Librarians in UK increasingly asked to remove books, as influence of US pressure groups spreads
-Anecdotal evidence suggests a rise in requests to take books off shelves, particularly LGBTQ+ titles

隨著美國(guó)壓力團(tuán)體的影響不斷擴(kuò)大，英國(guó)圖書(shū)管理員越來(lái)越多地被要求下架圖書(shū)
——坊間證據(jù)顯示，圖書(shū)下架的請(qǐng)求有所增加，尤其是LGBTQ+類圖書(shū)


(Evidence suggests that the work of US action groups is reaching UK libraries.)

（有證據(jù)表明，美國(guó)行動(dòng)團(tuán)體的工作成果正在進(jìn)入英國(guó)的圖書(shū)館。）
新聞：

Requests to remove books from library shelves are on the rise in the UK, as the influence of pressure groups behind book bans in the US crosses the Atlantic, according to those working in the sector.

圖書(shū)行業(yè)人士表示，隨著美國(guó)禁書(shū)活動(dòng)背后的壓力團(tuán)體的影響力跨越大西洋，要求英國(guó)圖書(shū)館下架圖書(shū)的請(qǐng)求數(shù)量正在上升。

Although “the situation here is nowhere [near] as bad, censorship does happen and there are some deeply worrying examples of library professionals losing their jobs and being trolled online for standing up for intellectual freedom on behalf of their users”, said Louis Coiffait-Gunn, CEO of the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals (Cilip).

英國(guó)特許圖書(shū)館與信息專業(yè)人員協(xié)會(huì)首席執(zhí)行官路易斯·科菲特-岡恩表示，雖然“這里的情況遠(yuǎn)沒(méi)有那么糟糕，但審查制度確實(shí)存在，而且有一些令人深感擔(dān)憂的例子——圖書(shū)館專業(yè)人員因?yàn)榇碛脩艟S護(hù)知識(shí)自由而失去工作，并在網(wǎng)上遭到騷擾。”

Ed Jewell, president of Libraries Connected, an independent charity that represents public libraries, said: “Anecdotal evidence from our members suggests that requests to remove books are increasing.” The School Library Association (SLA) said this year has seen an “increase in member queries about censorship”.

代表公共圖書(shū)館利益的獨(dú)立慈善機(jī)構(gòu)“連接圖書(shū)館”的主席埃德·朱厄爾說(shuō)：“來(lái)自我們成員的軼事證據(jù)表明，要求下架圖書(shū)的請(qǐng)求正在增加?！睂W(xué)校圖書(shū)館協(xié)會(huì)表示，今年“會(huì)員對(duì)審查制度的詢問(wèn)有所增加”。

Most of the UK challenges appear to come from individuals or small groups, unlike in the US, where 72% of demands to censor books last year were brought forward by organised groups, according to the American Library Association earlier this week.

英國(guó)遭遇的大多數(shù)挑戰(zhàn)似乎來(lái)自個(gè)人或小團(tuán)體，不像美國(guó)，美國(guó)圖書(shū)館協(xié)會(huì)本周早些時(shí)候的數(shù)據(jù)顯示，去年有72%的圖書(shū)審查要求是由有組織的團(tuán)體提出的。

However, evidence suggests that the work of US action groups is reaching UK libraries too. Alison Hicks, an associate professor in library and information studies at UCL, interviewed 10 UK-based school librarians who had experienced book challenges. One “spoke of finding propaganda from one of these groups left on her desk”, while another “was directly targeted by one of these groups”. Respondents “also spoke of being trolled by US pressure groups on social media, for example when responding to free book giveaways”.

