Second of Three Parts: Have Librarians Become the 'Book Burners'? Survey of 35 Town Libraries Not Heartening

The Lexington Library, like many other area libraries, may be censoring conservative books.

Part One : Mass. Libraries Are Censoring Books Basic Books of Conservative Thought Are Censored by Mass. Librarians

By Atty. J. Edward Pawlick
May 29, 2002

When discussing "Fahrenheit 451" in a panel about "Censorship & Free Speech" at the Walpole Library recently, it became obvious there is a serious problem with censorship in Massachusetts.

Those who are "burning" books in 2002 are the ones we trust the most - the librarians.

They love to talk about "book-burning" by fanatical citizens. But that's because the librarians buy the books. If they wish to censor, they don't have to burn anything. They just refuse to buy the book. It's very tidy and very clean.

But it's different for the citizens. If a librarian is able to sneak in a book that the citizens don't like and complain about, the librarians scream, "Help, kooks, book-burners! Help! And the ACLU comes riding to the rescue." It's obvious that we're headed toward a society like the one described in "Fahrenheit 451", but the librarians sincerely believe they are the saviors, not the destroyers, of our civilization. The residents of Walpole appear happy and prosperous with widescreen televisions that tell them everything they need to know - just like the people in "Fahrenheit 451". They're no different than the rest of suburbia. If something did not appear on Channel 4, 5 or 7 or in the Boston Globe, it doesn't exist. The people in Walpole are intelligent but afraid to discuss anything with enthusiasm and conviction because there must always be "consensus" and you must always consult an "expert" before issuing an opinion. The most important thing is not to hurt anyone's feelings. That is the ultimate sin. There were about a dozen people (mostly women - the limit was twenty) who attended a discussion of "Fahrenheit 451" by Prof. David Fedo. The discussion was interesting and the audience had intelligent people.

Is Your Library Censoring What You Can Read? How To Find Out What Can You Do About It? Is your library censoring what you are allowed to read? You can quickly find out. A good start would be to see if they have any of the eleven books that appear on our list. The best library had eight of the eleven. The towns that are the most "tolerant" had none. It would be good to point out to them that Wellesley has eight. Make your own list of non-liberal books. If they're not in your library, talk to your librarian and the members of the library board that you elected. If you're a beginner, you should probably not start with Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth. That will bring personal attacks against you because we do not live in a free society. You will be accused of hate. Again, it might be good to point out that Boston University, Boston College and UMass/Amherst all have that book. You might be able to find other libraries that also do. Please send a Letter to the Editor at MassNews and let us know what happens.

But the main point was not to hurt anyone's feelings. To a person who was brought up in an era of robust discussion and debate in the 1930s, it was sad to see only a shadow of that - and with so little input from the citizens. To a man who had been a history major at Williams College where we had great debates and then a trial lawyer, it was tedious.

Author of 'Fahrenheit' Was Concerned About Conservatives

The author of "Fahrenheit" was concerned about a fictitious "town librarian" who is "threatened by the local patriot bigot in regard to a few dozen books aching to be burned."

The author was worried about conservatives and Christians, but it is the liberals and non-Christians who are doing the book-burning in 2002.

This was made clear in 1998 by the noted, liberal Boston criminal lawyer and ACLU advocate, Harvey Silverglate, in his book, "The Shadow University. "

"Universities have become the enemy of a free society," he wrote, "and it is time for the citizens of that society to recognize this scandal of enormous proportions and to hold these institutions to account."

He wrote that, "Faculty and students who threaten the prevailing norms may be forced to undergo 'thought reform.'"

He wasn't writing about the "religious right." Although he did not say so, the liberals who have total power in our educational institutions and the media, were the object of his concern.

Although Silverglate limited his book to colleges, it is undeniable that such a "scandal of enormous proportions," as he calls it, also extends to the libraries of our most famous universities and beyond to the librarians who are taught by those schools.

This is not a scandal of censorship by "local patriot bigots," but by the entrenched liberals who control our colleges and libraries.

Silverglate will not totally concur with that because he is a member of that group. We must worry about his future in that circle of people and hope that he does not have to backtrack in order to survive.

A Confused Liberal

The author of "Fahrenheit," Ray Bradbury, became famous in 1953 by reworking the predictions of Aldous Huxley, who agreed with George Owell's "1984" that the citizens of the world would all be slaves in the year 1984, as had happened in Russia. But Huxley believed this would not result from the use of force as in Russia, but from people being so bored and mindless that they would happily succumb to slavery.

As I read Bradbury's book and prepared for the panel discussion, it became obvious that the book was very prescient because we in Massachusetts are already far down the road of censorship and book burning. What I read and saw confirmed how that is happening. Bradbury told us in a new introduction to "Fahrenheit 451" about a story he had written before he wrote the book. The story concerned the town librarian who is threatened by the local patriot bigots.

It is clear that Bradbury is troubled by the conservatives of the world. It would be interesting to question him now as to which group is censoring the free speech of the citizens today.

Just to make his point more explicit, Bradbury revealed who his hero is who published his new book in issues two, three and four of a new magazine.

"The young man was Hugh Hefner," writes Bradbury. "The magazine was Playboy, which arrived during the winter of 1953-54 to shock and improve the world. The rest is history. From that modest beginning, a brave publisher in a frightened nation survived and prospered."

Some of that is puzzling. "A frightened nation?" I don't remember anyone being frightened except for those of us young males who were sent to Korea to fight the Chinese Army. And those young men had reason to be frightened but no one at home had any fear, particularly after President Eisenhower replaced the incompetent Harry Truman who bungled us into the war. Happily, Eisenhower ended the war within a few months and we entered what liberal historians refer to as the boring, but very happy, 1950s.

"A brave publisher?" Is this how most would describe Hugh Hefner, the man who made a fortune by turning the women of America into sex objects?

Walpole Is Interesting

The truth of "Fahrenheit" as reflected by the town of Walpole was interesting.

Only two people attended our panel discussion (it was also televised on the local cable network). There were more people on the panel than in the audience.

The local newspaper editor, Tom Glynn, was an old-fashioned editor who tells it as he sees it. Whether you agree with him or not, you appreciate his forthrightness. He is independent. What a contrast to most of the suburban editors who are now employed in the Community Newspaper group that Fidelity Investments created just to make money.

The librarian at Walpole, Jerry Romelczyk, was a nice man who thought he would make the discussions more lively by having me there. I hope this didn't hurt his career in any way but I am sure that my attendance did not raise his esteem in the eyes of most of his profession.

It is obvious after this experience that the huge televisions are making us into robots who all think alike - consensus is the answer to everything.

Most of us just watch TV and read the Globe every day because we realize they will teach us what to think. No sense in doing it for yourself.