 |
| Me with my partner at the Christus in Salt Lake City. |
With my tremendous amount of privilege, it is my responsibility to inform myself and advocate for minorities, which includes confronting racism, misogyny, homophobia, transphobia, biphobia, and religious discrimination. As a librarian, the venue where I use my privilege is quite often the public library. A public library exists to serve the public, and the public is diverse. All members of a community deserve to be represented and valued in the library.
LGBTQ literature should not be separated from the general collection, and neither should it be identified with spine labels. What message does a library send when it separates out certain groups of books into their own "special places"? In my experience, there are three main results that stem from such a policy: 1) the pigeonholing of these works and the restriction of their limits, 2) the ostracism of these items and their readers, and 3) a lack of anonymity for patrons who choose to consult these items.
1. Pigeonholing
Pigeonholing is "a process that attempts to classify disparate entities into a limited number of categories" (Pigeonholing in Wikipedia, 2021). When we label a book as "LGBT literature," we assign it to a category. The National Coalition Against Censorship (n.d.) highlights the downfalls of this categorization, stating, "Calling a book 'gay-themed' or even 'LGBTQ-themed' doesn’t tell you much about it. In fact, it creates an artificial category.... [Books] under the label 'LGBTQ-themed' are really just books about everyday life. While they may have gay characters or address homophobia, those themes are often not central to the plot." When we pigeonhole a work, we reduce it to only one of its many aspects, to the detriment of its literary richness.
Discussing her decision as to the location of LGBT literature in her school library, library media specialist Vanessa Perez (2019) asked for input from her patrons: "While students wanted the books to be visible, they didn’t want the books segregated in a separate section or stickered with a rainbow. LGBTQ is not a genre. There are not queer romances, there are romances with queer main characters. There are not lesbian mysteries, there are mystery books with lesbian detectives. Trans students are not the only students who can or should read books with trans heroes." Just as a person is more than their sexuality, we do works of literature a disservice when we limit them to the sexuality of their characters or creators.
2. Ostracism
Have you ever felt different? I certainly have. I’m going out a limb here to say that I think most of us, if not all of us, have felt different at some point in our lives. And that’s not necessarily a bad thing. They say that variety is the spice of life, and I firmly believe that can be true. But sometimes being different is hard.
Imagine your difference from the norm resulted in insults and mean, unkind language. The society you live in teaches that your differences from everyone else are bad: shameful, unnatural, even disgusting. People will ask you to hide who you are so they don’t feel uncomfortable. Even if your family accepts you with your differences, there will almost certainly be relatives who don’t. You hear horrifying stories of people like you who have been physically attacked or even killed because of who they are.
How would you react? You might try to hide your differences, or wish them away. Your life could quite easily be filled with shame and fear. There are countless LGBT people who could tell our life stories. Many of us have learned pride and hope in the face of strife, and we have found a community that loves and accepts us. While our stories are certainly not all the same, most LGBT people share (at least in some degree) a legacy of shame in who we are, as a product of the society we live in.
 |
| Many of us have learned pride and hope. |
Only marginally better than banning it outright, separating LGBT literature from other fiction works creates a sense of otherness and alienation. It also implies that LGBT people should be separated from other people and denies us our humanity. Regarding the separation of LGBT children's materials to a "special location" away from the general collection, former librarian Kelly Jensen (2016) argues that this "sends the message that queer people aren't people. They're an issue." Jensen continues that this policy "tell[s] queer children and families, as well as those from families that aren’t, that they’re an issue that needs to be dealt with separately. That they’re not part of their own community."
By the same token, integrating the fiction collection can help all members of our community feel welcome and accepted. Hearing those stories enrich us all -- whether we are LGBT or not -- on our journey to finding who we are and embracing the rich diversity of our world.
3. Lack of Anonymity
How would you feel if everyone knew what books you were reading? What if everyone could see that you checked out a book on how to file for divorce, or how to leave an abusive relationship, or how to improve your sex life?
