To the Editor:

I spoke at the April 18 BOE meeting and my remarks are public record, so I will not rehash my statements. However, as an English teacher, I often impart upon my students the importance of diction and connotation in the close reading and evaluation of text and speech, and would like to provide some much-needed clarification on the meaning of some important words being bandied about.

First, pornography.

The definition of pornography has been defined in various ways by the courts for purposes of censorship, but it is generally agreed that pornography is, according to one ruling, “a visible material such as a photograph or videotape, including a material in electronic form, depicting a genital or other similar pornography which excites or stimulates sexual desire.” The main defining element of pornography in all the legal definitions is the intent to excite or stimulate. If you are forming an opinion on this topic but have not yet read the books in question, I encourage you to do so.

If you find any of the panels being shared on social media “stimulating,” you probably have a bigger problem you might want to address in therapy. The courts have, time and again, ruled that pornography is protected speech, and that “sexually explicit” content does not automatically equal pornography, especially not in the context of a larger story with a non-erotic narrative (which definitely applies to both Flamer and Blankets, the two texts currently in question).

The second word I’d like to discuss is banning. Those seeking to ban these books, and our BOE chair, have bristled at the idea of this discussion being called “book banning,” but that is exactly, precisely, legally what it is. The courts have ruled time and time again that once a text is put on a library shelf, it becomes protected speech.

Our BOE policy and the American Library Association guidelines for book selection both provide clear parameters for the selection of books, and they were followed in the case of the two books being discussed. Both are critically acclaimed, important examples of their genre, and provide unique and important viewpoints. When the books were challenged, and the BOE took up the responsibility for deciding on the removal of these books as outlined in the policy, they became a government body contemplating the prohibition of materials from general reading availability, or potential banners.

Library book challenge IS the number one way books are banned in the United States. There is no getting around this fact. We can’t soften it with semantics.

The case law on school library challenges has been settled and affirmed for over a century. I will save that for my next speech at the Board on May 2. But it is important that we understand the legal definitions we’re dealing with.

Sincerely,

Jacquelyn Kaplan

Sandy Hook