A recent overview in Publishers Weekly on: the state of free speech in the industry noted, “Many old book people have said that what makes the present unprecedented is a new impetus for censorship — and self-censorship — coming from the left.” When the reporter asked half a dozen influential figures at the biggest publishing houses for comment, only one wanted to talk – and only on condition of anonymity. “This is the censorship that, as the expression goes, dare not speak its name,” the reporter wrote.
The caution is based on recent experience. No publisher wants a different “american dirtimbroglio, which accused a highly anticipated novel of profiting from the migrant experience, no matter how well the book sells. No publisher wants the kind strike staff which took place at Hachette Book Group in 2020 when journalist Ronan Farrow protested his plan to publish a memoir by his father, Woody Allen.
It is certainly true that not every book deserves to be published. But those decisions should be based on the quality of a book as judged by editors and publishers, not in response to an imminent, perceived, or real political litmus test. The essence of publishing lies in taking risks, not avoiding them.
You understand why the publishing industry is getting nervous. Think about what happened to books that got on the wrong side of illiberal scolds. For example on Goodreads cruel campaigns have circulated against authors for accidental transgressions in novels that haven’t even been published yet. Sometimes the protest only takes place after a book is in the store. Last year, a rabbit in a children’s picture book got soot on his face from sticking his head in an oven to clean it – and the book was considered racially insensitive by a single blogger. It was reprinted with the image redrawn. All this after the book received rave reviews and a New York Times/New York Public Library Best Illustrated Children’s Book Award.
In another case, a white academic was charged with cultural appropriation because valfeminism, the subject of her book “Bad and Boujee” was beyond her own racial experience. The publisher subsequently withdrew the book. PEN America rightly denounced the publisher’s decision, noting that it “detracts from public discourse and contributes to a climate in which authors, editors and publishers are discouraged from taking risks.”
Books have always contained delicate and provocative material that goes against the sensitivities or deep-seated beliefs of some readers. But which material disturbances which people change over time; many stories of interracial collaboration that were once praised for their progressive values (“To Kill a Mockingbird”, “The Help”) are now criticized as “white savior” stories. Yet these books can still be read, appreciated and discussed – not only in spite of, but also because the offending material. If only to better understand where we started and how far we have come.