Tai chi in the Library (Week 4)

This week has been a lot about picking the brains (mmmm... brains) of librarians. In 511, we heard from two different school librarians. In 605, we visited the SU Law Library reference desk. And I conducted my interview with [name redacted for privacy] at a local library. So, you would think after this week, I should now have a complete picture of librarianship. Well... yes and no.

More than anything, I am getting to see that this profession is not monolithic in any way. Even my thoughts that every librarian was as "pro-freedom of information" as possible was tested, as the Law Library really can't offer anyone off the street specific legal advice. The library itself is closed to the public a large part of the day. I'm sure special collections can operate in the same way at times. "Yes, we have really rare, old manuscripts. No, you cannot see or touch it."

But, I think breaking all my preconceptions is useful in the long run. If some aspect of librarianship starts to feel old or dull, guess what? there's a million other opportunities that barely resemble that job. And it's probably all to the good that I have an open-ended view of the profession, so I can make it my own if need be (and it doesn't get me fired).

The "Unquiet Librarian" presentation was specifically pretty interesting, if a bit daunting. It goes along with a common theme I've heard a lot this week—of just jumping in and embracing any technology that you or your users could possibly use. It sounds easy and obvious, but you'd be surprised. Engaging in social media as an individual is intuitive, and is really only limited by how much expendable time the user has. But engaging in social media as an institution, to have a "face" and presence online that brings people into the bricks and mortar; that could be very challenging.

Last week, we also had the conversation about bees. While we have been urged from the get-go to be leaders, innovators, world-changers, and whatever other cool-sounding appellation, Lankes also talked about the reality of the situation. Some of us work better in teams instead of leading them. Some of us are good at the humdrum aspects of work, and manage to make that work creative or add some value to it. There's a place for people like this in the structure.

I suppose what I really struggle with is determining if I can do it all. Can I get the certification in Digital Libraries, while still trying to become a special subject librarian at an academic library (which will require another Master's), all on top of cataloging/web development/general awesomeness at being a librarian? I suppose I can only bite off so much in two years. I just don't want to start pruning my interests.

IST 511 Week 3 in Review

Week 3 (which was almost a week ago now) was less about lecturing, and more about finding our groups for various projects we have scheduled this semester. Still, there were some good takeaways. Sigh, I've seen "takeaways" work itself into my lexicon, and it annoys me.

So, a big part of the lecture I liked was an overview of the classical model of the library. But rather than looking at a system and taking it at face value, Prof. Lankes urged us change the system. I don't think I've ever been told that in a university setting. Only entrepreneurs, politicians, and popular culture at large have ever really put forth the attitude that if the current structure isn't working as well as it could be, it's time to knock it down and build something that works. That said, the structure is giving me a big picture, and my other classes are really starting to make it all come together in a big picture way. Now it's time for the fine detail, and doing lots of practice with MARC and a legion of other acronyms.

We also got some nice examples of the way a librarian can really diversify, and at a certain point they really do fit the title of "information professional" more than "librarian." The embedded librarian seems like a dream job, but certainly requires a specific skill set that may or not be easily obtained. Being a researcher for public or private interests is also very appealing, if you've got the time and patience. The many options make the field stronger than it otherwise would be if librarians were just a bunch of people with access to book catalogs.

Then there's the difficult task of assessment. When we talk about how libraries try to sing their praises yet still get lots of funding from sources, I was reminded of an old Economics professor I had. He said that, in business, you go to the investors and press events in your best suit: you go to the IRS in rags and squalor. It's a tough balancing act. I'm also skeptical of any metric that claims to have a "bottom line" of whether a library should stay or go. I always cringe when people try to cram such a world of nuance into a neat little package.

Tagging Can Be Socially Redeeming

One of the progenitors of hip hop, the great DJ Afrika Bambaataa, laid out the four elements (five if you count beat-boxing) of hip hop culture: DJing, MCing, b-boying (I love you if you actually do some research into b-boying), and graffiti, also known as "tagging." 

