173. Memorandum From the Assistant Secretary of State for Educational
and Cultural Affairs (Frankel) to
the Director of the United States Information Agency (Marks)1
Washington, December 29, 1967
SUBJECT
- Interagency Book Committee’s Review of Overseas Posts’ Responses
to the National Policy Statement on International Book and Library
Activities
The Interagency Book Committee has just completed a review of the
overseas posts’ responses to the national policy statement on
international book and library activities approved by the President last
January.2
One point that recurs in responses from all areas of the world raises a
basic policy question which has long been a matter of concern to me.
That is the policy which governs the operation of the USIS libraries overseas. I recognize that
USIA has a special mission to
perform. I suspect, however, that USIA’s objectives would be better served in the long-run by a
broader and less propagandistically oriented library policy. I believe
that it is in our national interest to support libraries overseas which
give a very broad view of the United States and of its connections to
and roots in Western and world civilization.
I reiterate this belief at this time because, quite independently of what
I think myself, it has been stated by a number of our foreign service
officers responsible for book and library programs overseas in their
responses to the President’s policy statement. All of them have had a
much greater opportunity than I to observe at first-hand the effects of
the present narrow and restrictive policy.
The Embassy in Laos, for example, suggests that USIS libraries should “serve as showcases of the diversity
of ideas and of the role of critical commentary in a democratic and free
society. It believes that the national policy statement underlines the
necessity for eliminating polarized, doctrinaire book-shelf content
which robs libraries of their credibility and casts doubt on America’s
confidence in free inquiry.”
[Page 551]
The post in Niger recommends broadening the book selection policy of
USIS libraries. Pointing out that
the French, British and Italian libraries offer a much broader selection
of literary, scientific and other works, it offers this difference in
library content as one reason for the notion that USIS peddles propaganda. It suggests that
we should stock USIS libraries with
the best in American and world literature, and in Africa, furnish a
generous supply of books on Africa.
The post in Gabon suggests that we would “increase our readership if we
were able to offer a higher quantity and quality of books of a purely
cultural as opposed to a political ‘propagandistic’ character. This is
the policy pursued in the local French Cultural Center where the reader
can even find translations of American authors.”
The Embassy in Brazil believes that “USIS libraries should be showcases of the American library
system”, while the Embassy in Belgium states that the most vital service
the USIS library provides is “the
demonstration it offers daily to Belgians in all walks of life, that a
free society needs free access to ‘recorded knowledge in all fields of
human endeavor’.”
One further related point I should like to bring to your attention is the
general agreement in the responses of the European posts on the value of
having American libraries overseas, the importance of maintaining those
now in existence, and the desirability of opening new ones to replace
some of those that have been closed.
Attached is a list of pertinent quotations from post responses to the
national book and library policy statement.
Attachment
Paper Prepared in the Bureau of Educational and
Cultural Affairs, Department of State3
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM OVERSEAS POSTS ON WHAT THE ROLE
AND FUNCTION OF USIS LIBRARIES
SHOULD BE
LAOS: [The post] “suggests that USIA should study how USIS libraries can serve as showcases of the diversity
of ideas and of the role of critical commentary in a democratic and
free society. It believes that the policy statement underlines the
necessity for eliminating polar
[Page 552]
ized, doctrinaire book-shelf content which robs
libraries of their credibility and casts doubt on America’s
confidence in free inquiry. It believes this can be done without
endangering our national position vis-à-vis those totalitarian
contenders who practice a monolitic approach to libraries. It
suggests that the policy USIA now
follows in its choice of periodicals, which expose American thought
on issues of the day, can serve as a model for book selection
policies.”
NIGER: “The post recommends broadening the book selection policy of
USIS libraries. These
libraries are now stocked with certain kinds of books, generally
those which are “approved” and which are not controversial.
Comparing USIS libraries with
libraries supported by France, Great Britain or Italy, many readers
are likely to find there a broader selection of literary, scientific
and other works of the country which supports the library as well as
noteworthy works of other countries, either in translation or in the
original. This difference in library content may be one reason for
the notion that USIS peddles
propaganda. One may well ask whether in most African countries there
is a reason to have such comprehensive libraries, since only a
fraction of the population reads and writes. One answer could be
that this fraction contains the intellectual elite on whom political
leaders, some of whom may also be intellectuals, will rely to do the
work in the government, in education, in economic planning, etc.
