A new wave of book bans sweeps the United States

Host: Matt Galloway

Guests: Angela Wynn, Jonathan Zimmerman and Michelle Arbuckle

MG: Good morning. I'm Matt Galloway. You're listening to The Current.

[Music: Theme]

MG: Still to come. When Marsha Lederman was five years old, she asked her mother why she didn't have any grandparents. The answer shaped the rest of her life. In just under 30 minutes, what it's meant to her to be the child of Holocaust survivors. But first, the right to read.

[Music: Theme]

TENNESSEE SPEAKER ONE: Let's say you take these books out of the library. What are you going to do with them? You gonna put them on the street, light 'em on fire. Where are they going?

TENNESSEE SPEAKER TWO: I don't have a clue, but I would burn them.

MG: From Tennessee, to Texas, to Florida. There is a new wave of book bannings in the United States. Parent groups and local politicians have succeeded in having a number of books removed from school curriculums and libraries. Titles now banned in some schools include Howard Zinn's, "A People's History of the United States". Margaret Atwood's, "A Handmaid's Tale" and "The Maus" by Art Spiegelman. The reasons behind the bans are diverse and hotly debated. And in Brooklyn, one community institution has stepped up to offer an alternative.

AMY MIKEL: Once the application is submitted. They're immediately issued a Brooklyn public library barcode and pin. And then with that barcode and pin they can access the entirety of our digital book collections. And the vast majority of what we're hearing are stories from trans, queer, gay and questioning kids who are asking for a library card so that they can read more about others like them.

MG: That's Brooklyn librarian Amy Mikel. The Brooklyn Library has launched what they're calling a books unbanned program aimed at youth age 13 to 21. Parents are also reaching out to the library on behalf of their kids to get their hands on banned books. Angela Wynn is one of the parents fighting against the book bans. She is the co-founder of Support Our Schools, and she joins us from Sarasota, Florida. Angela, good morning.

ANGELA WYNN: Good morning.

MG: Why was it important for you to get involved and take action against book bans in your community?

ANGELA WYNN: One of the reasons it's important for myself and S.O.S. is because children need to learn how to speak their truth. When we remove books that they identify with or that speak to them, we're telling them that they should not exist. A lot of the books that are being banned are also books that teach history. They are books that teach the truth in history. If we... if we don't teach the truth in history, we're allowing the mistakes of our past to become the mistakes of our future. We need to challenge kids. We need to challenge them to think outside the box.

MG: What sort of books are being banned?

ANGELA WYNN: We have books that are being banned, LGBTQ books. We actually have math books being banned in the state of Florida, math books that are being banned for references to SEL, which is social emotional learning.

MG: Can you explain what that is? This is fascinating, social, emotional learning. And why would that be controversial?

ANGELA WYNN: Social emotional learning teaches kids how to develop empathy. It teaches them how to work in groups, how to solve problems. Some of the people that are banning this and who do not want social emotional learning being taught in schools believe that it's teaching kids to hate themselves for being white. Teaching them how to dislike what they're doing, what their past ancestors did. And people are thinking that it's creating guilt in children that are white.

MG: How would that play out in a maths textbook?

ANGELA WYNN: Well, one of the passages that was a hot topic was there were two kids, one of them was feeling anxious about crossing a bridge, and the other child helps them by instilling confidence in them. And Florida decided that that was too close to social emotional learning. So they removed it. They scrubbed it from the math books.

MG: We spoke with Elana Fishbein, who's the founder of No Left Turn in Education. Her group is calling for 75 books to be banned in schools. Take a listen to what she says her group is advocating for.

ELANA FISHBEIN: We are not banning books. Kids can order them online, can go in with them in bookstores. We are saying that this is not the kind of book that should be in school libraries or in school classrooms or in school curriculum. But I'm not talking about anything beyond K-through-12 school.

MG: She says that kids can still have access to these books that are just not in the schools and that parents want to have a hand in what's actually happening inside the school walls and I guess a hand in what her kids are reading. What do you make of that?

