iHCPL #15

Okay, the geek in me really likes this exercise. As an English major I love writing responses involving my opinions and thoughts. So here goes:

In response to the Librarian 2.0 Manifesto, I must say that it was far more realistic and reasonable that I thought it might be. I especially liked the points that librarians will not fear Google and will let go of old practices when new/better methods become available. The part about not becoming frustrated with Library Bureaucracy is also a good point, however I think a point should be made about library administration and administrators listening to their branch "operatives" (librarians and staff) as well as the patrons. A balance between librarian/staff wants and needs and patron/customer wants and need must be met to best serve all concerned. All in all, I'd say that I agree with most of the points made in the manifesto.
I also read the articles "Away from the Icebergs", "Into a New World of Librarianship", and "A Temporary Place in Time". While all of these articles had some very interesting and provocative points, I am only going to discuss a few.

"Icebergs" made a few points that, in an ideal world, I would agree with but do not find realistic given the world and its people today. The first point I wish to contend is Anderson's argument that libraries should stop collecting print materials for the "just in case" scenario. I would argue against this if only because when it comes down to it, in my mind librarians (and therefore libraries) are the protectors of knowledge and access to knowledge. Moving into an entirely digital collection would be both foolish and irresponsible. What happens when the power goes out? Or when print sources are required for a project/assignment? What happens if the unthinkable occurs and there is a nuclear war? (Granted, if the last happened we would have more issues that whether people could access information. Or even if nothing so physically drastic happened, what if a super virus infects and corrupts the Internet and most of its information? I know, I know, these scenarios are unlikely to happen, but there are some crazies in the world and you can't predict the behavior or logic of insanity. Anderson also states that libraries should adapt themselves to their user's education level. I think, in a lot of ways, we have already begun to do so. People are constantly working to make better, more user friendly search engines; libraries offer classes from ESL to computer literacy and more. The final point that I somewhat disagree with is that libraries should abandon the "come to us" mentality. I agree that we should be available online and that we offer that as a service, but I don't think that it is asking too much for a patron to have to come in to use certain parts of the collection. If you want to try on a article of clothing or buy a cup of coffee you go to the store that sells the item...
Moving on.
In "Into a New World of Librarianship" Stephens argues that libraries will/should become "engaging centers for learning and experience". Now, I would LOVE this, but I don't think it is very likely (at least in public libraries) unless there is a fundamental change in the attitude of the public. The majority of public library patrons do not attend the library to learn or gain experience, they are here to access their email, or myspace, or facebook; to look up a favorite author's new book. In short, most people come to public libraries seeking entertainment (as shown by our fiction and dvd/cd circ stats...). There is nothing wrong with this, but it does underline the basic difference between our present patrons and the patrons in Stephens's future world. I think that there will have to be a fundamental shift in the thought process and lifestyle of the public for libraries to be these wonderful "centers for learning and experience". Perhaps if public libraries played up their non-fiction and reference sections as well as their databases that would help change the attitude. Hopefully I am wrong. It would be nice if libraries truly became as Stephens predicts.