Contested Spaces: A Critical History of Canadian Public Libraries as Neutral Places, 1960–2020

Contested Spaces: A Critical History of Canadian Public Libraries as Neutral Places, 1960–2020 by Whitney Kemble. Sacramento, CA: Litwin Books & Library Juice Press, 2024.

Whitney Kemble, a librarian at the Scarborough Campus of the University of Toronto, has contributed an important work in the growing field of ‘critical librarianship’ about the contentious issue of ‘library neutrality’ in public library event bookings from 1960 to 2020. She has identified thirty-three controversial events held in Canadian public libraries using various resources, such as contemporary newspaper articles. Although eight gatherings were cancelled, the vast majority of events took place. There are too many episodes to discuss in this review; still, readers will likely remember more recent events, such as the 2017 cancellation by Ottawa Public Library of the controversial film, Killing Europe, which examined terrorist activities, street riots, a migrant crisis, and societal polarization. Another instance was Meghan Murphy’s 2019 presentation on gender identity at Toronto Public Library’s Palmerston branch, which sparked notable opposition from LGBTQ organizations. Her event did take place with protestors outside the branch and it highlighted different perspectives on TPL’s adherence to intellectual freedom (IF). Older readers likely remember Mississauga’s cancellation of its 1978 screening for the BBC film, The Naked Civil Servant, a depiction of a man’s gay lifestyle that was ‘ahead of its time,’ at least for the library board that countermanded the original decision to hold the event.

What do we learn from all these Canadian experiences? Defining neutrality in a liberal democracy is difficult—in Contested Spaces, we find references to ideas like impartiality, absence of bias, equality or equity of treatment, tolerance, even-handedness, objectivity, and indifference. Since the 1960s, librarians have been particularly vocal about embracing neutrality or fostering social responsibility in a community context. There is a tension in the neutrality-advocacy debate regarding librarian proactiveness rather than passivity or indifference on societal issues. The traditional stance supposes that the public library uncritically dispenses information or avoids inappropriate influence or improper advice. This philosophy was evident a century ago in  March 1919 when George Locke, TPL’s chief librarian, told the Toronto Star, “If people have enough intelligence to look on the two sides of the question they will have enough to know how to act, and our public libraries here teach this.” But of course, on certain societal values, such as literacy, racism, poverty, social justice for disenfranchised minorities, and the very nature of democracy, libraries cannot be value-neutral. I believe attaining neutrality is a laudable goal, but an unattainable ideal.

Indeed, the author concludes that the stance of IF adopted by Canadian library associations since the 1960s can be problematic. This policy maintains the right to hold, receive, and disseminate all points of view without restrictions, but, as Kemble notes, “the values of safety, inclusion, and diversity regularly are trumped by the values of intellectual freedom and freedom of expression in libraries” (p. 130). For many librarians, a neutral stance is necessary to maintain IF because this enables individuals to form their own ideas. The author critiques the ‘myth of neutrality’ and questions the prioritization of IF above other library core values, for example, social justice or social responsibility. For her, “community, relationships, and protecting those who are most vulnerable are the values I prioritize personally...” (p. 138).

Although the author links main opposition to neutrality with the formation of the American Library Association (ALA) Social Responsibility Round Table (SRRT) in 1969, to be sure, library neutrality was an issue even before the ALA adopted its Bill of Rights in 1939. This bill emphasized unbiased book selection, a balanced collection, and the statement that “library meeting rooms should be available on equal terms to all groups.” At the time, the ALA’s short-lived Progressive Librarians’ Council (est. 1939) opposed the concept of neutrality, a challenge renewed in the 1990s when the independent Progressive Librarians’ Guild formed in the United States and opened chapters in Canada. To be truly progressive, one must believe in the need to redress social inequities and de-prioritize neutrality. Many American librarians believe the SRRT falls short in this regard because its voice is muted in a large bureaucratize organization.

Also, concerning value-neutrality, it would have been helpful for Kemble to touch on the growing influence of the New Public Administration (NPA) theory that developed in the United States after the 1960s. Since this time, public managers in North America at all levels of government have given more emphasis to social equity alongside the more traditional concept of social equality. Equity recognizes that different levels of support for persons or groups should be provided to achieve fairness in service outcomes. Equality seeks to treat people in the same way regarding opportunities or rights, with less regard for their needs or differences. The two ideas overlap, but there is a difference between practicing ‘fairness’ and ‘sameness.’ The NPA rejected neutrality and stressed the ethical responsibility of public servants to stand against injustice and advocate for marginalized communities. Yet, this theory is rarely mentioned in the library literature.

