he said. Books will have to stay on the shelf until the process is finished, he said. Removal would require a vote of the school committee. Educators and librarians are also protected from employment consequences when they select materials with their professional judgment and in good faith, he said. “No one should be losing their job because they’re doing what they have been asked to do,” Zrike said. Literacy is another important component in having the freedom to read, he said. It is the foundation for “nearly every other educational opportunity,” Zrike said. Students who aren’t literate struggle to find good jobs, manage healthcare, and engage in daily life, he said. It is also important for exercising citizens’ voices in democracy, he said. “Literacy is the foundational element to academic achievement and, more importantly, to opportunity and equity,” Zrike said. He said he wants every Massachusetts student to be able to go into a library and use everything they offer. The panel conversation about book challenges and banning was held shortly after the speeches. There were six panelists: Olivia Santoro, the ACLU’s deputy field director for civic education and mobilization; James Cressey, an education professor; Louis J. Lauer, a curriculum librarian at the Henry Whittemore Library; Stefan Papaioannou, a history professor; Caroline White, an early education student in the class of 2029; and Oak Blum, a family studies student in the class of 2027. Santoro said it isn’t hyperbole to say books save lives. When books are being challenged in schools, it’s usually books that are about or by people of color and LGBTQ+ people, she said. “The ability to see yourself in the curriculum and in the books that you have in school is really important to your understanding of who you are and how you fit into the world,” Santoro said. It’s just as important to see people who are different from you in books, she said. Cressey said as a psychologist and special educator, he believes that diverse literature is a powerful tool in dealing with trauma related to discrimination. White said it is important for students to feel accepted, especially at a young age. “I think books are the window to new opportunities and new perspectives for them to learn,” White said. Lauer said distinguishing self-censoring from just being socially aware is a constant question. It involves checking your gut reaction and comparing it against your own biases, he said. “It’s really important to have that level of self-reflection,” Lauer said. Blum said a good rule to follow is to be conscious of what you say and how it affects other people. Papaioannou said in one sense, simply stopping yourself from saying something is self-censoring. Being socially aware is about doing what you feel is good for the community, he said. White said the best way to fight censorship when not in a position of power is “just by getting your voice out there. “It’s coming to these kinds of talks, getting educated, figuring out, and diving deeper into those resources that can give you a voice,” White said. Blum said getting other powerless people involved is important. One person making good points is good, “but 10 people doing the same thing will have that much more of an impact,” Blum said. Santoro said one person does not have to do it alone. “When all of you come together and show up at that school board meeting, or that city hall meeting, or whatever the venue might be, it’s going to be a very powerful message for the people who are making those decisions,” Santoro said. Lauer said that, in his opinion, no books should ever be banned. “I think it’s really important that we have access and that people have freedom to access text, even if we don’t like the text to begin with,” Lauer said. Blum said it’s important to help both kids and adults think about controversial topics in a constructive way. “You can come across some rather upsetting things in books and they can impact you quite negatively, but how you digest that and how you react to that is, at the end of the day, a personal responsibility,” Blum said. It’s up to the individual to develop the ability to handle that responsibility, she added. Cressey said he agreed that no books should be banned, but educators focus on how to use texts to achieve learning objectives. “It’s the role of the teacher, the librarian, the parent, the caregiver,” Cressey said. White said books that “glorify” sexual violence and violence in general need to at least be looked at more closely, as she wouldn’t want students reading them. At the same time, there should be books that still discuss violence as a topic and how it impacts people. Santoro said she believes there’s a level of age appropriateness. “Maybe that book doesn’t belong on the shelf for kindergarten but it belongs on the shelf in middle school,” Santoro said. Papaioannou said it's always up to whoever is in the position of power. This usually means that marginalized people get left out of the conversation entirely, Papaioannou said.
