Grandt, a librarian at the Brooklyn Technical High School, was forced to pay a $500 fine and admit in a three page stipulation that he had violated the city ethics code when he promoted his daughter’s new book. His daughter, Eve Grandt, had provided illustrations for a graphic novel of William Shakespeare’s Macbeth published by Wiley Publishing.
In the following article Grandt claims he was merely a proud father who wanted to show off his daughter’s work. In the bi-monthly library newsletter he is responsible for circulating Grandt wrote: “Best New Book: Grandt, Eve, Shakespeare’s Macbeth-The Manga Edition” written under the title “Grandt’s Picks.” He also used a library display table to exhibit several copies of the book with the sign “Best Book Ever Written,” gave away free copies of the book if people were interested, and donated a copy to the library. Grandt explained that he had donated many books in addition to his daughter’s and that he did not think that his actions crossed the line. He remarked “I am supposed to, as part of my job, display new books and encourage the kids to read new books…So here, I displayed my daughter’s book and encouraged the kids to read it and am told I had done something illegal.”
The Brooklyn Conflict of Interests Board sent Grandt a letter telling him he could lose his job and be stripped of his teaching license. They also wanted to impose a $1000 fine. Ultimately, Grandt negotiated the fine down to $500 and removed the books from the library display table; including the one he had donated.
The Board declined to comment on their reasoning for the case though Grandt claimed they alleged his daughter would get twenty cents in royalties per copy sold but he had given the copies away and it is unclear on how the conflicts board interpreted the ethics code in relation to Grandt’s case.
Did Robert Grandt’s actions really warrant the attention of the Conflict of Interests Board? Did they overstep a line themselves with such a harsh response? At what point does a father’s pride cross the line and become the pursuit of self interest? As future librarians and information specialists we have a responsibility to encourage people to read and to expose them to books both popular and obscure. Certainly Shakespeare’s Macbeth could not be exactly considered unnoticed and having it illustrated by a local artist might even be a source of pride for the community. So, we have a book, an accepted classic, illustrated by a talented local artist, donated to the library, even available for free if interested, but the problem lies with the librarian at the library happening to be a parent of the artist. This is a case of policy out of control.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
I personally feel on the fence about how this situation was handled. I understand completely that Grandt was proud of his daughter’s work and that he wanted to show it off. It is a good book; we actually have that particular copy at the library I work at as well as a few other Shakespeare Manga novels. However, what I don’t agree on is how Grandt marketed his daughter’s work. By putting up a sign next to the display that reads “best book ever” Grandt is misleading the library’s patrons. The question to ask here is if he would have given this novel the same promotion if his daughter hadn’t been the one to provide the illustrations.
I agree that his actions proved to be a conflict of interest in the sense that he was leading patrons to believe it was a great piece of work, not because he honestly thought so but because his daughter had a part in creating it. I’m sure there were other options available to him for promoting the novel that didn’t involve him using every avenue available to him to spout that it was the “best new book”.
However, even though his actions did require some type of ramification, I feel that wanting to possibly strip him of his teaching license and wanting to fine him $1000 is a bit harsh. The Brooklyn Conflict of Interest Board could have gotten their point across without threatening to ruin him as a teacher.
The main point of this post seems to be the actual reason why a particular book is being given recognition as being great. I’m sure that if Gradnt would have given the Shakespeare Manga novel the same type of promotion if someone else had done the illustrations this wouldn’t have been an issue, but that’s not the case. What is the case is the fact that a father who has power to review and recommend books to the public used his power to promote the new book that his daughter illustrated, and not because it was truly the next best thing but because he was proud of his daughter’s accomplishment.
Policy out of control indeed! Did it “benefit him personally”? It doesn’t sound like he was trying to make a profit since he did donate the books and even passed out free ones.
The book sounds interesting and would help Shakespeare appeal to the many graphic novels fans, the majority of which are teens. Of course, it would have been wiser for him to have a Shakespeare display and include this book. It does seem like blind pride took over in his actions.
Still, the punishment does not fit the crime, if there even was a crime. Even the board would not go into specifics. It appears that Grandt’s is an honest mistake in judgment and yet the board sounded closed to any defense he might want to present.
“The Board declined to comment on their reasoning for the case though Grandt claimed they alleged his daughter would get twenty cents in royalties per copy sold but he had given the copies away and it is unclear on how the conflicts board interpreted the ethics code in relation to Grandt’s case.”
To take away his teaching license and fine him $1000 is definitely overkill and will only create low morale in the library. Verbally telling him to tone it down with the multiple displays and “Best Book Ever Written” sign would have been enough.
This case is closely related to professional ethics. I remember when we discussed the banned books week in class, I was against promoting books for the only reason that they are banned. What if they are not good enough to be promoted? This is a very similar case, a librarian is promoting a book for the only reason that it is written by his daughter. Obviously, he was not objective when he used the sentence “Best Book Ever Written.” However, if the book followed the normal gift and exchange policies and procedures to reach the library’s shelf it will not be a problem.
