Libraries Might Be Screwed... Then Again, What Isn't?

For an online discussion in one of my classes, we looked at an interesting screencast by Eli Neiburger, whose thesis generally boils down to: libraries are screwed. Granted, it's not all gloom and doom, and his purpose (in my opinion) is to make people face the stark reality of the current state of libraries in order to facilitate action. Still, there are indeed huge problems as we look to the e-book situation.

Even if libraries wanted to be filled entirely with e-books (one famous library is), publishers will not allow many new and bestselling books to be so openly shared by a library. Despite the fact that libraries possess software that erases the e-book after a certain period, akin to a normal library book, publishers know very well that there is no limiting mechanism. That is, when a library has 5 copies of a bestseller, only 5 people can have that out at one time. Spread across the country, this is manageable monetarily for a publisher. E-books don't have this limiter. You could have millions of people check out the e-book, finish it, and have no need to buy it from Amazon or what have you. Publishers are hip to this, and have consequently held back from giving libraries the right to rent out e-books to patrons... and since these are de faco the most popular items in the library, libraries are forced into appearing antiquarian (Where are the e-books? Libraries are stuck in the past, man). This situation could and very likely will change, but it's just another area where the public can point to libraries not meeting patrons' needs, and not keeping up with the times. One more reason not to give them so much tax money. Basically, we're screwed.

That said, who or what isn't "screwed" these days? Companies are still lean and mean, more profitable than they ever have been, as productivity expands due to the revelation that productivity goes up as more people exit the workforce. Is anyone happy with that little truth, that 10% of us will probably just have to remain unemployed for the foreseeable future? Is the publishing business really stable and solid? (Maybe this will give you some ideas) Are we in the midst of another tech boom or something? How's China doing lately? Honestly, if the sky is falling for libraries, the same case could be made for each and every industry that resides in the good ol' US of A. I even saw a laughable news story (more story than news) that honestly tried to make the case that the USA is destined to fall like Greece and Rome. First of all, the Greeks and the Roman Empire never really "fell" in concrete or easily explained ways. Rather, their empires eroded systematically over hundreds of years, culminating in either dramatic events (as in the case of Imperial Rome, who nevertheless survived another thousand years in the East) or rather unremarkable circumstances (Greece eventually becoming a solid league after Rome becomes a hegemony). Secondly, we can't even get the reasons these empires "fell" straight: what makes us think we could foresee our own demise and when it would take place?

Anyway, I'd be a lot more worried about libraries if these were prosperous times and all the industries linked to libraries were doing excellently. The fact is, for the past 2 years and for the foreseeable future... we're all screwed.

Bird After Dark

This weekend, I had the pleasure of volunteering for the Bird After Dark event, which was held on National Gaming Day (technically, the event started the day before, but midnight to 2 a.m. counts in my book). Usually, this day has libraries hosting game tournaments (video games included) and the like. The ALA website for 2010's events can be found here. The purpose is to "connect communities around the educational, recreational, and social value of all types of games."

Bird After Dark had games, to be sure, but a large part of the event was having fun while also learning a thing or two about Bird Library. Students browsed the stacks, browsed databases, and used the OPAC to answer a game quiz. In addition there were hilarious timed physical events, blaring music, mountains of candy, the motivation to win at trivial things (this is a very real phenomenon by the way), and the chance to win some neat prizes, like a Kindle or an SU Snuggie.

Bird's event is likely different form other libraries' events, because the audience and mission are different. An academic library, as Prof. Lankes pointed out last week, has a mission that focuses more around teaching, research, and service. It can even be broken down further, because universities differ from colleges, and there are even further breakdowns within both universities and colleges. Suffice to say, Bird's event did an excellent job of bridging the gap between unadulterated fun and their mission. Although I'd like to see an event that does just have straight up gaming (there might be some as far as I know!), Bird After Dark is an innovative way to get undergraduate students into the library without just begging them via e-mail or LMS spam. And who can turn down a chance to win a snuggie these days?

There's actually a growing field within LIS that deals with games with regard to libraries. I know Prof. Lankes is involved in this area. This is a very challenging prospect, especially with regard to video games. Striking a balance in the game selection between casual and more enthusiast games must be difficult with the typical library budget.

Regardless, Bird After Dark was great fun, and I was glad to participate. I'll be there next year!

The Value of Aesthetics

This last week we had a pretty lively discussion about what to do with artifacts in a library. It got heated. I mean, in a librarian way. It never got worse than in England.

A part of the discussion that ruffled a few feathers had to do with aesthetics. Prof. Lankes made the rather sober point that a lot of these old books do not contain information we "need" anymore: their value comes from pure aesthetics. His point is spot on in my view. But I could see how this would offend some people. After all, we've been taught for years that aesthetics is a surface value. We've been taught critical thinking, deep and profound thoughts, and original information is the ultimate goal. Three signed copies of Alice in Wonderland? Why do we need three?

Well, I concede these old books are pure eye candy, but they should be preserved. For me, aesthetics does involve critical thinking. I'm not talking about an antiquated view of aesthetics where there's an actual objective aesthetic "value" we can assign to a piece. No, aesthetics will for the most part be a case-by-case thing. It's an intricate dance between society's and one's own values.

That takes us back to the original problem. Maybe the culture at large doesn't care that a 16th century man took the pains to paint an entire landscape along the edges of a book that can only be seen when the book is manipulated a certain way. I do. I can't base this on information value per se, unless we start to define information in an extremely fuzzy way that information is anything that interacts with our brain. No, this thing is worth saving because new knowledge and art are so unique to the human experience, yet so vital to it, that I would save all the best examples we have of it. If I fought to keep a book that was merely signed by a long dead Queen of England (and the contents were pretty useless), I wouldn't expect the public's support. But we're not running a democracy here: we're running a library. As a citizen, I don't expect my tax money to go to a library to reinforce everything I know and like: I'd want to give my money to experts that know about subjects and perspectives on books and art that I might not have seen or read before. Otherwise, what's original about a library, and why would I need to go there? I'd want to be shown something that makes me go, "Oooooooooh!"

I have seen the power of aesthetic pleasure. Some people walk into the Sistene Chapel and are never quite the same. I count my days going to museums as some of the best of my life. Can I tell you I received a lot of information those days? Not really. I have studied art in great detail, but that was separate from my raw experience in looking at the art. As a librarian, I want to preserve those things that are so close to being thrown into the dustbin of history because it's only "pretty."