Course:LIBR559A/Asheim, L. (1953)

Citation

Asheim, L. (1953). Not censorship but selection. Wilson Library Bulletin, 28, 63-67. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/NotCensorshipButSelection

Annotation

The author compares and contrasts the notions of selection and censorship within the library spectrum. According to Asheim, creating and offering perfect accessibility is physically impossible because this would mean having all printed publications on the same shelf, in a single library. And there is no library in the world which can offer such accessibility. As soon as we begin to choose certain books over others, in terms of which should go on the primary shelf and which ones should be left out, we are discriminating against the latter. This is where selection comes in and hence, librarians are forced to select at this point. What intrigues me is that he presents selection in a purely positive manner and censorship in a merely negative one. For instance, Asheim explains that a selector finds reasons to keep the book where he/she finds strengths and virtues that will dominate objections. Conversely, a censor searches for reasons to reject the book. In addition, censor's major task is to find weaknesses and possible misinterpretations as he/she fears the response of irrational readers. Selector, on the other hand, assumes a reaction of the potential reader who is a rational and intelligent person. Censor contributes to destroying valuable information that may be worth saving because he/she supports the approach of "anything bad about the book - let us reject it"; whereas selector focuses on the good within a given book - let us try and keep it. “Selection, then, begins with a presumption in favor of liberty of thought; censorship, with a presumption in favor of thought control. Selection's approach to the book is positive, seeking its values in the book as a book, and in the book as a whole. Censorship's approach is negative, seeking for vulnerable characteristics wherever they can be found—anywhere within the book, or even outside it. Selection seeks to protect the right of the reader to read; censorship seeks to protect—not the right—but the reader himself from the fancied effects of his reading. The selector has faith in the intelligence of the reader; the censor has faith only in his own."

I understand that selection is unavoidable. However, I believe that in order to make the article more credible, authentic and efficient, he could have presented more evidence about the negative aspect of selection. And I think he could have presented positive evidence about censorship. This way he would provide his readers with a fair distinction between the two concept. I also do not think that all censorship is bad. For example, filtering - when youth is using libraries and there is filtering present to prevent young people from looking at pornographic material. Furthermore, when I hear the word selection - it makes me think of exclusion. Thus, personally I think that selecting means including some books while at the same time, excluding other materials. My major critique of this article however, is the author's assurance that a selector is free from his own prejudices and biases when deciding what to make available to the public. Librarians or not - our backgrounds and experiences do influence our choices and to remain objective while including certain material in a collection is simply not realistic.

Page author: Aleks Migorska