ANGELA WYNN: I think it's fine. If a parent wants to control what their child is reading, is learning, that's totally fine. But it's not their right to control what other students are reading or learning in school.

MG: What is this really about, do you think?

ANGELA WYNN: Well, it's about creating compliancy. It's about creating complacency in schools. We don't... We're not giving our children the tools to go out into the world. We are not giving them a reason. We're not challenging them. In the end, it's definitely... they think it's fighting the woke agenda. It's... The Stop Woke Act that's here in Florida right now is controlling diversity training. It's saying that anything that causes discomfort is not allowed to be taught in schools.

MG: And so at the heart of that, again, when you go back to that issue of social emotional learning, when you're talking about empathy in a textbook, when you're talking about allowing kids, as you said, to see themselves in a book, that they may get from the library. At its heart what do you think this is really about?

ANGELA WYNN: Well, here in Florida, we believe it's just a smoke and mirrors in the end. The government, not the government. I'm sorry. The politicians here in Florida are creating a problem that doesn't exist. They're a hammer without a nail. They are creating a distraction from their agenda. It's causing... It's causing communities to fight against one another. It's turning parents against teachers. It's just creating chaos. That's the result.

MG: You have a ten year old?

ANGELA WYNN: I do. I do have a ten year old girl.

MG: What do you say to her about this and how does she react to it? She's aware of what's going on, I'm sure, in and around her schools. How does she react to this?

ANGELA WYNN: Well, we've had many conversations. We've talked about some of the books that have been banned and the reasons. And she... We talked about creating discomfort. We've read books intentionally to get her opinion, to just ask her, how does it make you feel? How does it make you feel that your teachers or the politicians that are making these laws don't want you to learn about this? Do you feel bad? Do you feel... Do you feel like you shouldn't feel discomfort? And she says... She says no. She wants to know about how her classmates feel. She wants to know about what they went through. Even if it causes her discomfort. She wants to know so that she can protect her friends. She's very... We've been having this conversation since she was really, really little. So to her, she just can't wrap your mind around why anyone would want to say, you can't read this, you can't experience this.

MG: What are you hoping... You have a forum, a public forum that's happening next week. What are you hoping to achieve there? In the face of this and in the face of, as you said, the anti... So-called anti-woke legislation, the so-called don't say gay bill in Florida. What are you hoping to achieve?

ANGELA WYNN: Well, it's fighting censorship in our community. And don't say gay, stop woke acts, the book banning they all go together. One is the mechanism, the other is the reason. And what we're trying to accomplish at this forum, we're going to have speakers, we're going to have a panel. We want the community to get together. We want the community to bat around ideas on how we can fight censorship in our community. What can we do as parents? What can we do as community members to go out and say, No, we refuse to allow you to control what our kids are learning. School and education isn't to.... It isn't to teach kids what parents want them to learn. It's to teach them what society needs them to learn. And we need to come together as a community. We need to band together so we can fight this.

MG: Angela Wynn, good to speak with you. Thank you very much.

ANGELA WYNN: That's my pleasure. Thanks for having me on.

MG: Angela Wynn is a co-founder of Support Our Schools. She was in Sarasota, Florida. Jonathan Zimmerman has tracked the long history of book bans in the United States. He's a professor of the history of education at the University of Pennsylvania. Jonathan, good morning to you.

JONATHAN ZIMMERMAN: Good morning. Thanks for having me.

MG: Thanks for being here. This isn't the first time, obviously, that we've seen books banned in the United States, but there is new energy to this. I'll ask you the same question that I asked Angela. What is this really about? Why is this happening now, do you think?

JONATHAN ZIMMERMAN: I think what it's about is the radical polarisation of the United States. That's the first thing. The fact that lots of people have lost faith in their public institutions. And in this case, in their schools and their teachers. You know, some of the books that are being banned do address really sensitive topics, I don't think anybody that's serious denies that. But if you want to remove them from the curriculum, really what you're saying is you don't think the teacher is equipped to deal with that sensitivity. And I think that represents kind of a radical distrust and a radical cynicism about our schools and our teachers.

