National Library of Scotland censors The Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht

I know! Hence my frustration the semantic rhetoric around the world play ban/ withdrawal is doing my head in. TRAs are arguing the it wasn’t banned because it is in the collection, or will be and by that I mean the National Libraries entire collection of books. Which is a very different entity from the exhibition and whilst it wasn’t banned from the big collection, which is not possible to access without process, it was most definitely banned from the exhibition.

whikst the distinction between words might feel unimportant in the scheme of things this word play is currently holding sway and undermining the point very successful. When significant GC folk like John Pike argue with TRAs conceding it wasn’t a ‘ban’ but a ‘withdrawal’ he concedes a point that is all important the evidence no longer matters as their rhetoric becomes, as it is, the book was never banned.

I know that is not true but I want people to argue the point that it was a ban because the exhibition and the collection are not the same so inclusion from one does not automatically remove the idea of ‘ban’ from the other.

Reading the FOIs it sounds like Shah has been the driving force behind the ban

'Banned Books Week UK is led by Index on Censorship as a parallel campaign to Banned Books Week in the USA. It ran successfully for a couple of years prior to the pandemic and is re-launching in 2025. Index invites booksellers, libraries, literary organisations, publishers, schools, writers and any other organisations interested in getting involved with the campaign. The aim of Banned Books Week UK is to become a truly nationwide campaign. Follow us on X.'

This is a great spot Arabella. Should we all nominate TWWWW?

Name changed for this; I know NLS inside out. Be in no doubt, the stakeholders that they are so scared of are their paymasters, the Scottish Government. Also, believe me when I say the vast majority of the staff are normally very supportive of Amina Shah, who has been a transformative and thoughtful boss, and those staff deplore the actions of the tiny faction who have backed her into a corner on this issue by threatening disruptive action.

These issues will continue to happen in the Scottish public sector unless and until the Scottish Government holds its hands up and says it was wrong to impose Stonewall law throughout the sector. It seems unlikely that will happen any time soon, unfortunately.

Yes it's only a ban from the exhibition not the library. That's still a ban.

Anyway NLS thought hard and decided that seriously pissing off contributors including three MSPs, a journalist, and J K Rowling (by my current count) just didn't count as a big enough risk.

Wonder what they do for an encore.

Will these organisations never learn? One after another the Post Office, NHS Fife and now the NLS ships have sunk while the hapless CEOs and Boards were 'protecting their reputation'
I've used the NLS for academic research for many years and am shocked at their craven lack of principles, just unforgivable.

I'm picturing copies turning up daily, like Harry Potter's invitation to Hogwarts ...

How unfortunate that the emails from the FOI directly contradict that assertion.

It has been deliberately, consciously excluded from the exhibition, despite fulfilling the criteria, having four public nominations, and despite the EqIA stating that 'the exclusion of this book could be regarded as an attack on women's rights and censorship of gender critical ideology'. The book had also passed a 'sensitivity check'.

The EqIA goes on to talk about the harmful impact on staff, public criticism, scrutiny from government, and other consequences and that excluding it may damage their reputation and public duty.

The staff network claimed including the book would cause 'severe harm' to staff.

Damian Barr is featured, despite his 'tittering sickly' joke about a transwoman who attempted and failed to commit suicide.

'On 28 May, Amina Shah produces a paper about her decision for the Chair of the Board, recommending WWWW is excluded ”not due to the content of the book itself or the views expressed, but to the potential impact on key stakeholders and the reputation of the Library.
There is a risk that they will withdraw their support for the exhibition and the centenary”. '

I mean there's 34 pages of emails (many of them redacted) and references to other meetings/calls about the decision to exclude the book, it isn't like it was taken fucking lightly.

At this point I'm thinking that shelling out £22 and sending them one would be money well spent. Supporting excellent wims and doing a little protest at the same time...😏

They could just pop out to the local Waterstones. There are 10+ copies in stock...

Jealous of your signed copy! Keep it secret, keep it safe!

Well they're not having mine! It's signed and all.

It's just shown up....

Oh poo indeed!

What was the pic of?

... including those at NSL making the decision about TWWWW it seems...

https://www.hive.co.uk/Product/Susan-Dalgety/The-Women-Who-Wouldnt-Wheesht/29932319

Hardback - paperback is out of stock on Hive, unfortunately.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Women-Who-Wouldnt-Wheesht/dp/1408720728/

Paperback available via the evil empire.

(I hope the image will appear soon)

Oh poo - I must have left the NLS just before they arrived!

One nice (but not surprising) fact from the exhibition- Harry Potter came top with 12 requests.

And a fun image from the display: (spot the librarian's name at the top)

Right. They've had at least three copies delivered to them since.

I'm wondering if we all keep sending copies to them directly they may manage to add it to the shelf.

Joanna Cherry posted on X the internal message from Amina Shah which seems to be deploying the same argument the TRAs are making the because it is available, or will be, in the collection itself it’s not banned.

But the exhibition is distinct from that collection and its withdrawal from that undeniably is a ban.

The fact it is not banned elsewhere doesn’t hold up. The public can access exhibitions but have to be readers to access the collection and it’s a process most won’t engage with so this is sophistry.

I’m frustrated that folk aren’t challenging that more and I have NO followers or anything useful to spark that challenge. Is anyone in here got friends with high followers who would challenge rather that accept that point. Even Jon Pike is accepting it by conceding withdrawal rather than ban.

exhibtion and collection are not one and the same.

Well one side can read a book. The other seems incapable of reading a book...

'Didn't arrive'.

Can we check the delivery notes and who has signed for what recently please?

Apparently TWWWW is not in the reading room and won't be available until January 2026! They really need to get to a book shop....

This is the second volume.

The first volume is hiding in the pile

(And currently the photos are hiding as well!)

A read-in vs a die-in (c.f. Nottingham this weekend) - sort of sums up the relative levels of maturity on both sides.