Emerson is taking the week off since I spent the weekend shoveling snow and working on school stuff. And speaking of school, class is unofficially over. We’ve completed ten weeks of discussion and this week all I have to focus on is finishing my grant which has turned out to be a lot more involved than I expected. It would probably be easier if I actually worked at a library, the demographic information would be readily available. But I’ve had to trawl through annual reports and all kinds of other documents just to get the basics down about my library. For the most part, that is all done, now I can work on actually describing why I want money.

I thought I’d tell you a little about last week’s discussion about the future of libraries and librarianship. Class discussion centered around having to know and keep up with technology, being flexible and creative, that kind of thing. Of course we all agreed libraries weren’t going away, we are all studying to be librarians. If we thought libraries were on the way out, none of us would be getting an MLIS degree.

The reading for the week was what was most interesting. Two rather long articles were about the shortcomings of technology and why libraries should really be all about books. It warmed my heart it did. One of them was quite dire too:

If librarians and others persist in seeing the advent of electronic documents and resources as the Second Coming of Gutenberg and if we continue to behave as if we are in an exceptional and transformational time without basing that belief and those actions on a clear-headed examination of reality, we could provoke an unnecessary cataclysm.¹   

The author, Michael Gorman, goes on to say that a universal virtual library is as far away as intergalactic flight. The problems are legion and range from preservation of electronic formats and how expensive they are to continually update, to the problems with search engines and the vulnerability of interconnected networks.

The second article wasn’t quite as doom and gloom. Thomas Mann (his name made me giggle) acknowledged that technology was part of libraries and should be, but if research institutions want to remain vital, it will be through their book collections. Mann took on the railroad analogy that is popular in the library world. The analogy goes like this. Railroads got into trouble because they assumed they were in the railroad business rather than the transportation business. If libraries want to survive, they have to realize they are in the information business, not the book business. Mann called this a “damaging and misguided way of looking at things.”²

Mann did his research on the railroads and goes into detail about what really happened and why the railroad analogy is a bunch of historical hooey. He then goes on to explain the advantages of paper books over electronic books, among them it is impossible to read a full-length book on a computer screen without getting a headache. Comprehension is also better with paper books. And printed books are a whole heck of a lot easier to preserve than electronic books–you don’t have to worry about a printed book’s format making it unreadable to future generations. And copyright issues; copyright is trending in the direction of being very strict on electronic resources. Mann insists that electronic resources should supplement books, not the other way around.

These articles were very cheering to me. The flood of technology into libraries seems to be unstoppable, but Mann and Gorman prove that there are people out there (Mann is the Reading Room Reference Librarian and the Library of Congress, or he was when he wrote the article) who are speaking out and making sure we don’t forget about the books.

¹Gorman, M. (2003). Challenges of the future. In The Enduring Library: Technology, Tradition, and the Quest for Balance. Chicago, ALA, 95-109

² Mann, T. (2001). The importance of books, free access, and libraries as places—And the dangerous inadequacy of the information science paradigm. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 27(4), 268-281.

Advertisement