然而，有證據(jù)表明，美國(guó)活動(dòng)組織的工作也正在影響英國(guó)圖書(shū)館。倫敦大學(xué)學(xué)院圖書(shū)館和信息研究副教授艾莉森·?？怂共稍L了10位經(jīng)歷過(guò)圖書(shū)挑戰(zhàn)的英國(guó)學(xué)校圖書(shū)管理員。其中一人“談到在她的辦公桌上發(fā)現(xiàn)了其中一個(gè)組織的宣傳材料”，而另一人“直接成為其中一個(gè)組織的目標(biāo)”。受訪者“還談到在社交媒體上受到美國(guó)壓力團(tuán)體的騷擾，比如在回應(yīng)免費(fèi)贈(zèng)送書(shū)籍時(shí)”。

It is “certainly possible that the scale of censorship we’re seeing in the US will influence the debate over here”, said Jewell. However, the level of influence to date is far from clear, particularly because the nature of censorship requests in the UK seems to differ from those brought forward in the US.

朱厄爾說(shuō)：“我們?cè)诿绹?guó)看到的審查規(guī)模當(dāng)然有可能影響到這里的辯論。”然而，迄今為止的影響程度還遠(yuǎn)不清楚，特別是因?yàn)橛?guó)審查要求的性質(zhì)似乎與美國(guó)提出的審查要求不同。

Censorship by pupils in UK schools, including “vandalising library material, annotating library books with racist and homophobic slurs”, and damaging posters and displays was identified in Hicks’ study, which she wrote about in the spring issue of the SLA’s journal, The School Librarian. Such censorship “is not something I have seen in the US”, she said.

?？怂沟难芯堪l(fā)現(xiàn)，英國(guó)學(xué)校的學(xué)生進(jìn)行審查，包括“破壞圖書(shū)館資料，在圖書(shū)館的書(shū)中注釋種族主義和恐同言論”，以及破壞海報(bào)和展覽。她在學(xué)校圖書(shū)館協(xié)會(huì)的雜志《學(xué)校圖書(shū)管理員》的春季刊上刊登了這篇研究文章。她表示，這種審查制度“我在美國(guó)從未見(jiàn)過(guò)”。

The types of books targeted may also differ. “Almost all the UK attacks reported in my study centred on LGBTQ+ materials, while US attacks appear to target material related to race, ethnicity and social justice as well as LGBTQ+ issues,” said Hicks.

針對(duì)的圖書(shū)類型也可能有所不同。?？怂拐f(shuō)：“在我的研究中，幾乎所有對(duì)英國(guó)的攻擊都集中在LGBTQ+材料上，而對(duì)美國(guó)的攻擊似乎都是針對(duì)與種族、民族、社會(huì)正義以及LGBTQ+問(wèn)題有關(guān)的材料。”

While the study was small, the “LGBTQ focus of book challenges was undeniable”, wrote Hicks. Challenges were levelled against Alice Oseman’s Heartstopper series, about the love story of two British schoolboys, and “coded” narratives in books such as Billy’s Bravery by Tom Percival, about a boy who wants to dress up as his favourite superhero, Nature Girl.

?？怂箤?xiě)道，雖然這項(xiàng)研究規(guī)模很小，但“圖書(shū)挑戰(zhàn)對(duì)LGBTQ的關(guān)注是不可否認(rèn)的”。愛(ài)麗絲·奧斯曼的《驚心動(dòng)魄》系列小說(shuō)講述了兩個(gè)英國(guó)男學(xué)生的愛(ài)情故事，湯姆·珀西瓦爾的《比利的勇敢》講述了一個(gè)男孩想打扮成他最喜歡的超級(jí)英雄“自然女孩”的故事。

This supports the findings of an Index on Censorship survey last year, in which 28 of 53 librarians polled reported that they had been asked to remove books from library shelves, many of which were LGBTQ+ titles. In more than half of those cases, books were taken off shelves.

這支持了去年一項(xiàng)審查指數(shù)調(diào)查的結(jié)果，在接受調(diào)查的53名圖書(shū)館員中，有28人報(bào)告說(shuō)，他們被要求從圖書(shū)館書(shū)架上撤下書(shū)籍，其中許多是LGBTQ+的書(shū)。在半數(shù)以上的案例中，書(shū)被下架了。

However, a 2023 study by Cilip, which found that a third of UK librarians had been asked by members of the public to censor or remove books, did identify themes of race and empire as among the most targeted, along with LGBTQ+.

