5 ms·
I worked in a library, though not as a librarian, for a long time. And I had worked in one as a high school student. I no longer support libraries as they sta
by at_a_remove 3y ago
I worked in a library, though not as a librarian, for a long time. And I had worked in one as a high school student.
I no longer support libraries as they stand. Most of their current issues are self-inflicted. I will now lay out why. The Internet came along, and Google of course. (You remember when Google seemed to have the correct answer to everything, in the past) And then the scanning of books, and the librarians panicked. They had an identity crisis: What good is a library in the age of Google?
This contagious panic spread and the usual questions came about. "What will we be, then?" And they immediately started trying to be everything to everyone. In a university setting, that means that various small groups will immediately come looking. Maybe the library can help us! And so the library begins to do things outside of its original scope, further and further. We begin housing various student groups, despite not having enough space for books. Checking the logs of the prayer room and the breastfeeding room was a little bitter, but we still need that ... but we have too many books. Named faculty carrels, we keep those, but we have too many books. Bathrooms we have, but that one woman just likes to empty her bladder in the elevator. Librarians, in their helpfulness but lack of identity, have become janitors and people who help you fill out your tax forms and security guards who have to keep an eye out for that guy who likes to jerk off on Level A, in the back.
I received a survey from my library a couple of years ago. Multiple choice: "Are our libraries A) doing enough to help LGBTQ people? B) not doing enough?" Note the lack of the third option, maybe you're focusing on them too much because WHERE ARE THE BOOKS? My local "civilian" library doesn't seem to have anything to lend that isn't recent any longer. It's Redbox for books. The shelves are fewer, the shelves are shorter, the shelves have been shoved back for "community spaces." The local loan system is garbage, the statewide system is getting thinner and thinner, and inter-library loan beyond that, well, it used to be great, but they're shoveling out books (and I'm not talking about that thirty-ninth copy of Twilight which was once in hot demand but isn't any longer) that were once in most branches I visited.
Many academic libraries are playing a game of Hearts. There's only two ways to win Hearts. The first involves getting rid of your Hearts before the other players do, paring down books. The other involves trying to collect all the hearts, which makes you the hub of an interlibrary loan system that externalizes the cost of having and housing books, which is not insignificant. Before she retired, a librarian passed on to me a shocking paper describing the cost per year of the average book just to exist on a shelf. Most people don't think about that.
No, I don't think a middle ground is what is called for. Get back to books, by which I mean, the acquisition and organization of information such that the depth of it can be accessed by those in need of it, perhaps more so than they really understand, not just the first thing that Google (or ChatGPT) vomits out.
- nerdo 3y ago> I received a survey from my library a couple of years ago. Multiple choice: "Are our libraries A) doing enough to help LGBTQ people? B) not doing enough?" Same at my local library, singular focus on LGBT kids content and activism with all budgets entirely allocated to it. Would make sense to rebrand as state-run LGBTQ bookstores, more glam for the librarians than homeless shelters perhaps?
- hobotime 3y agoOur King County library spends about $250 per household, and the average family borrows three books. Honestly, given their cost per book, they should just buy books people want and close down.
- friend_and_foe 3y agoWhile I agree with you, I think those librarians with an identity crisis were right: they need to justify their existence in an age where they aren't needed. I do believe that if a library tries to just be a library it will not last for much longer. Which is OK. We honestly don't need libraries for what they are anymore. The reason is in the medium. When we want a book (or a CD or DVD or VHS tape or whatever) we don't want the physical object, we want the information inside. We no longer physically need the object to get at the information, we no longer need a central repository to store these objects for our convenience. Libraries have no reason to exist anymore. The true libraries of today are maligned, banned, hated, called criminals. They are libgen, scipub and torrent trackers. They're done often for no profit, just for the sake of an ideological motivation to make information available. The medium has changed but people's desire for the information is still there. There are people out there keeping up the fight, but the ones trying to maintain a quite room full of shelves just refuse to see where the fight is going and are being left behind.
- at_a_remove 3y agoThey really are needed, which is the ironic part. Subject librarians are the people you want because they know what book you need before you need it, they know what sources of information are outdated, they know how to organize and get at that information, in depth. People who "just Google" something lack that depth of understanding, they end up picking the wrong books to look in, and so on. You are right that the people want the information inside, but you're missing the part where the subject librarian puts people in touch with the container that the user really wants (every user their book), even if they aren't stating it well to a search engine. And we both know how poorly people phrase things to search engines, or how a novice to the field simply does not know the correct terminology of the field (the jargon) to put in.