Sometimes collection development isn't easy....

Whilst I work with a team of others to select titles for our library, I do however, possess the final say in all selections and purchases. It's my job and we have limited funds. I am constantly saying "yes" to some titles and "no" to others all based on a whole myriad of considerations. This is what collection management and development entails.

So when a book was recently suggested to me for the library to buy which is basically about a married school teacher in a suburban US town who has a singular sexual obsession with 14 year old boys - "It is a craving she pursues with sociopathic meticulousness and forethought, her sole purpose in becoming a teacher is to fulfil her passion and provide her access to her compulsion” - I said 'no'.

I found myself quite distressed by the synopsis of the book. I tweeted about it. One of my friends commented that she'd once been offered a self-published non-fiction title on incest for her library to buy. Though the particular title she'd been offered was completely lacking in academic rigour or literary merit and so was rejected, she made a rather significant point - "as one of the last societal taboos, surely accurate and non-sensationalist discourse would be valuable?" I tend to agree with the sentiment. 

I considered what GoodReads readers had to say about the book in question. The ratings and the comments vary from 0 stars right up to 5 stars. Comments also range from praise of the writer's skill in presenting a distinctly horrible character to those who lambasted it as nothing more than sensationalist pornography..
This sort of blurring the lines is evil. If I could do it over again, I'd have stayed away, just to avoid the corrosive effect that desensitization has been proven to have on our psyches. At the very least, I implore you, don't let your kids read it, even your "mature" ones. (Recynd)

The range of comments went on to raise the issue of how a particular crime is viewed not only in society but also in different countries.

This made me curious as to what our very own Crimes Act 1900 No. 40 has to say - not just about the kind of behaviour being portrayed but also the fact of the physical presence of the book in bookshops...

Sections 66A - 77 cover the whole gamut of sexual offences relating to children.
Section 91FB describes child abuse material as any "material that depicts or describes, in a way that reasonable persons would regard as being, in all the circumstances, offensive ... a person who is, appears to be or is implied to be, a child engaged in or apparently engaged in a sexual pose or sexual activity (whether or not in the presence of other persons)."
This section goes on to state that "the matters to be taken into account in deciding whether reasonable persons would regard particular material as being, in all the circumstances, offensive, include:(a) the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults, and (b) the literary, artistic or educational merit (if any) of the material, and (c) the journalistic merit (if any) of the material, being the merit of the material as a record or report of a matter of public interest, and (d) the general character of the material (including whether it is of a medical, legal or scientific character)".
91H describes the penalty for production, dissemination and/or possession of said material to be a maximum of 10 years.

Does the book depict acts of child abuse as per the Crimes Act 1900? Yes. 
Am I a reasonable adult to be offended by it? Yes.
Does the book have any literary, artistic, or educational merit? No. Do any of the characters in the book participate in sexual offences against children? Yes. Do these characters actively pursue this activity? Yes. Do they know it is wrong? Yes. Does that stop them? No. Do they consider murder in order to hide their crime? Yes. Are they sexually interested in any kinds of sexual partners other than children of a certain age? No. (Note: I am basing my answers here on the majority of comments I read on GoodReads).

The book in question does not have graphic images but it does explicitly detail sexual activities between an adult and a child that leaves little to the imagination. The adult protagonist actively seeks out children of a certain age bracket and does not appear to be interested in these children as they mature. Based on what the Crimes Act 1900 tells me this is both behaviour and the presentation of behaviour that is a crime in Australia. Indeed there is a very good paper by Kylie Miller, Senior Analyst with the National Crime Authority, which considers the nature and definition of a paedophile. So, considering all these elements it could be fair to say that the library buying this book and making it available to the general public would constitute a breach of the Crimes Act. It's probably a good thing I said 'no' then isn't it.

It will be interesting to see how this book progresses through the Australian literary scene. We're a pretty forgiving lot, open to reading about all sorts of subjects, but I truly query whether this 'debut novel' is worth the paper it has been printed on.


On a final note, this is my own personal opinion. It is based solely on my interpretation of the reviews available on GoodReads and my interpretation of the Crimes Act 1900. I do not believe that having a list of 'banned books' is in any way shape or form a good idea. Nor do I believe that content which is extremely offensive to a reasonable person is a good way to get people's attention and change the social mindset that all paedophiles are male. If this were a Non-Fiction title which enabled " accurate and non-sensationalist discourse" I would be all for it - but it's not.