Citizens’ Forum discussion at LPL, 1945

Fittingly, in terms of social responsibility, Kemble begins her history with the London Public Library’s 1960 decision to screen the American film, Iron Curtain Lands, in a park. Not surprisingly, at the height of the Cold War, some people objected to this post-Stalinist documentary. On this occasion, the event was postponed and rescheduled for viewing without further problems. London had been a leader in organizing and sponsoring events with groups since its new modernist-style library opened in 1941, featuring rooms and an auditorium for use by the public. The postwar era was an era of community based groups and clubs devoted to photography, books, National Film Board viewings, citizens’ forums, women, youth, music, fraternities or sororities, and a host of other local associations. Librarians were beginning to give more attention to community concerns rather than focusing on individuals.

However, the 1960s would introduce new social movements on a national and even international scale, focusing on nuclear disarmament, feminism, animal rights, environmental concerns, pro-life advocacy, civil rights, and bilingualism. These organizations formed local groups and emphasized contentious issues related to identity, human rights, free expression, and broader social problems, such as poverty. The tried-and-true adoption of neutrality allowed many librarians to believe they were insulated from controversial subjects comparable to career public servants. But in April 1962, their reticence was called out by a keen observer, J. Bascom St. John, in the Toronto Globe & Mail: “They have a mistaken idea that professional ethics in the book field requires them to preserve a discreet silence, or at any rate, a virtual inaudibility. There are a few welcome exceptions to this generalization, but what librarians need more than anything else is a new concept of dignity. Dignity is not submission; it is pride. It is not a masterful withdrawal, it is an absolute determination to be heard and respected.” It was in this societal environment that IF statements were finally adopted by library associations in Ontario (1963) and Canada (1966). These statements were primarily concerned with book selection and free expression, but the Canadian Library Association statement added the responsibility of libraries to facilitate “the right of expression by making available all facilities and services at their disposal.” IF was a step towards librarians seeing themselves as part of a social process of educating citizens by offering a wider range of resources and views.

Contested Spaces charts various issues that have challenged or bedevilled library authorities across the country for more than half a century: anti-communism, LGBTQ rights, environmental activism, Indigenous identity, anti-Muslim prejudice, drag queen story times, and anti-vaccine protestations, to name a few. Statistics for the book’s thirty-three events show that twenty-five events were allowed to proceed (76%), six events were cancelled by the library (18%), and two other events were dropped by the organizers (6%). The twenty-five events that were held usually embraced normative library statements upholding IF and library neutrality. The rationale for cancelled events also included the contravention of library anti-discrimination policy, security issues, or arguments related to unacceptable racial or controversial views, and hate speech.

In the case of the Mississauga 1978 film cancellation, the library responded by updating its policy on film selection and use. In 1990, Ottawa Public Library cancelled a lecture on reducing immigration and withdrawal of foreign aid because it was “inappropriate” (p. 14). The 2009 cancellation of events proposing to discuss assisted suicide in Vancouver was vetoed by the library because it received legal advice that it was a potential violation of the Criminal Code of Canada (p. 41–44). The public library in Saskatoon cancelled a speaker scheduled to speak on the matter of abortion due to its controversial nature, citing logistical safety concerns in 2017. The author notes this was an interesting decision because safety concerns trumped IF (p. 58). In the 2017 case of Killing Europe, the Ottawa library cited its stance vis-à-vis its internal anti-discrimination policy. Eventually, legal challenges upheld the library’s position because it was not legally obligated to protect IF when private events were held on its premises (p. 72). Although Vancouver originally approved Megan Murphy’s session on gender identity and feminism for March 2020 based on IF and neutrality, her event was called off due to COVID-19 closures. In terms of politics, Kemble designates four of these library decisions as a progressive force and two as conservative reaction (Mississauga and Vancouver in 2009). 

Contested Spaces closes by critiquing the reliance on the principle of IF and assertions of neutrality. Kemble believes that libraries too often reinforce the status quo of societal power imbalances by protecting ‘ideas over people.’ Although on occasion security and safety come to the fore in the decision-making process, too often values related to social justice are ignored or relegated to secondary consideration. This state of affairs does not fit with the author’s concept of progressiveness or value-neutrality: in many instances, neutrality can be a malleable concept. Nonetheless, the concept of neutrality is still a recognized value in library work because it espouses tolerance and accommodation of people and groups with different ideas and goals.

Whitney Kemble’s criticisms in her well-researched monograph stand out in a Canadian context and make us consider whether our current policies that uphold neutrality are adequate or a fruitless ethical search. Of course, progressiveness is not without its critics, but the author concludes that she is ready for these conversations (p. 39). Her publisher, Litwin Books & Library Juice, is known for its academic quality, and this book is a valuable addition to the debate on neutrality in a liberal democratic society, which no doubt will continue.

Additional sources:

My blog on the Canadian Library Association adoption of its intellectual freedom policy at Calgary in 1966 is at this link.

A YouTube video news report of the protest in support of the transgender community against controversial speaker Meghan Murphy’s appearance at the Palmerston Branch is at this link.