Certainly there are topics that should be allowed the dignity of privacy, and sexuality is certainly one of them. The right to privacy is a fundamental building block of public libraries, and isolating or labelling LGBT materials can cause a breach of privacy. Amanda Wilk, a branch manager at Kitchener Public Library, notes that "identifying books with LGBTQ+ labels may prevent library users from accessing them for fear of being outed" (Open Shelf, 2018).
The toolkit "Open to All" by the American Library Association Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Round Table (n.d.) states, "In any community, there are GLBT persons who are not ready to be recognized as such.... People who are 'in the closet' or questioning often need information resources the most, so it is essential to provide safe and anonymous access, without judgment" (p. 2). It continues, "Interfiling GLBT materials can be a positive move for libraries; when these materials are placed alongside other books and materials, GLBT users feel welcomed" (p. 6).
******
These same principles apply to several other groups of books, such as works by or about individuals with disabilities, of particular races or ethnicities, belonging to religious or political groups, etc. That is to say, given the inappropriateness of creating a separate LGBT section, it would be equally inappropriate to separate out a "Disabled People" section, a "Asians" section, a "Muslims" section, or a "Republicans" section.
However, the issue becomes somewhat more complicated when it comes to street lit. Librarian Rollie Welch (2011) asserts that "distinctions between street lit and mainstream fiction are evident. Street lit is a subgenre of fiction, similar to romance and western novels" (p. 266). He also argues against the grouping of street lit in a section of "African American fiction" or "black fiction," calling up the hypothetical of separating out works by Danielle Steel and Louis L'Amour into a section based on the author's race.
A library may separate or label its fiction collection according to genre if its intent is to "facilitate access by making it easier for users to locate resources" (American Library Association, 2015). However, the American Library Association (2015) warns against "[p]rejudicial labels [that] are designed to restrict access, based on a value judgment that the content, language, or themes of the resource, or the background or views of the creator(s) of the resource, render it inappropriate or offensive for all or certain groups of users" (2015). A label or a separate shelving location may be appropriate based on genre, including street lit, but the utmost care should be taken to prevent this labeling from relying on a value judgment about the content of the work or the background of the creator.
References
American Library Association. (2015, July 13). "Labeling systems: An interpretation of the Library Bill of Rights". Retrieved April 13, 2021, from http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill/interpretation/labeling-systems Document ID: 211cf21a-4164-b9e4-658b-35ef709f3e22
American Library Association Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Round Table. (n.d.). "Open to all: Serving the GLBT community in your library." Retrieved April 13, 2021, from http://www.ala.org/rt/sites/ala.org.rt/files/content/professionaltools/160309-glbtrt-open-to-all-toolkit-online.pdf
Jensen, K. (2018, October 13). "Queer phobia and the public library." Book Riot. Retrieved April 13, 2021, from https://bookriot.com/public-libraries-you-owe-your-queer-patrons-better/
National Coalition Against Censorship. (n.d.). "LGBTQ right to read resource guide." Retrieved April 13, 2021, from https://ncac.org/resource/krrp-lgbtq-content-right-to-read-resource
Open Shelf. (2018, April 3). "Respecting anonymity through collection development." Retrieved April 13, 2021, from https://open-shelf.ca/180403-respecting-anonymity-through-collection-development/
Perez, V. (2019, February 28). "Libraries can be LGBTQ-affirming spaces on school campuses." National Council of Teachers of English. Retrieved April 13, 2021, from https://ncte.org/blog/2019/02/libraries-can-be-lgbtq-affirming-spaces-on-school-campuses/
Pigeonholing. (2021, February 18). In Wikipedia. Retrieved April 13, 2021, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pigeonholing&oldid=1007536700
Welch, R. (2011). Everything street literature. Libraries Unlimited.
*Portions of this blogpost first appeared on Provo City Library blog.*