According to Tom Spurgeon, the library trustees voted against keeping the books on shelves (at least for the time being). More in the thread over at Alison Bechdel’s blog:
At the meeting tonight of the Marshall Public Library Board of Trustees, the Board President proposed that the board appoint a committee to revise the library’s materials selection policy. That proposal passed, but with at least one “no” vote. I was sitting in the back and could not see all the hands, so I don’t know how many voted against the proposal.
Here’s the problem, as far as I am concerned: While the committee works on a new materials selection policy, the two books (”Blankets” and “Fun Home”) will be removed from circulation. They will be unavailable. There was no mention of how long the process will take.
When the Board President asked which of the Board members wanted to serve on the committee, apparently most of the hands went up, because we heard her say, “Well, I guess the whole Board could be on the committee.”
There’s nothing yet at the Marshall Democrat-News, but if I find anything specific that we can substantiate, I will report on it.
[UPDATE: A reader from Marshall notes that the books are "temporarily removed" as a materials collection policy is being drafted and that the case is at a standstill. The Marshall Democrat-News is an afternoon paper and I will update this post as more qualifying coverage comes in.]
Being Wrong by Kathryn Schulz: Being wrong, as it turns out, isn't just the other variable in a binary opposition. Indeed, the relationship between our beliefs and the vast body of knowledge is one of humanity's big problems, but, at times, one of its great virtues. This thoughtful volume outlines numerous examples of human folly, from end-of-the-world prophets to ocular misperception, and makes a strong case for becoming more transparent about human fallibility, even when the results can be quite deadly. (
The Invisible Bridge by Julie Orrigner: This sweeping epic, which has been rightly identified in some corners as a "Holocaust page turner," puts to rest any and all rumors that the historical novel is dead. Orringer's great talent for balancing fine Romantic details, a vigorous synthesis of prewar Paris and Magyar strife, and Nazi brutality demonstrates a remarkable evolution from her previous short story collection, How to Breathe Underwater, and makes this a must read. (
If I Loved You, I Would Tell You This by Robin Black: Forget Wells Tower. Robin Black's marvelous short story collection, which has been needlessly ignored by The New York Times and The Washington Post, is very much on the level: far better than anything written by that lumbering Young Turk. These subtle stories have the maturity to avoid belabored metaphors and neat conclusions, revealing numerous nuances about the human condition in its careful use of understated language. (
Don’t be so fatalistic; Mills hasn’t won anything yet. If the Marshall paper (which will be published this afternoon) confirms the story, which smells more like a delay tactic than a decision by the library board, the anti-censorship militia will likely rally around the authors. This is far from over.
Please go back to Alison’s blog and read MPL director, Amy Crump’s correction to one of the posts reporting on the meeting. The books are not banned, just temporarily removed while a materials collection policy is being written. Louise Mills has not won yet. It’s a draw.
In addition, you mentioned the Marshall paper. It is an afternoon paper. The online edition is usually there around 3 pm. (central time)