NSLS Blogs

 Home » Blogs » Something Different Every Day

Something Different Every Day

« January 2007 | Main | March 2007 »

February 27, 2007

I am NOT a censor!

Is there any librarian out there who wouldn't say (and loudly), "I am NOT a censor!"? I encountered someone recently who claimed not to believe in censorship, and explained in the next sentence that she thought this year's Newbery winner did not belong in the children's department of public libraries. Her reasoning was that it was a young adult book, I guess because the s-word did not belong in a children's book. The main character is ten, and absolutely nothing happens that would be inappropriate in a children's book, so let me just put it out there: she's kidding herself. She wants to call it YA because that makes her feel better about not buying it. She is a censor.

But she's not the only one. I'll bet we routinely kid ourselves when we censor. For one thing, we always call it selection rather than censorship. Nobody can afford to buy everything, so part of what we are paid for is our professional expertise on which of the 4000+ books that will come out this year we will buy. Obviously we're going to pick up the book on a current topic that's gotten stars from the various review journals. Obviously we're NOT going to buy the book that's gotten lousy reviews and is overpriced to boot. But from there, the waters get a lot more murky. Maybe I'm not going to buy that book that got fantastic reviews but is on a subject that I can't imagine kids truly being nearly as interested in as the adult reviewers (Kurlansky's book about cod, say) and I think that's still clearly selection, though of course it is nudging a little closer to censorship because it's based on my opinion of what would interest kids. But let's say maybe it's a book with okay reviews on Britney Spears, and I feel that Britney, with her public meltdowns and her public appearances sans underwear, has become a poor role model for today's kids, so I decide not to buy that book. That, my librarian friends, is really close to censorship. That's not comfortable, though, so I might tell myself instead, "Oh, let's wait and see how Britney does after rehab and THEN buy something--this book will be out of date so quickly".

I think one of the best things about the whole Lucky debate has been the opportunity for each of us to take a good look in the mirror. Are you a censor? Sometimes, maybe, just a little?

Posted by susan at 4:20 PM | Comments (1)

February 18, 2007

A lot of fuss over one word

Here are the things I hate about the whole "scrotum" discussion:

*It makes librarians look like idiots. From one point of view, it makes us look like twittering old-fashioned ladies who get fussed easily. From another point of view, it makes us look like conservative-baiting, agenda-driven, untrustworthy guardians of children. How many people reading that article do you think looked at it and thought, "Yay, librarians are awesome!"

*It is polarizing. It is pitting school librarians against public librarians, and way too much of the discussion on the various listservs like Child_Lit and CCBC involves public librarians throwing stones at school librarians without any real empathy for the position school librarians are in. We are all in the same boat, but some of us can row a little further out without having our oars taken away than others.

*It isn't fostering healthy discussion that might offer support to the school librarians who want to risk buying this year's Newbery winner; it just bashes the ones who made an instant decision not to buy. I don't think any of the ensuing discussion will have changed their minds, because it has been so (sorry!) self-righteous.

*It distracts from what to me is the real issue with use of the word "scrotum". Here's the background, for those of you who haven't yet gotten your copy of this surprise winner. Ten-year-old Lucky is listening in on an Alcoholics Anonymous-like meeting where one of the members is describing when he hit bottom. It was when a rattlesnake bit his dog on the "scrotum" and he was too drunk to be able to help his dog. To me, the problem with the word "scrotum" is that it does indeed stick out from everything else in the book. Is it realistic to think that this character would have used that word in that context? It doesn't ring true to me. He'd likely have used a word that one really can't get away with in children's books, so does that mean you have to use the clinical-sounding word "scrotum"? No. As one of my staff commented, he could have just said "privates". Same point, better match with character, less fuss all around.

That said, I am proud that public librarians seem almost universally to be picking up this book. And to me, it seems like an opportunity to pick up this book just BECAUSE it won the Newbery Medal. You can just as easily use the argument that "People expect to find the Newbery Medal in the collection" as any of the more conservative excuses not to purchase. The bottom line is, kids do have a right to read the best books, and the Newbery medal by definition is the best of this year's books.

