Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

On Books, Censorship And Political Pressure

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • On Books, Censorship And Political Pressure

    ON BOOKS, CENSORSHIP AND POLITICAL PRESSURE
    Haroon Siddiqui

    Toronto Star, Canada
    March 16 2006

    Just as the din of the Danish cartoon controversy - with its arguments
    over freedom of speech, censorship and political or consumer pressures
    - was dying down, several others with similar echoes have hit the
    headlines.

    The Toronto school board has joined those in York, Essex and Ottawa
    in restricting access to a book about the Arab-Israeli conflict.

    The Ontario Library Association had included Deborah Ellis's Three
    Wishes: Palestinian and Israeli Children Speak in its list of 20
    Canadian books for a province-wide program that encourages reading.

    Students in Grades 4 to 6 will vote their choice in May for the Silver
    Birch Award (others being the Blue Spruce, Red Maple and White Pine
    awards for other age groups).

    But the Canadian Jewish Congress argued that the book is not suitable
    for young children, and called for its removal from the popular
    program.

    The librarians stood by their choice, backed by the Association of
    Canadian Publishers, the Writers' Union, the Playwrights Guild, PEN
    Canada and the Freedom to Read Committee of the Book and Periodical
    Council.

    PEN director Alan Cumyn asked the Toronto board if it would "restrict
    access to, for example, The Diary of Anne Frank or the more recent
    Hannah's Suitcase, which also deal with very dark subject matter,"
    i.e. the Holocaust. Both books "have helped inspire and educate
    countless children about the nature of our often difficult world."

    The age-appropriate argument, said Sheila Kauffman, owner of Another
    Story, a Toronto children's bookstore, is often a way of suppressing
    certain viewpoints.

    A similar conclusion was reached by Bernard Katz, a retired University
    of Guelph librarian, who had been asked by the library association to
    respond to the Jewish congress's analysis of the Ellis book. He wrote
    that the congress was reacting to "what they perceive as criticism
    of Israel's behaviour toward Palestinian civilians."

    Criticism of Israel is what prompted the New York Theatre Workshop
    to cancel My Name is Rachel Corrie. That's a British play about the
    young American student activist who in 2003 went to the Gaza Strip
    where she stood in front of an Israeli bulldozer to prevent the
    destruction of a Palestinian home and was crushed to death.

    James Nicola, the theatre's artistic director, said that in "talking
    around and listening in our communities in New York, what we heard
    was that (with) Ariel Sharon's illness and the election of Hamas ...
    we had a very edgy situation."

    Katharine Viner, co-creator of the play, accused the theatre of
    censorship and criticized its management for having "caved in to
    political pressure."

    The Los Angeles affiliate of PBS has cancelled a documentary on the
    Armenian genocide, and also a follow-up panel discussion, scheduled
    for airing on the network April 17.

    Two of the four panelists argue that while World War I-era massacre
    did take place, it was not a planned genocide by Turkey.

    The Armenian National Committee of America objected. The PBS affiliate
    in Los Angeles (home to more than 400,000 Armenian Americans) pulled
    the plug. An affiliate in Plattsburg (which beams into Montreal)
    said it would show the documentary but not the panel discussion.

    London Mayor Ken Livingstone has been suspended from his elected office
    for four weeks for comparing a Jewish reporter to a Nazi concentration
    camp guard. He has appealed the ruling by the Adjudication Panel,
    which deals with disciplinary cases at the municipal level. It had
    acted on a complaint by the Board of Deputies of British Jews, which
    offered this sensible summation on the verdict:

    "Had the mayor simply recognized the upset his comments had caused,
    this sorry episode could have been avoided."

    The House of Commons in Britain has passed a law banning groups that
    "glorify terrorism." Yet it rejected a bill prohibiting anything
    "abusive and insulting" to a religious group.

    The latter, characterized as a sop to British Muslims, was opposed
    by writers and artists concerned about their creative freedoms being
    curbed. The former, aimed at another group of Muslims, sailed right
    through, even though it, perhaps, threatens freedom of speech even
    more, given the vagueness of the language of the act.

    These examples have elicited vastly different official and public
    responses to a familiar challenge.

    Exposing this inconsistency may turn out to have been the more lasting
    legacy of the Danish cartoon caper.
Working...
X