然而，英國(guó)特許圖書(shū)館與信息專業(yè)人員學(xué)會(huì)在2023年的一項(xiàng)研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，三分之一的英國(guó)圖書(shū)館員曾被公眾要求審查或刪除書(shū)籍，并將種族和帝國(guó)主題列為最受攻擊的目標(biāo)，還有LGBTQ+。

While there may be differences in how the challenges are playing out, “this should not take away from the huge impact these attacks are having” in the UK, said Hicks. “My research demonstrates that UK school librarians are facing equivalent levels of distress and hostility in the face of book ban challenges such as these.”

?？怂拐f(shuō)，盡管這些挑戰(zhàn)如何發(fā)揮作用可能存在差異，但“這不應(yīng)抹掉這些攻擊在英國(guó)造成的巨大影響。我的研究表明，面對(duì)此類禁書(shū)挑戰(zhàn)，英國(guó)學(xué)校圖書(shū)館員面臨著同等程度的痛苦和敵意?！?/b>

In the US, book banning measures have been enacted across a number of states in recent years. “Library leaders in the UK are paying close attention to what’s happening in the US and there’s definitely a strong feeling of solidarity with American librarians,” said Jewell. Coiffait-Gunn of Cilip added that the profession “l(fā)ooks on with deep concern at the increasingly polarised and political debate” in the US about “what people, especially children, are allowed to read”.

在美國(guó)，近年來(lái)許多州都頒布了禁書(shū)措施。朱厄爾說(shuō)：“英國(guó)圖書(shū)館的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)們正密切關(guān)注著美國(guó)正在發(fā)生的事情，他們與美國(guó)圖書(shū)館員們絕對(duì)有一種強(qiáng)烈的團(tuán)結(jié)感?！?英國(guó)特許圖書(shū)館與信息專業(yè)人員學(xué)會(huì)的科菲特-岡恩補(bǔ)充說(shuō)，該行業(yè)“深切關(guān)注美國(guó)關(guān)于人們，尤其是兒童，被允許閱讀什么的日益兩極分化的政治辯論”。

One cause for concern in the UK is the “l(fā)ack of robust evidence” about how widespread censorship is, said Coiffait-Gunn. “It’s hard to evidence what doesn’t happen and which books are not available.” The government does not tally how many school libraries or librarians there are, “l(fā)et alone track book bans”.

科菲特-岡恩說(shuō)，英國(guó)擔(dān)心的一個(gè)原因是“缺乏強(qiáng)有力的證據(jù)”證明審查有多普遍?！昂茈y證明什么沒(méi)有發(fā)生，哪些書(shū)沒(méi)有?！闭疀](méi)有統(tǒng)計(jì)有多少學(xué)校圖書(shū)館或圖書(shū)管理員，“更不用說(shuō)追蹤圖書(shū)禁令了”。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處


Most UK libraries follow the Cilip ethical frxwork, which states that published materials should not be restricted on any grounds but the law, said Jewell. “That gives them the confidence and assurance to reject demands” for censorship.

朱厄爾說(shuō)，大多數(shù)英國(guó)圖書(shū)館都遵循英國(guó)特許圖書(shū)館與信息專業(yè)人員學(xué)會(huì)道德框架，該框架規(guī)定，除了法律之外，出版材料不應(yīng)受到任何理由的限制?！斑@給了他們拒絕審查要求的信心和保證”。

“What we must guard against is a climate where libraries avoid stocking certain books – or holding talks or activities – for fear of negative publicity, threats or intimidation,” he added. “It’s vital that libraries feel able to provide access to a wide range of perspectives if they are to facilitate the free exchange of ideas.”

他補(bǔ)充說(shuō)：“我們必須警惕的是，圖書(shū)館因?yàn)楹ε仑?fù)面宣傳、威脅或恐嚇而避免儲(chǔ)存某些書(shū)籍——或舉行講座或活動(dòng)。如果圖書(shū)館想要促進(jìn)思想的自由交流，那么讓它們覺(jué)得能夠提供廣泛的視角是至關(guān)重要的?！?br />