The United States, books and censorship: a sign of malaise

In early July, the National Association of Librarians in the United States launched a campaign to unite citizens in the fight against any form of book banning. In 2023 alone, over 4,200 volumes were removed from public shelves in conservative states. Vincenzo Matera, a lecturer in Social History of Culture at Università della Svizzera italiana (USI), addressed this issue in an interview published in the pages of Corriere del Ticino.

Vincenzo Matera points out that the censorship attempts reported in the USA are not surprising. "We are not talking about something new. Books have always stirred up conflicts of this kind. Quite simply, they contain ideas. Ideas fuel thought and are therefore considered, also in their symbolic value, as tools that can give rise to critical perspectives. In fact, critical thinking is mainly nurtured through reading." Hence, throughout history, the frequent attempts to keep books under control. "Before the invention of the printing press, the Catholic Church exercised, as far as possible, strict supervision over books, which were mainly produced in monasteries and a few universities. After Gutenberg, everything became a bit more complicated. Printing made it possible for any publisher to decide to publish a text. This led to the creation of the Index Librorum Prohibitorum by Pope Paul IV, Gian Pietro Carafa, in 1559". An index, moreover, much more up-to-date than one might think. "It was updated until very recently, the last time in 1959, and abrogated by the Second Vatican Council only in 1966," Matera points out. "We are not discussing a new phenomenon. In today's globally connected society, attempting to censor books is inherently ineffective."

How should we interpret the current events in the United States? "The campaign launched in July should be evaluated based on its symbolic significance rather than its concrete impact. Although it may not be effective in producing real change, it serves as an important tool for groups and movements fighting against censorship. It is also useful for promoting certain political agendas and gaining visibility. However, in a global society, censorship is unlikely to be effective unless there are strict control mechanisms in place, as seen in countries like China or Iran." To conclude, Matera points out that "these attempts are a sign of a certain malaise in the level of democracy in a country. They arise and assert themselves when there are groups that want to impose their vision on others. Throughout history, obscurantism has never led to positive outcomes. Whenever a single vision has been imposed in a society or within a community, the results, over a longer or shorter period of time, have always been disastrous. Embracing diversity, engaging in open dialogue, and allowing the circulation of different ideas are essential for a thriving society. We must never forget this".

The PDF of Professor Matera's interview is available in the attachment (Italian only)