Worth noting these are very individual "per local council" removals,
The analysis revealed that across the country at least 16 books were removed from library shelves in 11 councils following a single objection from a customer, parent or librarian.
for example:
In Hertfordshire a customer complained about the use of the racial slur “golliwog” in Briggs’s children’s book Fungus the Bogeyman (1977).
and so one particular edition was removed from just that local library to save a local resident from a joke about golliwog being offensive to humans.
Elsewhere:
Verne’s Five Weeks in a Balloon, which was written in 1863, was removed by Coventry Library Services after one customer complained about its “inappropriate and racist” language.
Again, one specific edition|translation from the French that went full naggers.
It's not the main UK "big libraries", it's:
Nonetheless, decisions on stock policy are made by each library independently with oversight lying with local authorities
and:
Of the 16 books removed from public libraries, eight were due to complaints regarding racist or divisive” language, three for “inappropriate” sexual or violent content, three for concerns about potentially damaging health advice and two for outdated information.
I dare say the editions removed found their way to other local libraries.
These feel like perfect examples of when banning them makes people MORE likely to read them and revive potentially offensive language (that many people have never ever even seen written or heard spoken). Not saying banning is the wrong answer per se. Just that it can seriously backfire
Raymond Briggs was being fully self aware using Golliwog, knowing that Enid Byton had used it in a thoroughly racist manner in The Famous Five childrens books:
The story follows one day in the life of a working-class Bogeyman whose job it is to scare human beings, who are referred to as Drycleaners, and the narrative hinges on the joke that Bogeymen enjoy all things humans find disgusting.
One illustration shows a puppet reminiscent of the traditional “golliwog” but with pink skin and yellow hair. The annotation reads: “Boggiewogs: The Bogey Golliwog. These are a caricature of pink Drycleaners. They always have huge blue eyes, rosebud mouths and curly blond hair.”
It's mocking the traditional (to that time) British use of Golliwog with a blue eyed racial stereotype doll ... making children question and puzzle over such things in a fun book about farts, slime, dirt, etc.
I wasn't aware of that particular backstory. But I suspected--before seeing the name explicitly mentioned--that Enid Blyton is probably one of the prolific authors that would trigger various alarm bells for some modern audiences.
highlights her use of golliwog .. although to be fair that's a Famous Five parody and her main use of the golliwog stereotype was in her Noddy book series (I got that part wrong in my comment above).
It all sheds some light on the whys and wherefors of the Mau Mau rebellion.
I've been vaguely amused on some recent trips to England that the Five are so prominent on Great Western's advertising posters. I've also seen some funny parodies like the Five on Brexit Island. https://www.amazon.com/Five-Brexit-Island-Bruno-Vincent/dp/1...
It's important to remember that it's only a book ban when initiated by the wrong people. If the right people do it, it's not a ban, and nothing to be worried about.
If anyone can veto content for a whole community, after that policy plays out is there any content left? It has become difficult to identity any human behavior that someone somewhere doesn't think is racist.
I think "banned" is inflammatory. These are individual books removed by a few libraries. As others have said, a fight could lead to unhelpful controversy. Wait a while and put them back would be my approach, and possibly theirs too.
Certainly the natural instinct (or at least mine) is that the books are what they are at the time they were published. However, it's also true that there are probably lots of terms, stereotypes, and just general attitudes throughout books for children and young adults from (especially) the past that wouldn't make it past a mainstream editor today. (Of of course some Disney and other cartoons as well.)
It's a handful of books in a handful of local libraries. Yes, it's dumb and shouldn't have happened, but there are far more important and insidious cases of thought cleansing that deserve more attention.
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/arts/article/books-banned-from-l...
https://archive.md/yQmiQ
Worth noting these are very individual "per local council" removals,
for example: and so one particular edition was removed from just that local library to save a local resident from a joke about golliwog being offensive to humans.Elsewhere:
Again, one specific edition|translation from the French that went full naggers.It's not the main UK "big libraries", it's:
and: I dare say the editions removed found their way to other local libraries.