Since these are primary target audiences, we should want them to
find books of real interest to them in our libraries. Once people
find in a library the things for which they are looking, they
eventually may get around to the books which we would like them to
read. Therefore, we should stock USIS libraries with the best in American and world
literature. In Africa we should furnish our libraries with a
generous supply of books on Africa. . . .”
KENYA: “If [USIS libraries] are to
be models of today’s library service, emphasis will have to be
placed on having an American library staff. Reference collections
should be stressed, book collections widened and made more balanced,
up-to-date techniques employed and appearances modernized. These
factors are important for . . . our country continues to be regarded
as the most modern in the world, and our libraries should reflect
the modern concept of library service.”
GABON: “Even if one aim of our international book and library
program, namely the promotion of readership in England, can hope to
have only very limited success, this should not discourage us from
pursuing our main objective, which should be the development in
francophone areas of a readership for American authors and an
appreciation for American values and techniques. . . . Important
[for this] is the provision of adequate French translations of the
latest publications in the world of American fiction and
non-fiction. We would increase our readership if we were able to
offer a higher quantity and quality
[Page 553]
of books of a purely cultural as opposed to a
political “propagandistic” character. This is the policy pursued in
the local French Cultural Center where the reader can even find
translations of American authors.”
BRAZIL: “USIS libraries should be
showcases of the American library system and should provide the best
of reference and technical service.”
BELGIUM: “The USIS Lincoln
Library’s most important contribution to [national book and library
policy] objectives lies in the fact of its existence, as an example
of American library science on foreign soil. For, in functioning as
an American library, it has something profound to say about
democracy and about the free access to information in a democratic
society. . . . The most vital service [it] provides in terms of the
[policy] objectives is the demonstration it offers daily to Belgians
of all walks of life: that a free society needs free access to
‘recorded knowledge in all fields of human endeavor.’”
SWEDEN: “It remains our opinion, often expressed through the years,
that books are basic to our country’s information program here, and
that the American library remains the exemplary and tangible symbol
of a free and open society which places value on fact, enlightened
opinion and free discussion.”
FRANCE: “It is in the area of providing libraries where French
students and others could enjoy maximum access to the best books on
American civilization . . . that USIA has made a major effort in the past. This effort
was substantially curtailed between 1963 and 1966 because of budget
cuts, and can only be restored through increased budget allocations.
. . . Ideally, there should be an American library in each
university center, staffed by American and French personnel. . . .
More realistically, depending on funds, one or more such libraries
could be established by USIS in
the highest priority university cities. . . . Should funds and
personnel essential for opening new branch libraries be available,
the Post could develop an order of priority . . . and could
undertake to establish one or more libraries designed to serve both
U.S. and French interests.”
SPAIN: “Centers in Bilbao and Sevilla were closed several years ago
and the book collections given to area universities. Valencia’s
center remains a USIS
responsibility, but no funds are available for its support. . . .
This is plainly short-sighted, for Spain is at a stage when the flow
of current reliable information and contemporary scholarship is
essential to the growing, discontented generation. The Post is sadly
aware that it cannot do everything, but wishes it could at a minimum
maintain its purpose and responsibility in Spain’s three major
cities. . . . This means money and support for the faces of the U.S.
represented by the study and information centers. It is very
difficult to explain to young Spaniards, or to anyone, that the U.S.
does not have enough money for such things.”
[Page 554]
AUSTRIA: “The objectives of the Directive, the Post’s country plan
objectives, and specific needs of top priority target groups would
all be served by measures increasing the availability of American
books [in America House Libraries]. . . . The Post is making a study
to determine staff, funds, and space involved in reconversion of the
America House Reference Library [in Vienna] to a lending
library.”
ITALY: “Thought might be given to the involvement of American
libraries, both public and private, in the sponsorship and
management of individual American overseas libraries as a part of
their normal programs. American librarians could be rotated abroad
under a system integrated with the sponsoring American library or
library association. The overseas American libraries would be shaped
to the needs of the community—sometimes the emphasis could be on a
free, open public library, sometimes on a research library—and the
sponsoring library, or group, in the United States selected
accordingly. Necessary governmental support could be
contractual.