MG: How does this compare to similar movements in the past?

JONATHAN ZIMMERMAN: Well, look, the United States has always had locally controlled schools, and it's always had popular movements to try to influence or control or censor what schools are taught. In the history curriculum, in the science curriculum. But one thing I'd like your listeners to know is that some of those movements came from the left, and I would argue they had hugely salutary consequences. So think about the history curriculum in the United States. So up until the 1960s, I was born in the very early 1960s. Most history textbooks in the United States portrayed slavery as mostly a benefits an institution developed by white people to civilize savage Africans. Now, they don't depict slavery that way anymore. Why not? It's not because historians had a come to Jesus moment, because historians were producing all the falsehoods that I just described. The reason is the NAACP and the Urban League created textbook committees that actually went into schools and into school boards to fight those awful interpretations and ultimately to change them. So, you know, I think in a moment like this, when there does seem to be so much, I will say bad faith pressure on the schools from some very bad actors. I think it's also important for us to realize that pressure on the schools can take many different forms. And frankly, I want to applaud the prior speaker for trying to add her voice to that, which I think is exactly the right call. The right response. The wrong response is the one we saw in Virginia from Terry McAuliffe, which is parents should just butt out of schools. That's going to be a loser in the United States for many reasons. But the big reason, I would argue, is it denies that kind of history I was just describing where parents actually intervened. I'll just say, you know, on the side of racial justice.

MG: When it comes to issues of race, I mean, there are a lot of parents who are fighting to have certain books banned that deal with race in America. You think of the 1619 project and the work that was done by The New York Times, first as an article, then as a larger book. Take a listen to this parent at a recent school meeting in Virginia.

VIRGINIA PARENT: I will do everything I possibly can to fight to the bitter end. Until you prove to me that you are not teaching my children that they are racist just because they're white.

MG: So many of the books banned have to do with gender or identity or being Black in America. What do you... What goes through your mind when you hear that parent say that he's afraid that some books are just teaching his kids that they're racist because they're white?

JONATHAN ZIMMERMAN: Well, you know, I think that what the parent is correctly perceiving is that some of these interpretations do represent a fundamental challenge to the way that many people have thought about America. Let me be clear. The parent is wrong that the 1619 project teaches racial hate or teaches white people to hate themselves. But I think beneath the parents comment is a correct perception that the 1619 project does represent a fundamental challenge to lots of small p, progessive stories about the United States and how it's always improving. And, you know, the arc of justice is long. It bends towards, you know, the arc of history is long, bends toward justice and so on. I think he's correct in that. Now, the difference between he and I, I think that's a good challenge. And I think what we should be doing is pairing that challenge with the traditional interpretation. So if I were king and we don't have enough time this morning to explain why that will never happen, what would happen in the classrooms of that gentleman and everywhere else is that the teacher would present the 1619 project and the state approved textbook. And we'd say, okay, like let's compare and contrast. Let's start with Columbus. What do we say about that phenomenon, about, quote, discovery? Which interpretation do you think is, quote, better? What would that mean? Now, the really hard question that nobody wants to answer right now in the United States is who exactly wants when I just described. I do. But I rather doubt the gentleman that you just quoted does. And I would add further how many advocates for the 1619 project do? I ask that as an empirical question because I don't know the answer, but I think this is a hugely teachable moment if we have the courage to actually present and as such to our kids. And when I say a teachable moment, what I mean is Americans are disagreeing fundamentally about the past and even the meaning of their nation. That's not an opinion. That's a fact. And we can document it. The only question is, are we willing to admit it when the kids are in the room?

MG: You're in the year of midterm elections. And already, as I said, it's not just 1619 project, maths textbooks are now being seen as political footballs as well. How do you see this as an extension of the larger kind of culture wars that are happening right now in your country?