Sure, I'm playing on a homophone/homograph/homonym, but let me set up the parallel between graffiti tagging and social tagging on the Web. Tagging was regarded in the 1980s as vandalism. Despite there being extremely beautiful, expressive, and aesthetically attractive instances of tagging, it was still condemned by community leaders. This very rejection and refusal to grant these artists some space only led to further vandalism.

This antediluvian viewpoint is misplaced in modern society. Some truly forward-thinking artists went out and rented space in cities, gathered a crew of taggers, and showed that this art form (an ancient art form dating back to at least ancient Rome and probably much earlier), once viewed as degenerative, could actually beautify a space if given the chance.

So it was with great confusion that I read in one of my LIS books today that social tagging's utility is a subject of debate. I do credit the book for elaborating the potential uses of social tagging in metadata schemes, but I really have to question why they question the utility? 

Now, I'll be the first to admit I wince at the pure craziness that will ensue if/when library books are being tagged en masse by the public, not to mention librarians. Trust me, I've heard some weird tags for things over the past few weeks. Yikes. But aren't we afraid of every new and powerful idea? It only takes the human mind one second to go from, "That sounds cool." to, "The machines will ruin our lives!" The idea of "user-contributed" information is pretty old hat by now, but does anyone remember the pretentious ridicule that professors hurled at Wikipedia? The idea that people, and not experts at institutions, could contribute to knowledge! Inconceivable!

I'll relate a personal example of tagging that happened tonight. Let me preface this by admitting I have a special place in Hades mapped out in Dante fashion (right before the ninth circle, Cocytus) that would house the creators of chain e-mails. I can't think of some poetic justice right now -- perhaps setting a tick on him, then bringing 10 of the tick's friends, and 10 of his friends, and so on. And yet, as I saw one of my friends on Facebook complete a silly "Top 15 Albums in 15 Minutes," because he tagged me in the post, I couldn't help but participate. I would even call it, dare I say, fun.

So, what was really all that different between a chain e-mail and this Facebook exercise? Well, besides not occurring during my morning, when every thing not deadly urgent in my e-mail inbox makes me angry? One crucial difference: (instant) communication. Every one was commenting on each others' picks. Why we should have put an album someone else had put down. Albums we would have picked if we had more slots. Some of us started talking about music taste in general, and a large discussion was being had across many different profiles. Communication and information while being socially involved... isn't this what libraries are trying to facilitate? 

The problems might be there, but the utility of social tagging is real and cannot be doubted. If institutions don't get in on this now, they will have left yet another big idea to Facebook or Google to pioneer. Tagging, even if it leads to a dead end in libraries, could ultimately branch out to some innovation we've always wanted when it comes to classification discrepancies between member and information professional.

Week 2 Musings

One of the challenges that seems to loom in the mind of the public, if not my professors and colleagues, is how a librarian stays relevant in the world of Google (and sometimes these thoughts turn into articles that masquerade as journalism). To the library student and the professor, the justification is strong and reasoned. But as I talk to friends and family outside the profession; they aren't so sure. Some have suggested that libraries are still relevant because some people aren't computer literate, and so can't use Google. This obviously means that libraries would strive to teach everyone digital literacy, and then slowly fade into obsolescence. A drawn-out seppuku, in other words.

Besides the technical distinctions that make libraries still retain value over search engines (one huge factor has to be that in catalogs, you don't have to sort through 10 million blogs and umpteen million sites of unsavory character), Prof. Lankes highlighted that this profession has a unique core set of values. A business like Amazon, Borders or Google will get you to a book or two that you want, and the idea is to funnel you to the check-out line and get you to punch in your debit card as soon as possible. A librarian, however, will hopefully not funnel your interest at all. A librarian might expand your interest, or turn you to a source you never thought you wanted in the first place. A search engine or commercial catalog will not have this capacity in the foreseeable future. And in my opinion, it would usually lead to decreased sales, because it's much easier to point to one book to buy than to display 20 resources. Heck, one might actually have to go to the library if they wanted 20 sources on a subject.

