As library week comes to a close I thought it a good time to ask the question, what is a library? Is a library a book storage warehouse? A computer lab? A community center? An information clearing house? A place to get free movies for movie night? All of these things? None of these things?
All throughout library school in all of my classes the question never fails to come up in one form or another. You might wonder why. In an age when a good many people think that if you can’t find it through Google it must not exist, libraries, more precisely librarians, are gravely concerned about how to remain relevant. So library professionals ask in classes, in webinars, in conferences and scholarly articles, in their library meetings and on listservs, what is the purpose of a library? And further, what is a librarian?
You would think the answer would be easy, but it’s not. And the debate rages on. I wondered naively at first why there had to be an answer at all, couldn’t we just play it by ear so to speak? But I have since learned that an answer is necessary in one way or another because it affects the library’s collections, services, and, increasingly, it’s architecutre.
The turmoil is mainly caused by technology. A large number of librarians have embraced the challenge and are running with it, experimenting, designing information commons and offering new services – computer game night at the library, text and chat reference, video chat reference with Skype, digital libraries, digital repositories, mash-ups, apps, wikis, you name it. The reports looking into the future skill sets required of librarians are all emphasizing technology and the ability to be flexible and deal well with constant change.
As you can imagine, while many librarians are excited by change, there are equally as many who aren’t. Some librarians want libraries to not change at all. There is a lot of conflict because of this. Of course there are librarians all along the spectrum, but everyone is obligated to take part in the discussion.
If you are wondering where I fall in the library debate, is it enough for me to remind you that when I graduate in May 2011 I will have a concentration in digital libraries and my dream job is digital humanities librarian at a university? But if you’ve read this blog with any frequency you also know I love books. Technology and books are not mutually exclusive.
A library’s job is to provide information and we librarians have to be prepared to provide it in a variety of ways in a manner that best fits a patron’s needs. To me it doesn’t matter if the information is digital or analog, e-book or paperback, audio or video. What matters is that I am able to solve a problem, find the resource that turns a student’s or professor’s research into something amazing, provide the means for entertainment and education, be serious and playful, teach and learn. What matters is that every person who visits the library has an experience that makes them want to come back again and again.
I think it’s cool that your concentration is going to be in digital libraries–very relevant for the future. And I still don’t understand why the two sorts of libraries (are there two sorts?) the technological and the more traditional paper sides can’t happily coexist? We embrace technology where I work yet today at the ref desk we worked on a problem of finding a source sited incorrectly on a bibliography–using the internet yet ultimately going to the shelf for the paper bound periodical as it was not available anywhere online. I think this debate is really going to go on for a very long time–I think the important thing is to be flexible and willing to use a variety of sources to solve problems. And you’re getting so close to finishing–aren’t you excited?!
What a great question. I tend to drag my feet a bit about technological change, especially when it comes to things I love, like libraries full of books, but I love the idea of them living side by side! (books and digital libraries)
Tricky question. Can it be understood as a vast, open access resource for all types of written matter, whether off a Caxton press or a webpage? A storehouse of information and entertainment. It’s funny how much power a good definition wields, isn’t it? So much of academia is about defining the field first, because then you know what you’re dealing with, and yet always the problem with definition is perennial.
Such nice words and a great attitude. I think it’s great that libraries are moving to embrace technology, especially as they provide a free place to access technology. At the same time Coleens recent ‘create a school library’ project reminds us of the importance of libraries filled with books made of paper. Some people don’t have access to ereaders, or computers at home, but everyone can take a book home.
We’ve actually had quite a bit of money pumped into local libraries during and just before the recession, with more to come, which is fantastic at a time when libraries seem to be an easy cut for some many regions. Our councils have realised that as the recession bites people will need access to free technology and support to enable them to fill out new job applications, so the need for technology has really led to our libraries receiving much needed makeovers.
Isn’t a librarian a human search engine? As for a library, I’ve always regarded it as one of our greatest achievements: a communal place where people can borrow words for free. Regards, Kevin
I’d never really stopped to think that this would be a contentious issue in the librarian world, but now that you say so I feel silly for not realizing it. I always struggle with change in my own life, so I am sympathetic to those who feel threatened by the onset of technology-based change in library services. On the other hand, the writing is really on the wall at this point, and technology has so much inspiring value and potential that it would be tragic to resist it.
On your definition, perhaps there is no need for a physical space. Information can be transmitted electronically by a well-trained telecommuting librarian.
Isn’t a library more than a place to obtain information, regardless of form or entertaining librarian? If so, that might somehow be incorporated in your definition.
The day Libraries are obsolete, well, this is my own definition of The Apocalypse.
I finished Yann Martel’s new book tonight, Beatrice & Virgil.
The real theme of it is the inadequacy of language, of words, of books, by extension. To convey true experience. Inadequacy.
At one point the protagonist, Henry, realizes that all of his particular research on a subject could have been found on the Internet in “four tenths of second.” [p.170]
This is why a writer like W.G. Sebald uses photos in his work — it is precisely because of the inadequacy of language / words. There has never been anything in such profound contradiction to itself, as words.
At once the most appropriate vehicle [how else would Martel or Sebald communicate with me]…… but inadequate, so inadequate.
The future of literature rests in a bower of lack of information.
The more tapping, the less turning.
If we all knew everything, we’d never have to lift a page. It’s scary.
Pingback: Lit Links! « Drunk Literature
Stefanie, what about e-books and libraries? Will we be able to check a digital book out of the library to read on our Nooks, or Kindles, or other e-readers? Or is that already possible? I took a Nook for a test drive last Friday at B&N. I liked it okay, but think it would take some getting used to. It was a question I asked the youngster at the desk, but she didn’t know the answer (but she was very helpful in finding me a hardbound copy of First Among Sequels by Jasper Fforde. It was 75% off the original price and they only had 4 copies!)
My local library just sent out a fairly extensive survey that asked a lot of questions about how we used the library and I think they are tackling some of these questions now so they can plan for the future. If less people are checking out the printed books and more are using the library computers, they have to be aware of that (for instance). I think libraries have a big challenge ahead of them as they are forced in this digital age to reinvent themselves a bit.
I find the emphasis on technology forcing libraries to change a bit blinkered. There are many, many reasons that libraries (and others) must change. There is changing curriculum, changing demographics and even change caused by disaster [when a local hall burnt down, suddenly all the displaced groups were looking for new places to meet].
In this whole article the most important phrase is: “the ability to be flexible and deal well with constant change.”
Who knows what the future brings, what new technologies will come, what patrons will need. Libraries – and everyone else – had better be ready for anything.