JONATHAN ZIMMERMAN: Well, you know, I think that, you know, the reason it's an extension is that... And the reason the culture wars are different is we're now actually arguing about the narrative of America. So, you know, most of the battles we've fought about these subjects, if you're talking about history now, have been about this thing called inclusion. Right. Who should be part of the story? Right. So, again, if you open up textbooks before the 1960s, they were almost all about white men. Now they're not, right? Anyone who says they are just hasn't looked at them. Right. This is why they're 800 pages long. Right. If you want to know about baisakhi Americans, there's a sidebar about them. And there are great heroines and heroes. But I think up until very recently, the theme of the book has remained the same. You know, Quest for Liberty, Rise of the American Nation. And all of these formerly excluded groups were really folded into that same upbeat story. I think what's new about right now is that the story itself is being contested. And I think, again, that's a much more fundamental challenge, and that's what we're all experiencing.

MG: And that goes back to what I asked earlier at the very beginning, which is what this is about. In some ways, you see that as... or it's being framed as a threat to the narrative....

JONATHAN ZIMMERMAN: Yes and again, in fairness to the gentleman that you quoted there, it is a kind of threat. Again, I think he was misrepresenting in some ways the threat. But depending on how you're defining that term, it is a challenge, it is a threat to the idea that America was, for example, born in liberty and has always symbolized freedom. Look at the title, The 1619 Project. Right. It is suggesting something else. The gentleman is right about that.

MG: Just before I let you go, I mean, as more state lawmakers look to ban more books, what are you going to be watching for?

JONATHAN ZIMMERMAN: I'm going to be watching for activists like the person that you just had on, because I think that is the answer. John Dewey said the solution to the problem of democracy is more democracy. So, you know, if you are outraged like I am about these book bans, do not take the Terry McAuliffe path and say, you know, parents should just butt out and let's leave this to the experts and the teachers. I think that's a loser politically. And I'd even go so far as to say it's a loser morally. You know, I think the answer is precisely what you just heard in the prior speaker, which is, hey, you don't like this. You, too, are a citizen. You, too, are a taxpayer. You too have rights, you're a parent. Get out there. Raise your voice on behalf of freedom. If you don't like censorship, don't tell people not to censor. Raise your voice on behalf of freedom.

MG: Jonathan, good to speak with you. Thank you very much.

JONATHAN ZIMMERMAN: Thanks for having me.

MG: Jonathan Zimmerman, professor of history of education at the University of Pennsylvania. He was in Philadelphia. Michelle Arbuckle is co-chair of the Freedom of Expression Committee and director of member engagement and education at the Ontario Library Association. Michelle, good morning to you.

MICHELLE ARBUCKLE: Good morning. Thanks for having me.

MG: You listened to what's happening in the United States. How does that compare to what happens here in this country when it comes to Canada's history of banning books?

MICHELLE ARBUCKLE: Yeah, it's a really good question. And I mean, you know, it's good to think about this because often what happens with American culture is we do get consumed by it as Canadians and we get a little bit blindsided and not quite sure what's happening in our own backyard. So, you know, it is quite different what's happening here in Canada. We have a national organization that tracks challenges to books and I should pause for a second and explain. We actually don't call, we don't use the word banned in Canada, so we don't ban books and we don't have banned books week like they do in the States. We have freedom to read week here. And we celebrate the books that we can read and we discuss, you know, intellectual freedom and why it's important. We have challenges in Canada and so we track when a book has been challenged, when someone goes to a library and says, I don't think this should be here or why is this here? Or maybe it should be in a different place. Why is my child reading this, that kind of thing? So between 2019 and 2020, we recorded 45 challenges across Canada. So, you know, that's quite different from what's happening in the States. I think that there's a little bit less, you know, manufactured controversy at the political level. And the reasons that things are being challenged are quite different.

MG: What are some of the books that people might recognize that have been challenged?