Another big part of this week has been starting to think about the different types of libraries, and which I would feel most fits my backgrounds and interests. I see many potential paths, personally. I could easily see myself as librarian tech or something similar at a public library, especially since the majority of librarians go on to work in a public or academic library. Eventually I would want to become a specialist in Classics and possibly Latin manuscripts.

Another possibility is working in a private collection or special collection within a larger library. As we have been learning, certain collections have become more like museums as of late, and conversely museums have begun to classify things more like libraries. Perhaps there will be an interesting opportunity to combine those two ideas into a simply place of learning and information. Would it be a lyceum? Or maybe you could call it a "muserary."

"All Art is Propaganda"

The title of this post is both a quote and collection of essays by one of my favorite authors, George Orwell. My interpretation of the quote is that in both obvious and subtle ways, art can direct our emotions into action, or at least change our thoughts in a measurable way. Obvious examples are Guernica or Goya's The Third of May 1808, where the viewer can't help but be horrified and enraged at the events occurring in the painting. Even if it's a "good" cause objectively speaking, art nevertheless relies on emotions and feelings to convince the viewer of the artist's stance: yup, propaganda.

Now I'm going to be talking about video games, in particular the BioShock series. Don't leave; this will be painless.

Despite its downright pedestrian title and standard "shoot 'em up" mechanics, BioShock creates a convincing dystopia in two separate games: the first game focuses on an Ayn Randian underwater city called Rapture where the inhabitants are free to genetically modify themselves, and live off whatever they can produce without any sort of government entity (the prescience of this game to predate the Tea Party movement by a full year should be noted), while the second game returns to Rapture years later where a collectivist cult has spawned a dictator that must be stopped. Amidst it all, the player takes an active role in destroying this world gone mad. The player can act benevolently and risk being shot in the back, or be ruthless to a culture that would dare base its principles in anti-civilization. Of course, for me this is a moment of serious thinking while being entertained. For Orwell, dangerous nation-building was a reality, and so important to him that he fought in a war for a country not his own!

It's only recently that I have begun to think about how video games get closer and closer to a legitimate art form. So, knowing this, it makes me next worry about preserving them. Thankfully Wikipedia is a great resource to at least keep some metadata and information about the game itself (as opposed to just commercial listings for purchase at Amazon or Gamestop), and enterprising YouTube users capture what they can. The unique form of video games presents many problems if one wanted to place it in a, say, digital library. It's clearly a heavily visual form of art, so some sort of video clip would be imperative in my opinion. Yet every "playthrough" is different, and can potentially take 2 to 100+ hours. Trailers for games are notorious for looking nothing like the actual game (because of CGI), and containing irrelevant information. Would you simply house the entire piece of software itself, or would that be necessary? Would you be able to use emulators, or does this violate copyright? Games are usually tied to operating systems, further complicating matters. I must admit part of me wouldn't mind being one of a coterie that would only know certain obscure games that have almost no record.

If nothing else, you should at least look into the works of George Orwell, even though I have forever tainted his legacy by mixing in video games and general nerdiness.

IST 511 Week 1: What I did over the summer

IST 511 is the gateway course to my graduate field, as well as the impetus of this blog, humble as it may be. When I read the textbook's introductory chapter, I was pleased to find that it contained a brief history of libraries through recorded history.

I'm sure many of my friends' eyes glazed over as they quickly skimmed to the meatier parts of the chapter, but this was the part that intrigued me. As a Humanities and Classics nerd, I have always been fascinated about the diverse range of people that have filled the role of gatekeeper to knowledge, or have the task of "carrying the torch" to other parts of the world who could benefit from specific knowledge. Historically, these weren't stuffy people wearing argyle sweaters. They were Greeks enslaved by the Romans to tutor their children. They were monks who battled their own orders and a willfully ignorant society to spread knowledge. They were Muslim scholars and warriors who held important documents that were long forgotten in Western Europe.

As Prof. Lankes points out, we need not get caught up in the functions of what these people did, or seek out labels for them. The main thing is that they, and hopefully someday I, will have the ability to "improve society through facilitating knowledge creation in... communities."

I still really wish I could have seen the library at Alexandria, though!