School librarians are being told to remove art books with ‘historic paintings of nudes’ in the latest censorship controversy revealed today.
The ‘insane’ trend was revealed by a delegate at the annual conference of the National Education Union (NEU), saying she had heard ‘many accounts’ of art books being cut.
It comes after a school librarian at Lowry Academy in Salford, Greater Manchester, revealed last week she had been forced to remove books deemed ‘inappropriate’ by management.
Bosses used artificial intelligence to earmark almost 200 books for removal, including George Orwell’s 1984 and Stephenie Meyer’s Twilight.
The school later admitted it had removed ‘a small number of books’ but said it had put the others back, into ‘age-appropriate categories’.
The Lowry Academy case prompted the NEU to pass an urgent motion yesterday to ‘fight censorship and defend librarians’.
The union said that although the woman in the original controversy is not part of the union, it wanted to protect its own librarian members from suffering a similar fate.
Proposing the motion, Kristabelle Williams, a member from Lewisham, said: ‘We cannot ignore the issues that this case has brought up.
‘We can take action as a union now to try to make sure it doesn’t happen again.’
She said the support of the union would give librarians the ‘confidence to not self-censor and resist the chilling effect that this case will cultivate’.
She added members fear there is now an ‘increased risk of external complaints’ and ‘hate campaigns’ about books in their libraries.
Also speaking during the debate was Laura Butterworth, a member from Tameside Greater Manchester, which is near Lowry Academy.
She said: ‘I’ve heard many accounts from librarians in my district, of them having to take art books off the shelves because they have historic paintings and sculptures of nudes, which is insane.
‘Literature is an art form, and we need to make sure we are not eroding it and we’re not censoring it.’
It is not clear which art books or artworks she was referring to.
Another member, Bernice Reynolds, said: ‘This is a direct attack on our educational values. Shrinking access to stories has never empowered a child.’
The union’s motion said: ‘No school librarian should fear losing their job for carrying out their professional role; they should be supported by their school and defended by their union.’
It resolved to ‘fight censorship’ and ‘develop toolkits’ for librarians and regional union representatives on how to deal with removal requests.
It also said AI should not be ‘used as a punitive tool’ to ‘sanction staff’.
Daniel Kebede, NEU General Secretary, said: ‘Any move to censor books in school libraries, based on misinformation and fearmongering, should ring alarm bells for all of us. The NEU is clear that this is not a path we are prepared to follow in the UK. Children’s access to a wide range of literature is a fundamental good that the NEU is proud to defend.’
The Lowry Academy case was revealed just over a week ago by the Daily Mail following an investigation from Index on Censorship, a charity which campaigns for freedom of expression.
The librarian, who Index did not name due to her being ‘vulnerable’, said the school asked AI to generate summaries justifying why 193 books were not suitable for pupils.
This included a graphic novel version of 1984, illustrated by Matyas Namai, with the AI-generated summary warning there were ‘themes of torture, violence, sexual coercion’.
Also on the list were Michelle Obama’s autobiography, Becoming, and romance novel The Notebook by Nicholas Sparks.
The librarian said she was put under a ‘safeguarding’ investigation – leading to her resignation – for allowing certain books in the library.
Responding to the allegations, spokesman for United Learning Trust, which runs the school, said: ‘It is not the case that books have been ‘banned’ by the school. Following concerns that a number of books within the library were neither age nor content appropriate, an audit was conducted.
‘Following this, books have been placed into age-appropriate categories and returned to the shelves. A very small number of books were deemed inappropriate even for older children due to their content and have been removed.’
