So here we are, the homework assignment that I've been putting off, reading the Library 2.0 articles. But I've managed to squeeze it in, and here is a transcript of the discussion my daughter and I had.
The first article read was Away from Icebergs by Rick Anderson. The initial opinion was that he misses the whole point- after reading his whole article that is still my opinion.
I disagree with Rick Anderson on a few points. Largely, in his idea that we no longer need 'just in case' collections, Mr.Anderson seems to be of the opinion that most information isn't that hard to get and why should we therefore store it on the off chance that it's needed.
I must begin by saying that storing information ‘in case it's needed’ largely forms the base of what any library is- no matter what their specific purpose. We store information- in case people need it. It's that simple. Secondly, some information is hard to get.
Local history is an excellent example of this- as the memory of our town's settlement slowly dies with the people who experienced it first hand, we have come to rely more and more on small-run publications that document this information for prosperity. History is a good example overall- the death of Henry the VIII won't change, so your 1980s copy of history of the English Monarchy won't ever become obsolete. The Romans will never update their progress in shaping the Western world- they're dead, they’ve finished all that. Of course we do learn new things about them, and that's great. But that’s what periodicals are for, and on the joyous occasions when history needs to be re-written, people will do so.
Mr. Anderson appears to propose that we rid ourselves of all but the most pertinent blocks of information. Or as I call them, books.
People like books- I should say, they love books. They like them sitting on the shelves and in piles by the bed, they like to carry them in their bag and when the mood strikes, they take them up and read them. Its more than just absorbing words; reading is a tactile experience. The cover art, the weight of the tome the feel of the paper, the smell of old book (and new books too) all enhance the reading experience. The strolling of the shelves looking for something that catches your eye. Anyone who's spent anytime on a web-based book shop will tell you how hard it is to 'browse', unless you have more than a vague idea of what you want.
I suppose whether or not you agree with that would rely on what your idea of libraries are in the first place. Many who work in the library system will see them as all kinds of marvelous things and go on about communication interface and patron self-service. Those who attend libraries will have a more simplified view- it's a place that holds books.
Of course we do more than that, but we’re talking about basic notions here. Some libraries are archival, some are for research purposes, and others are merely there for recreation. There are libraries that have become museums in themselves, filled with precious books- the Vatican and Oxford libraries are lovely examples of this.
All libraries must decide what they keep and what they archive based on what the community around them needs and best interests are, but archiving books in the first place is what makes libraries libraries. We need to continue that charge.
The action of constantly evicting old texts from the collections for example, gives a problem that effects the reading world greatly- people can no longer find the book they so loved as a child (unless it’s a classic), because it’s been out of print for 15 years. Fiction is a transient thing, and if a library ceases to become somewhere they can find old books of their childhood, we shall devolve into nothing more than a book rental facility. This is not to say that we should keep absolutely everything, but there's no reason (beyond the practicalities of storage) that we can't preserve as much as we can.
There's no reason why all our books must be printed within the last 10 years. There is no reason why we should go to the trouble (and expense) of obtaining the newly printed unless we discover something new and revelatory that is re-published.
The point of some of this rambling is that libraries are more than just information banks- they are community hubs; a place where people can meet each other, take their children. Or just get out of the house. Further, the book is not just a paper block of information that there's in case you need it, it is an object that is often loved and revered.
Mr.Anderson also talked about improving the ‘interface’ between librarian, the library system and the patron. (He means making things easier to use.) Streamlining the systems that aid us in our quest to help the patron are always in need of a 'spruce up', there's not doubt about that. Having the libraries basic services online is a valuable resource for those who use it, and this is one aspect where the expansion of the libraries existence in the world of technology can be championed.
But from a general base point, a machine should not be the only option. If only for the reason that many people, no matter their age or generation, are not interested in gathering their information from a machine. Additionally there are people who do not have the funds available to them to obtain a computer; for many people access to the internet involves- going to the library.
Perhaps soon we will live in a society where people have the local newspaper delivered via mini-disc rather than a block of tree-pulp (a large percentage of people get their national and world news online already) but there will always be plenty of people who resent the loss of that experience of juggling a bed sheet-sized wad of paper just to get the news. People will miss it. Humans have romantic notions about what ‘intellectual’ past-times involve. Reading and paper go hand in hand.
To shun the electronic in favour of the paper and ink may seem romantic or in some extreme opinions old fashioned. Call it what you will, but some people genuinely prefer books over machines and that’s never going to change. Some people still listen to 45s, or use a handkerchief. Some people (and yes, even young people) don’t even have a television.
Libraries are about books and always will be, unless the turn of civilization leads us down apocalyptic paths. Books are objects of much affection, there’s something mysterious and comforting in flipping through the pages looking for what you need to know, almost as if you’re uncovering a treasure.
I had additional thoughts as to the role of the librarian themselves- librarians are a kind of teacher and always have been. From simple requests such as where is the large print right up to do you have any books on the Norman conquest written from a French point of view or 'I read a book in grade 6 about a dog that ran away- but I don’t know the title, author or year it was published.' If a librarian is familiar with their library then these questions are but simple everyday challenges that make what they do worthwhile. They will know where the history section is and which book is more likely to be sympathetically French on the subject of the conquest.
To be reduced to the task of simply directing people to a further information point only reduces the necessity of them being there in the first place, and we might as well go the way of the tram conductor or the bank teller. People (and it seems snobbish to say this, but it is sadly true) are at times very confused, dull-brained things who want to be very much pointed in the exact right direction, or they'll get lost.
Do we want a society that says “ah, librarians, remember them? It's all just computers now.”
The second article I read was something more along my lines of thinking; To a temporary place in time... by Dr. Wendy Schultz. She too was of the opinion that libraries are more than just information points, her words "libraries are not merely in communities, they are communities: they preserve and promote community memories" put perfectly the belief I hold that the library is a living thing.
Dr. Wendy Shultz’ notion that library systems will evolve to the level of library 4.0 in which the quiet, wood lined study stocked with leather bound tomes and the smell of cigars will be offered up as an interactive experience (a knowledge spa, as she calls it) amuses me greatly, because I feel that after all is said and done, a library is a place you can go to get a book, and that’s how people like it.
There’s no doubt in my mind that libraries are invaluable and will always exist. Progress isn’t a dirty word, and things can always do with improvement- but if that progress comes at a price of a loss of respectable tradition, then going forward might end up as going backward instead. By all means grow and develop the notion of what a library is, by all means offer people access to all the varied ways there are of obtaining knowledge- but do not forget what a library is to people, and they are the most important reason for the libraries existence at all. Without people, there is no need or knowledge.