Well, personally I'd have picked Laura Schlitz's sublime A Drowned Maiden's Hair. But, that's neither here nor there.

Posted by susan at 5:46 PM | Comments (5)

February 15, 2007

Getting smarter every day

In a fascinating report on NPR this morning, they talked about a study that showed that kids who believe that they can get smarter do better in school. Kids who think they are at a certain level and that's what they will be for life start to have deteriorating grades. It doesn't mean that smarter kids get smarter and dumber kids get dumber--it means that all kids have the potential for getting smarter and if they understand that, they are much more willing to work. It must be satisfying on some level to do a math problem and think "There. Now I am a little smarter than I was before."

I think this is great information to get out to parents, and potentially a wonderful way to promote using the library during the summer. But the best thing about it is getting the word to kids. If we mention it in our programs, and get excited about them getting a little bit smarter every time they solve a puzzle or do something requiring some thought, it will be another way to make a positive impact in their lives.

Isn't it exciting to have a job like that? I love being a children's librarian!

Posted by susan at 9:44 AM | Comments (0)

February 14, 2007

2006 Cybils--the bloggers' award!

http://dadtalk.typepad.com/cybils/2007/02/the_2006_cybils.html#more

Congratulations to the group of bloggers who have diligently read and voted on the 2006 best children's books. They just announced (on a blog, of course) their top choices in nine categories. What a great list! I'm especially thrilled to see Ptolemy's Gate, An Egg Is Quiet, and A Drowned Maiden's Hair pick up awards.

How wonderful to see a process that included a large number of readers/voters, but made up of people who know the field. The Quills, of course, is more democratic, but not exactly in a good way to judge by the results (The Book Thief outvoted by Eldest, for instance). The Cybils hit the balance between knowledge and inclusiveness.

Posted by susan at 12:50 PM | Comments (0)

February 9, 2007

What makes a great trustee?

I've had reason lately to give some thought to the question of What makes a great trustee? Of course, the opposite question comes up, too. I think a great trustee is someone who:

*Has a library card before they run for trustee
*Values the work of public libraries and their staff
*Understands that a public library cannot be run on a business model but
*Also understands that they are responsible for managing public funds wisely
*Has a basic grasp of budgeting and finance
*Is willing to put in the time to learn about the issues facing libraries today
*Doesn't see the library board as a stepping stone to public office
*Appreciates the role of libraries as vital to maintaining an educated electorate
*Doesn't run to serve with the sole intention of reducing taxes but instead advocates with legislators to improve library funding
*Defends the rights of citizens to have free and open access to materials

We had a trustee once who as Board President was faced with a request to have a book pulled from the collection. I imagine that as a Jewish man, it was painful for him to have to look a patron in the eye and refuse the request to remove a David Duke book from the collection. But he understood that free speech begins with defending even the ugliest of speech, and so he left that vile book on the shelf. I admire that man very much. He was a great trustee. Being a great trustee takes courage, and heart, and a willingness to serve to try to make the world a better place...and yes, you really do have to believe in the mission of the public library--Benjamin Franklin and his friends had a great idea all those years ago.

Posted by susan at 9:05 AM | Comments (0)

February 1, 2007

July 21, 2007

The seventh and presumably last Harry Potter book will be released July 21, 2007. I can't decide...am I happy, sad, or annoyed? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/6320733.stm

Annoyed is because you could hardly come up with a subject less related to our Summer Reading theme this year of Mission Read: To the Library and Beyond! Space and wizards do not make a very comfortable fit, and if we'd known about the release of HP7 it would have been tempting to switch to a more fantasy-based theme. But too much work has gone into Mission Read already, so that spaceship has sailed...er...blasted off.

Sad is of course because it's the last Harry! Bad things will happen in it, and at the last page the story will be over. That is really sad. I read the first Harry Potter as an advanced reader copy and fell in love back then. And the ending of the last book was so sad that when I was reading it out loud to my family we had to stop for awhile because it's hard to read and cry at the same time.

But I guess I'll try to focus on happy. Yippee, a new Harry to look forward to! And also, it will be very interesting to see what Rowling does AFTER Harry. Wonder how many years that will take?

Posted by susan at 7:40 AM | Comments (0)