I was prompted to write this blog by a posted question on the Primary School Librarians group on Facebook (a private support group with over 2k members) It said that some year 5 pupils had pointed out the use of the words slag and slut in a couple of Jacqueline Wilson novels and so asked for advice on restricting these books to year 6 only or discarding them altogether. This generated a lot of comments- mainly pointing out similar language in other books - notably by David Walliams and either suggesting that if you accept one, you should accept the other, or advising you get rid of them both! Other answers suggested that because this author writes for teens as well as primary, that they find guidance on her website about age suitability (n.b. that version of the website no longer exists, and the current publisher website does not do that, but I will be suggesting other ways to get help later.) This is not the first time Dame Jacqueline’s books have caused this sort of concern - (perhaps an occupational hazard for anyone writing within the social realist genre)  My Sister Jodie famously had a word removed from the text, by the publisher, which caused this riposte from Michael Rosen.  

There have been quite a few posts on this sort of topic recently, so I thought it was about time to tackle the thorny issue of censorship and the library, because what is described above is ultimately just that. An adult deciding what children should be allowed to access. As a professional librarian I am bound to a code of ethics which includes the duty to uphold, promote and defend: Intellectual freedom, including freedom from censorship. In the United States they have an Office for Intellectual Freedom and a Library Bill of Rights. But this may seem a heavy-handed way to approach the primary school problem being addressed? More a case of avoiding parental complaints than censorship? 

There are indeed many degrees of censorship and many gatekeepers between the book and the child. The author may self-censor their writing for a particular audience. Publishers might insist on changes, as we have seen. Bookshops only stock a fraction of the books published and parents, teachers or librarians choose which books they will buy and that children will have access to. There is a fascinating discussion piece in Books for Keeps which explains these different perspectives really well and shows that this has always been a perennial topic in the community.

All gatekeepers want to do right by the child, but they may well differ very strongly about what ‘right’ is. Some of you may have seen the article a few days ago in the Guardian which reported findings from the ALA on their top ten most challenged books. Banned Books Week (September 26-October 2, 2021) is an annual event celebrating the freedom to read which spotlights current and historical attempts to censor books in libraries and schools. But here in the UK we would find it surprising that the most challenged book ever has been Harry Potter; religious fundamentalists are against any mention of witchcraft and similarly Philip Pullman’s His Dark Materials was perceived as being anti established religion. These are best-selling and award-winning books which people have demanded that schools and libraries remove from their shelves!  As you can see from the Guardian report sexuality still comes top of the complaints, but increasingly anti-racist books are now being challenged. Yet at the other end of the spectrum, there have been historically accepted challenges against racist depictions such as Helen Bannerman’s Little Black Sambo and Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin. It would be shocking to find these books still on library shelves, so there clearly is an ‘acceptable’ and necessary level of censorship. In much the same way you would expect that out of date and misleading information books are removed from the shelves. This is every bit as important as disposing of books that are worn out and tatty.

Selecting the appropriate materials in the first place is also very relevant to the problem under discussion. Ideally a school would have a selection policy, even when money is very tight it is important to spend it well and not to blindly accept all donations! 

But given that it would be impossible to personally read everything, where can you get help to assess books on your shelves or before purchase?  Specialist children’s book suppliers like Browns Books for Students and Peters have very useful websites which give recommended age ranges, reading ages and brief reviews. Here on LoveReading4Schools of course we have expert, peer and child reviews, extracts and reading lists for different age groups and themes. Although no substitute for extensive personal reading, reading informed reviews is the next best thing. The School Librarian journal is the last print source of multiple reviews  (www.sla.org.uk), but Books for Keeps and Armadillo websites are invaluable.  Common Sense Media is another excellent, balanced approach to suitability checking for parents and schools (and not just for books). Even Amazon has information, if you know where to find it. Scroll down the page until you find the bibliographic details (ISBN, page length and publication date) and often you will find an age range given. 

To return to the original question however, it is clearly not a case of objecting to seriously unsuitable or age inappropriate content, but to what is perceived to be inappropriate language. Certainly, those terms would not be used aloud or in writing in any school, by children or adults. But in a fiction book where the author is striving to create convincing characters facing real life dilemmas? The Carnegie medal (awarded for outstanding writing for children) criteria ask “How are the characters portrayed? Can the reader understand why the characters act, think and speak the way they do?” and “Is the dialogue (including inner dialogue) believable for each character? Is it consistent with the character and the experiences they go through?” In other words, context is everything. Michael Rosen pointed out in his article about Jaqueline Wilson, the double standards all adults have about ‘bad’ language. “We know that they share "rude" words. How do we know? Because we adults did when we were children.” My initial reaction to the Year 5 children would have been that this was an ideal opportunity for some valuable discussion about the book and how it made them feel; about the difference between formal and informal language and perhaps to talk about verbal abuse and sexism. 

I am a firm believer that reading is ‘safe’ and a place in which you can inhabit other lives, learn from their mistakes (Junk by Melvin Burgess would never convert anyone to drugtaking), develop empathy and understanding. I also believe that children read at their own level of awareness. Some nuances go over their heads. Or indeed they skip bits which make them uncomfortable, or they will decide a book is not for them. Self-censorship is part of becoming a discerning reader. What is important is the opportunity at home and at school to talk about issues and for questions to be welcomed. Children and young people should be given as rich and varied a diet of reading materials as possible. As gatekeepers we should strive for the highest quality in our libraries, but this does not mean bland or simply safe, unobjectionable books. As long ago as 1966, children’s author Catherine Storr wrote “It is not by keeping our children out of touch with the rigours of life that we best fit them to face it. We must give them the equipment which will enable them to fight. We shall not do this by burying their heads, like ostriches, in the sand, but by showing them that in the discovery of the terror and beauty of the world they are neither helpless nor alone” We need to remember that it was probably the book that shocked or surprised us or made us really stop and think that made us the lifelong readers that we must be to be writing and reading this! 

Joy Court