SLJ Talks to Pat Scales, expert witness in the Vamos a Cuba case
RSSThis article originally appeared in SLJâs Extra Helping. <a href="https://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/subscribe.asp">Sign up now!</a>
Joan Oleck -- School Library Journal, 08/23/2006
The contentious battle in Miami over K–2 children's book Vamos a Cuba (Heinemann Library, 2001)—and other titles in author Alta Schreier's 24-book "Visit to…" series—has now moved to the federal appeals level.
This past Tuesday, the Miami-Dade School Board voted 5-2 to appeal a federal district court's previous ruling allowing the books to stay on school library shelves, mostly in elementary schools.. The case will now go before the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta.
On one side of the controversy is the school board, on the other, the Miami chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Florida and the school district's Student Government Association (with support from the Florida Library Association). The debate springs from a Cuban-exile parent's complaint over the book's noncritical look at modern-day life in Castro's Cuba.
Though Vamos a Cuba went through the district's customary review process, the School Board rejected the group's recommendation and voted 6-3 in June to remove all 24 books. An opponent's motion for a preliminary injunction to halt this removal was subsequently heard (and later granted) in federal district court.
Testifying for the ACLU at the July 21 hearing was school librarian Pat Scales (right), a First Amendment issues spokeswoman for the American Library Association. Scales spoke with SLJ ahead of the school board's decision to appeal the preliminary injunction; the ACLU and Student Government Association also will likely file for a permanent injunction.
What did you think of the "Visit to…" series?
Some people in the Cuban community felt that it did not paint an accurate picture of Cuba because it did not mention Castro and the oppression under Castro. I looked at the entire series; I read them all. One of the points I made in my affidavit was that ages four to eight cognitively really don't "get" the concept of government. They are establishing their own place within the community; "community" may be their neighborhood, their town or city, or even their classroom in their school. But as far as a broader picture of government, they don't [have one]. So what the case was all about was what was omitted rather than what was included.
What else did the board object to about the Cuba book?
It said that in Cuba, for special festivals, men wear white pants and white shirts, and women wear bright-colored skirts with ruffles. And they said only the rich would do that. I raised the case in the affidavit that in Scotland—I did look at the book on Scotland—and guess what? They showed a kilt. Well, people in Scotland don't walk around in a kilt, and they're so expensive, mostly only the rich wear them unless they make their own.
During your testimony, what did the school board's attorney ask you?
They had an expert witness, a woman Ph.D psychologist who said that lying to children will cause them damage. And they claimed that by omitting information from these books, it was indeed a lie. So I put in my affidavit that in the case of children ages four to eight sometimes in a nonfiction work too much information can be more damaging than too little. And they kept going on to me about this: "Well do you think it's too much information to say that the children in Cuba are poor?" And I said no, but [that detail is] in the book. It says children go to school part of the day and work the other part. And it's in the pictures.
What did you testify to under rebuttal questioning by the ACLU's attorney?
I said, "Based on what I have observed in this courtroom today it appears to me that the reason the books were removed is because of the personal and political convictions of the adults and their [attempt] to inflict their own convictions on children and children's books."
What is your history as an activist on First Amendment issues?
It goes back to the early 1980s where I started a parent literature group [in Greenville], where we read and talked about the same books the children were reading. And it got discovered nationally; The Today Show came and filmed…I've always believed [that by] being open and talking to kids and listening to their opinions you really diminish problems with censorship. By allowing kids the freedom to read, you're allowing them the freedom to reject what they maybe aren't ready for.
What other books are the targets of current censorship efforts?
I did two on summer reading last week: One was in Rochester, NY; the book was Chris Crutcher's Running Loose (HarperCollins/Greenwillow, 1983). Another book was Life Is Funny by E. R. Frank (DK, 2000). That one happens to be in the Columbia, SC, area.
So censorship efforts are not a thing of the past?
I'd say they're getting worse. This the first time I've heard so much out of summer reading.
