Once More into the Breach

During Banned Books Week, we are perhaps both lucky and unlucky to have in Vice-Presidential hopeful Sarah Palin a very new public figure who allows us to delve into the methods, ideologies, and public faces of the book-banning mind—as well as into the varied public reactions to this always controversial issue. Much has been written and said about what Palin is alleged to have done, and much of it has been based on misinformation, conjecture, and personal prejudice and hasn’t been a reflection of research or disinterested journalistic inquiry. Nearly as problematic is that hot-headed finger-pointing has taken the place of true reflection and hasn’t opened much room for serious inquiry into the very divisions that this issue has created (and is a reflection of).

The story that’s been spread through the blogosphere is that as mayor of her hometown, Wasilla, Alaska, Sarah Palin banned or tried to ban a list of 91 books from the Wasilla Public Library--including Gabriel García Màrquez’s One Hundred Years of Solitude, Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Confessions, and Aristophanes’ Lysistrata. Then, when the town’s librarian, Mary Ellen Emmons (now Mary Ellen Baker), refused to cooperate, Palin either fired her or tried to have her fired.

Pro-Palin bloggers have fired back to discount the entire story, pointing out that one book on the circulating list, J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone, wasn’t published until 1998 and that the list is merely a cut-and paste of a “generic” list of banned books. Aside from pointing out the disparity of the Rowling date, almost all pro-Palin blogs provide no other evidence of the story’s falsehood, but this disparity is evidence enough to keep many people from looking into the matter further.

The inclusion of Rowling’s book seems to discount the list itself (as does the concept of the notably unliterary former beauty queen even having heard of García Màrquez, Rousseau, or Aristophanes), but what about the rest of the story?

According to the September 4th, 2008 issue of the Anchorage Daily News and a December 1996 edition of Wasilli’s hometown newspaper, the Frontiersman, the facts are as follows: "Before being sworn in 1996, mayor-elect Sarah Palin approached librarian Emmons with an inquiry about the prospect of banning books, which Emmons rejected out of hand. Emmons told the Frontiersman that after being sworn in, mayor Palin made the same inquiry two more times, with Emmons refusing to consider the possibility each time. Palin made one of these inquiries at an October 1996 City Council meeting... No specific books were mentioned at the meeting."

The Frontiersman article said that after being questioned, Palin called her inquiries, “rhetorical and simply part of a policy discussion.”

Then a few months later, librarian Emmons received a letter from Palin telling her she was going to be fired. The letter didn’t mention the issue of book-banning and simply cited Palin's opinion that Emmons didn't fully support her. Public support was behind Emmons, who had been a librarian in Wasilli for seven years. Finally Palin purportedly relented. In August of 1999, librarian Emmons resigned her position two months before Palin began her second term as mayor. No political pressure or hostility from Palin has been cited as the reason for her decision.

So according to the facts, no books were banned, and no list of any kind was proposed. The list circulating on the Internet is a cut-and-paste job--drawn from a specific and accurate list of “Books Banned at One Time or Another in the United States."

We've seen how Palin's entry onto the national stage has made both the left and the right lose sight of things like evidence and research and has led to simple knee-jerk reaction. As with so many issues, nuanced examination has given way to simple partisan faith, and like so much of Presidential politics and debate, shorthand soundbites have taken the place of the deeper truths that take more time and effort to uncover. Quick, determined responses almost always impact people more than thoughtful inquiry.

As a result, we in the literary and cultural community have to ask ourselves how we want to approach the issue without furthering the divide and alienating ourselves from either side. Keeping the reading community as large and diverse as possible is in all of our best interests. In our attempt to keep an even view and avoid partisanship, this article can provide no real answers. It can only provide the facts (as far as we can know them) and offer the About Classic Literature blog as a forum for thoughtful discussion.