MICHELLE ARBUCKLE: Oh, sure, there's quite a few of them. I mean, as your previous guests noted, you know, Margaret Atwood is on there, Mordecai Richler's, Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz. More recently, there are books like Mariko Tamaki and Jillian Tamaki's This One Summer, which is a beautiful graphic novel. You know, there are many, many books, but books that are challenged for different reasons. So there was a book in B.C. Bedtime for Frances, which many of you may remember from your childhood, was challenged because it shows the character, the little bear, being spanked, and the parent didn't want their child to see that. You know, books about Scientology were challenged in Nova Scotia because the person thought that it encouraged people to join a cult. And so, you know, these books are challenged for many different reasons. And normally what will happen is the library and the library staff will then tell the person, you know, here's the policy around this, here's why we have it in the library. And here's the process you can go through if you want to challenge this book more formally, and then it takes different paths from there.

MG: Listeners may have heard of the recent controversy around David A. Robertson's book, The Great Bear. This book was under review. The belief was from some that it could be harmful to indigenous students. He is indigenous himself. He was confused by what was unfolding. The book is now back on shelves at the Durham District Libraries. What does that tell you? How convoluted that is. What does that tell you about how fraught this issue is, the issue of challenges and the importance of context in those challenges?

MICHELLE ARBUCKLE: Well, I think what's really interesting and important about that scenario is the process. You know, and I'm heartwarming... It's heartwarming to see, you know, the parents, the students, people who rose up to say, no, this will not be removed. My child will be reading this or, you know, I will be reading this as a parent. But what's important and what I think got people really upset was that the process was kind of kept secret and the books were removed. There was a message sent out, from what I understand. And the books were just removed without any due process. And that's not typically how this happens. So when a challenge occurs in a library, there's a discussion, there's a review. But while that's happening, the book is still available to the community that wants to read it. So that's what happened a little bit differently in that scenario. From my understanding.

MG: Some of these subjects can be challenging in and of themselves, which is in part why, you know, the book may have been written to try and explore those difficult subjects. What is at stake if limits are placed on libraries, in schools but also public libraries, and if people in authority can dictate what's read and what isn't?

MICHELLE ARBUCKLE: Oh. I mean, the very first steps of fascism are to undermine our education system and to, you know, put some doubt in our teachers and the processes and the books that we read and intellectual freedom. This is part of freedom to read. I mean, the very essence of participating and being part of a democratic society is intellectual freedom. The person you just quoted from West Virginia who was able to go and say, I don't believe this should be taught, was able to say that because of intellectual freedom. So, you know, we want to encourage people to engage in these conversations and to make their opinions heard and to go to their teachers and their libraries when they're questioning a certain book and, you know, its place in the curriculum or how their student, their child might have access to it. But that doesn't mean they get to choose when someone else gets to have access or to read that book.

MG: Just before I let you go, as you mentioned, we watch what's happening in the United States because it's a large country and it absorbs a lot of oxygen. Do you worry that the politicisation of those reading lists that we see there could creep across the border?

MICHELLE ARBUCKLE: Well, I worry that people tend to oversimplify things. So we see a headline, we see the clickbait, we see... I mean, these stories are truly troubling and terrible. And it seems that what's happening is not just the questioning of books, but the very questioning of human lives and, you know, the importance that they play in society or their existence. And so I think it's important for people not to oversimplify things, not to fall for the clickbait, but to read the books. I'm heartworm to see groups of people and students who have created subversive book clubs where they're actually seeking out these books that have been challenged and reading them for themselves and figuring out, you know, what was the reasoning behind this and what do I think about that? Read the books, make up your own minds and see what you think about these challenges.

MG: Michelle, good to speak with you. Thank you very much.

MICHELLE ARBUCKLE: Thanks so much. It's been a pleasure.

MG: Michelle Arbuckle is co-chair of the Freedom of Expression Committee and Director of Member Engagement and Education at the Ontario Library Association. She was in Toronto. Well, coming up after your regional update.

CBC Radio · Posted: May 02, 2022 5:34 PM ET | Last Updated: May 2 - Listen to the entire episode here. SOS segment begins at 22:52.