3 ms·

I think he was referring specifically to their traditional function as a repository of information. I think in that regard, libraries are outmoded. Of course t

I think he was referring specifically to their traditional function as a repository of information. I think in that regard, libraries are outmoded. Of course they have been and can be transformed to perform other important community functions.

nerpderp82 7y ago
To see them only as a repository is a very narrow literalist view. They have always had other uses than "just storing books".
justin66 7y ago
> I think he was referring specifically to their traditional function as a repository of information. I think in that regard, libraries are outmoded. It's like people have never heard of e-books.
yborg 7y ago
They are not outmoded for this function, which is the function of a repository of information free to all citizens. They are critical for it, and they are giving up on it, by and large, thanks to the current generation of professional librarians. What is described in the article is also happening in the US, and over the last 15 years the public library has largely ceased to be a repository for information or even a kiosk to access information, which would be it's primary modern function. It has become a place to deliver entertainment, and even more importantly to warehouse children of working parents and in some areas, homeless people. These are perhaps useful and important functions, but not a primary rationale for a library. But in order to perform these functions, the libraries have eliminated ... the books. And I don't just mean the physical books, and most of the suburban libraries around here have eliminated by my estimate at least half of their physical collections, both in books and media, largely to open floor space for lounge areas. These books in many cases are now just gone. They aren't available to read digitally either - because libraries are largely outsourcing the whole 'content' thing to for-profit companies that essentially lease books for access by libraries at ridiculous prices. And you'll get what they consider profitable, which is largely content that is ... entertainment. One of the great functions of the "old" library was access to out-of-print material. This is now largely gone, and because it is out of print, you won't find it in digital distribution, either. And obscure or unpopular material that formerly could be found in a library you now must buy, at a high price because of low individual interest. I believe that the public library was one of the great democratic institutions in the US, not just because it afforded access to information, but as a place where everyone, rich and poor, would go and have the same right to borrow a book. The only sliver of hope I see here is that most libraries still seem to have large children's sections and it warms my heart to see parents still taking little ones to the library. It's one of the small rituals that help to produce a civil society and one that I fear will eventually be privatized as well.

nerpderp82 7y ago

To see them only as a repository is a very narrow literalist view. They have always had other uses than "just storing books".

justin66 7y ago

> I think he was referring specifically to their traditional function as a repository of information. I think in that regard, libraries are outmoded. It's like people have never heard of e-books.

yborg 7y ago

They are not outmoded for this function, which is the function of a repository of information free to all citizens. They are critical for it, and they are giving up on it, by and large, thanks to the current generation of professional librarians. What is described in the article is also happening in the US, and over the last 15 years the public library has largely ceased to be a repository for information or even a kiosk to access information, which would be it's primary modern function. It has become a place to deliver entertainment, and even more importantly to warehouse children of working parents and in some areas, homeless people. These are perhaps useful and important functions, but not a primary rationale for a library. But in order to perform these functions, the libraries have eliminated ... the books. And I don't just mean the physical books, and most of the suburban libraries around here have eliminated by my estimate at least half of their physical collections, both in books and media, largely to open floor space for lounge areas. These books in many cases are now just gone. They aren't available to read digitally either - because libraries are largely outsourcing the whole 'content' thing to for-profit companies that essentially lease books for access by libraries at ridiculous prices. And you'll get what they consider profitable, which is largely content that is ... entertainment. One of the great functions of the "old" library was access to out-of-print material. This is now largely gone, and because it is out of print, you won't find it in digital distribution, either. And obscure or unpopular material that formerly could be found in a library you now must buy, at a high price because of low individual interest. I believe that the public library was one of the great democratic institutions in the US, not just because it afforded access to information, but as a place where everyone, rich and poor, would go and have the same right to borrow a book. The only sliver of hope I see here is that most libraries still seem to have large children's sections and it warms my heart to see parents still taking little ones to the library. It's one of the small rituals that help to produce a civil society and one that I fear will eventually be privatized as well.