This post was written by 楼凤天堂 member Cody Miller.
On July 17th of this year, in which he effusively praised librarians across the country while unwaveringly condemning the various efforts to ban books happening in state houses. His accolades for librarians echoed my own feelings about the work librarians do (work that is ). Yet, his musings on the current wave of book bans included language that I found troublesome:
“It鈥檚 no coincidence that these ‘banned books’ are often written by or feature people of color, indigenous people, and members of the LGBTQ+ community 鈥� though there have also been unfortunate instances in which books by conservative authors or books containing ‘triggering’ words or scenes have been targets for removal. Either way, the impulse seems to be to silence, rather than engage, rebut, learn from or seek to understand views that don’t fit our own.”
President Obama is correct that . However, his latter comment about conservative authors being the target of removal does not describe the differences in how and why LGBTQ and BIPOC author books are being targeted and who is doing the targeting. To illustrate the difference you can easily and conversations about topics relating to LGBTQ and BIPOC authors (despite a , which ). You cannot find an example of a Democratic-controlled state passing a bill that would ban the works of a conservative author or punish educators for not including trigger warnings. The political asymmetry between the examples President Obama offers up cannot be ignored.
The statement also included the . The false equivalencies and criticism of college students belies how power is shaping the current wave of book banning efforts. As journalist , politicians and media figures can often mask or ignore power imbalances in reporting, which leads to readers lacking a broader picture of the social, political, and cultural factors at play. To return to President Obama鈥檚 statement: a group of students asking for a right-wing author鈥檚 book to be removed from a collection is not the equivalent to a state legislative body and its allied political party using the full force of the government to remove LGBTQ and BIPOC authors. For one, a group of students do not hold the . Additionally, the . You and I may personally hold a range of opinions about college students trying to remove a book authored by a writer whose political views we detest from a library. However, from an analysis of power, we can conclude that putting students鈥� attempt to remove a conservative author from a library is not an equivalent to .
President Obama鈥檚 statement and the profusive responses it garnered online has led me to believe that we must talk about power and policy when discussing book bans. Centering power and policy means factoring in history as well as explicit definitions of policies and legislation. names policies and government actors in their definition of book bans. Considering how policy and power shape book bans could point to a refined response to the wave of book bans we鈥檝e seen over the past three years. The following questions have helped me better understand and vocalize the stakes of various book banning efforts over the past three years.
Who is doing the banning? How are they achieving the book banning? For instance, is the ban coming from a piece of state legislation or is it coming from ? The answer to this question can help guide action steps. For instance, if a ban is being taken up at a school board meeting, then . However, if the ban is coming from purposefully nebulous legislative text, then identifying where your state representative stands on the bill can become a site for action. There is not a singular way that books are being banned in our current moment, so knowing who is behind the banning and how they鈥檝e trying to enact the ban is important.
How is this book ban part of a larger pattern in public life and American politics? This question helps address the question of power that was missing from President Obama鈥檚 statement. Understanding how power shapes an effort to ban a book gives insight into the broader political forces at play. This question can also provide insight into building coalitions for larger public school projects. An episode of the podcast details how student and community activists fighting school privatization movements linked the fight to other efforts to harm public schools, like book banning and anti-LGBTQ policies. Understanding how a particular book banning effort is linked to broader policies can provide a ramp for activists fighting book bans to find valuable allies in widely defending public schools. The have demonstrated the power of this tactic.
What work is already being done to stop the ban? How can I support that work? This question can help connect people to work that is already being done to fight against book bans. Being horrified by what is happening with book bans in the past three years is understandable. And, it鈥檚 important to note that there are activists who have been developing strategies and moves to fight for the freedom to read. Knowing activists and organizations who have history fighting book bans can provide insight into strategies and methods to employ depending on the context. These activists and organizations also typically know who are allied players and which political actors need pressure and persuasion. Knowing who has a history fighting book bans can also make challenging book bans a solidarity-building experience.
At the end of his letter, President Obama invited readers to democratic participation by reviewing the organization . The organization includes suggestions and tips to fight against the wave of book bans. Their material on is especially valuable. It鈥檚 encouraging to see the former and using their platform to speak out against the dangers of book banning and the ensuing harm these bans do to young people. We must continue speaking out against these bans and demand sympathetic political and civic leaders do the same. At the same time, we must be clear that our conversations about books don鈥檛 rely on both sides-ism tropes that bely the broader goals of these book banning political actors. The politicians voting to ban books and honest history are the same politicians seeking to , , , and . A group of college students questioning the place of one book in a library or calling for stronger trigger warnings do not pose a similar threat to pluralistic democracy. Addressing power and policy in our conversations about book bans will make that distinction clear.
Cody Miller is an associate professor of English education at SUNY Brockport. During his seven years as a high school English teacher and in his current role, he has positioned texts as vehicles to discuss broader sociopolitical issues in students鈥� lives and worlds. Miller is the editor of English Leadership Quarterly. He was awarded 楼凤天堂鈥檚 LGBTQIA+ Advocacy & Leadership Award in 2022. He can be reached at hmiller@brockport.edu or on Twitter at @CodyMillerELA.
It is the policy of 楼凤天堂 in all publications, including the Literacy & 楼凤天堂 blog, to provide a forum for the open discussion of ideas concerning the content and the teaching of English and the language arts. Publicity accorded to any particular point of view does not imply endorsement by the Executive Committee, the Board of Directors, the staff, or the membership at large, except in announcements of policy, where such endorsement is clearly specified.