Book bans are surging in the United States right now.
In 2023, the American Library Association reported that the number of titles targeted at public libraries had increased more than 90 percent from a year prior, and 17 states – including Florida, Texas, and Connecticut – had seen more than 100 censorship attempts. A more recent report from the free expression-focused nonprofit PEN America notes that more than 4,000 unique titles have been banned across the country. The organization says that we’re in a moment of education censorship “unseen since the 1950s-era Red Scare.’’
Rhode Island hasn’t been immune from this alarming trend. In recent years, parents in North Kingstown and Westerly have fought to have the graphic memoir “Gender Queer“ removed from local shelves. In Pawtucket, a play based on the graphic novel “Fun Home” was pulled from a local classroom after a parent complained. In Glocester, a parent’s complaints about reading material led to new policies that drew criticism from the ACLU. In North Smithfield, a parent submitted a list of books they found objectionable on local school-library shelves that included Toni Morrison’s Pulitzer Prize-winning novel “Beloved.’’ Two years ago, a group of legislators introduced a bill that would hold public and charter school libraries liable for “indecent’’ material lent to minors. Proposed punishments included fines and/or prison time.
There are a lot of reasons to object to this alarming trend.
You might note that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that all people have the right to “seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media’’ which makes book bans an infringement on this human right.
You might object because such bans are an affront to American ideas. The founding fathers — among them Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, and James Madison — were avid readers and writers who valued the free exchange of ideas. And subsequent presidents warned against censorship. During the height of McCarthyism, President Dwight Eisenhower — a Republican — told a crowd at Dartmouth College, “Don’t join the book burners!’’
You might object because you know that book bans can be a harbinger of worse things to come. After his Holocaust-focused graphic novels “Maus” were banned by a school district in Tennessee, the author Art Spiegelman said, “Book burning leads to people burning.’’
And even if you’re not persuaded by any of these arguments, you might be offended by more local reasons.
Rhode Island was founded by a guy — Roger Williams — who was banished from the Massachusetts Bay Colony for espousing “new and dangerous opinions.’’ Any Rhode Islander today who tries to limit public access to ideas they find distasteful is chipping away at the freedom of conscience Williams established here.
The state also has a rich history of literacy and education. Newport is home to America’s oldest continuous lending library, the Redwood Library and Athenaeum. One of the nation’s largest financial aid programs for undergraduates, Pell Grants, is named for Rhode Island’s former US senator. Today, the state’s colleges and universities draw students from around the world. Brown, in particular, is famous for its freewheeling “Open Curriculum.’’ Book bans are a departure from this proud heritage.
It is for all of these reasons – from the hyperlocal to the international – that I support the “Freedom to Read’’ bills recently introduced in the Rhode Island House and Senate. The bills include measures that would make it harder to take books off public shelves in Rhode Island. They require that people challenging reading materials live in the vicinity of the school or library they’re challenging. They deter frivolous censorship complaints by granting legal fees to schools and libraries that win such cases. And they enhance protections for librarians against both civil suits and criminal charges.
To be clear, the bills do not mandate that students mustread material that they or their parents find objectionable. They simply ensure that one parent’s discomfort does not diminish the access of an entire community.
Now, as a published author, you might think that I’ve got a conflict of interest on this issue. And, of course, I don’t want my book to be banned. Contrary to what some folks believe, book bans don’t actually help authors via the publicity they supposedly generate.
But I’m a straight white guy, who wrote a book – a true crime story – that mostly involves straight white folks. And today’s book bans generally aren’t targeting authors like me or books like mine. PEN’s recent report states that, of the titles banned during the 2023-2024 school year, 36 percent featured fictional characters or real people of color, while 29 percent included LGBTQ+ characters, people, or themes. The report notes, “The movement to ban books originated in a coordinated network of groups that also largely espouses white supremacist and Christian nationalist ideology.’’
By opposing book bans in my backyard, I’m speaking up to protect free expression, not my own bottom line. I am defending the local libraries I love, and the civic-minded folks who work there. I am affirming the Rhode Island Library Association’s position on intellectual freedom, which reads, in part: “Libraries manifest the promises of the First Amendment by making available the widest possible range of viewpoints, opinions, and ideas, so that every person has the opportunity to freely read and consider information and ideas, regardless of their content or the viewpoint.’’
Rhode Islanders would never agree to change the state motto from “Hope’’ to “Fear.’’ Nor would we ever rename the statue atop the state house as the “Semi-Independent Man.’’ And yet efforts to pull books from local shelves move us in this direction.
Let’s pass the “Freedom to Read’’ bills and leave book bans in the past where they belong.
Philip Eil is a freelance journalist and author based in Providence, his hometown. He is a member of the Rhode Island Chapter of Authors Against Book Bans.
