The recent recant by Alex Malarkey of the events in the book
The Boy Who Came Back from Heaven,
also prompted a discussion at EPL. We
discussed books that have been recalled by publishers, recanted by authors, or
proved to be inaccurate. What should
libraries do with these books?
Our decision was to leave the decision up to the individual
selectors, who use our collection development policy to make decisions. This is a case where having a good selection development
policy is very important. Criteria for
selecting materials to add (or keep) in our collection include reputation of
publisher and author, accuracy of information, including a diversity of
perspectives, and demand by library users.
In the case of The Boy
Who Came Back from Heaven, although the reputation of the author and the
accuracy of the information have been questioned, we felt that the controversy
over the book might cause demand. I
believe the selector decided that the book would be left in the collection
until it was no longer circulating and then weeded. I did note the irony of the author's name. I remember my Mom telling me more than once that I was full of malarkey!
In the case of James Frey’s A Million Little Pieces, the publisher actually reissued the book with
a disclaimer. Our copy, however, does
not include the disclaimer. It will most likely stay on the shelf as it
still circulates. The Jefferson Lies by David Barton has been pulled by its
publisher, Thomas Nelson because several of the claims have been proved to be
false, and Charles Pellegrino’s The Last
Train from Hiroshima has been pulled by Henry Holt and Company because of
fraudulent sources.
Several alternatives for what to do with these books were
discussed. Should we add our own
disclaimer at in the front of the book?
We decided against this as it was felt we should not change a book. Should we purchase the publisher’s version
with the disclaimer? This wasn’t felt to
be a good use of library funds for a book that is no longer a bestseller, and
is widely known to be fabricated. Also, most of the books were just pulled by the publisher, not reissued with disclaimers. We even discussed making a “backroom” (or
bathroom) collection of books that have been debunked! In the end, I guess they’ll have their
fifteen minutes of fame and then be weeded because they don’t have what it
takes to remain in the collection.
It does present an interesting problem when an author is proven to have lied. But, as something like this becomes public, people's interest in the book and author may very well increase rather than decrease. I suspect more people will want to come to the library to look at the book.
ReplyDeleteThe public library is not in the business of determining whether or not an author is telling the truth or not. The public library is in the business of housing and organizing its contents. Readers decide if they want to read what is available.
I am glad to read that EPL opted to wait until the interest in Malarky's book diminishes before removing it from the collection.
You and Jeff both brought up a good point--sometimes the controversy surrounding a title actually increases the circulation. While we should not deny our patrons the right to read these books, we do control decisions about where we put them in the library. A Million Little Pieces, for instance, could be moved from the biography/memoir area in non-fiction to the fiction section--as it is a work of fiction.
ReplyDeleteYes, you're right - we're not in the business of determining truth, just housing and organizing. If the publisher pulls the book, how else will people who wonder what the fuss is all about find a copy?
ReplyDelete