On the other hand, I think that the Brooklyn Conflict of Interests Board overreacted by removing the book from the library’s display table and shelf. Even if the librarian’s act was considered unethical, the quality of the book should be taken into consideration and the book should be judged dependently and have the right to be available on the library’s shelf.
Also, I think that charging Grandt fines was not a fair decision because no profit was made from this book promotion. The book was donated to the library and free copies were offered to the patrons. However, a severe warning was necessary since the librarian disregarded his professional ethics and used his authority for personal purposes.
I agree with Trista – this is a tricky issue. I do think that it is worthwhile for librarians to promote certain titles that may be of particular interest to patrons. For high school students who may be reading Shakespeare and/or interested in graphic novels, it is a good choice to feature.
It is difficult to promote a title that does not hold some personal interest. I was at the library today and overheard a librarian talking to a patron with several books in his hands. She said, “I really like this author. You should try his book. I think you’ll like it too.” By using the patron’s selections, the librarian made a judgment call and recommended an additional title. This could be very helpful and time-saving for patrons.
I think that Grandt was trying something similar. It would have been more appropriate for him to do a Shakespeare themed display with his daughter’s book as one of the titles. He could have also created a graphic novel display.
I wonder if the Conflict of Interests Board would have had as much of an issue if he promoted it as his daughter’s book instead of as the “Best Book Ever Written.” That would be an honest representation and would make the reason for his bias clear.
I agree with Gandt when he says that it’s his job to acquire and promote new titles. However, he crossed the line by focusing on his own daughter’s book too much. It should have been one of several books chosen for a feature, not the only one.
I think the whole situation could have been handled differently. I wonder why it didn’t end with the first conversation in the assistant principal’s office. Did the Board make their position clear then? Did Grandt choose not to heed a warning at that point? If so, then I can see why the situation might escalate. If not, I think that the Conflict of Interests Board definitely overreacted.
My concern with this is the punishment that the ethical board wanted to give/gave the librarian. Although I don't agree with the way that he marketed the book, I think the fine of $500 (when what they wanted was $1000) and the fact that the book had to be removed from the display table was a little harsh. These punishments seem excessive especially considering the committees' lack of explanation as to why specifically they came up with that particular punishment. I could see them issuing some sort of statement that told the librarian that he could not use the visuals that he chose to (like 'the best book ever' tag line) and provide other books on the table related to the context, in addition to the stopping of handing out free copies of the book. I don't think that it is fair that the book would have to be re-shelved and put on the back burner because he is related to the artist. It is his job every month or week or whatever to provide new books to that display table and if he does if fact like this book then I don't see why he shouldn't be able to display it, as long as he toned back the enthusiasm that he has for it, and treats it with the same attention he gives to any other book on that he puts on that table.
At the very least, Robert Grant should have provided full disclosure and informed patrons he was related to the author. I agree with Trista that Grant can't possibly be able to display the book with the title, "Best Book Ever Written" without any pretense of bias. I think the ethics violation exists there instead of in the royalties.
While I don't necessarily think the Conflict of Interests Board was completely unjustified, I do think they should have appointed another librarian (or whatever procedure they have set for choosing titles) to decide whether a copy of the book should be kept on the shelf. The illustrator shouldn't be penalized (and children shouldn't miss out) simply because of her father's pride. On the other hand, I've never been given free books from a library unless it was a discard or when I participated in the children's summer reading program. Perhaps if the free copies had been distributed within a program, it would've made more sense. If Grant isn't paying out for copies of other titles to give away for free, this book shouldn't have been either.
Father should have known what the complications would have been; however, the fine was excessive. A verbal slap on the wrist should have sufficed.
Father should have absolved himself from promotions; at the very least this shows poor judgment on his part. In fact, he should have consulted policy for guidance on the matter to avoid a potential sticky situation.
Grandt took his pride too far. If his position does allow him to promote materials, his daughter's book should be chosen and promoted in the same way. He should be able to adequately defend his choice outside of their relationship.
I agree that this shows poor judgement on Grandt's part. I am also curious as to the precedents regarding the fine. If similar situations have happened before and handled with a hefty fine or if this were written policy somewhere, Grandt shouldn't complain about the fine. If you don't want to face the consequences, don't break the rule.
However, if the board came up with this on their own, it seems harsh. It doesn't seem that this incident requires stripping him of his teaching license and removing him from his job (thankfully they didn't). I get the impression that the board wanted to make an example out of Grandt rather than figuiring out the appropriate way to handle the situation.
I agree with just about everyone else in saying the tag line "Best Book Ever" was inappropriate. However his promotion of the book under his personal pick (Grandt's Picks) seems to be in line with me. It would seem to me that a book listed under that heading would clearly be a personal suggestion to the patron.
Post a Comment