Thursday, January 24, 2008

This blog entry, concerning the readings from Tuesday Jan. 22 2008, deals with the way in which the future of the library was envisioned and the issues that are at the forefront of modern dilemmas. “The Once and Future Library” of Nicholas Basbanes, the theoretical analysis of Wayne Wiegand and the educational perspective of Christine Pawley – each provides an insight into where we have been as a profession and the implications of current practices on where we are headed.

“The Once and Future Library” touches on the issue of digitization by way a story about the San Francisco Public Library. In this situation, the library management all but removed books from the plan for the space, and instead focused on space itself. In the place of books, newspapers and other public records stood grand architecture and named meeting spaces. Yet, what is a named meeting space if the original purpose for the building itself is all but lost to marketing. What use will the groups have for a space that holds nothing but other spaces?

Some within the library establishment alleged interference from “Library Activists”. This alleged activism attracted the attention of Nicholson Baker, a noted print culture scholar, most famous for the American Newspaper Repository. He spearheaded a movement to save documents and to challenge the status quo. While his efforts were dynamic in this area, one key concentration of his efforts, focusing on the preservation of the card catalogue deserves mention. The preservation of this documentation preserves historical information not found in the electronic records according to some.

Wayne Wiegand’s “American Library History Literature: 1947-1997 Theoretical Perspectives?” examines the various types of library history literature during the titular time period. Of particular note is the way in which the library has operated as an agency of social control, inculcating the working classes with ideas that are deemed acceptable by members of the upper class, which have historically dictated what is and is not acceptable in society.

Wiegand focuses on the way in which the library leadership is out of touch with what mainstream audiences want. They deliver the classics when the mainstream wants to read tabloids and romance. It is akin to the formative years of television when soap operas competed with actual operas, and light comedies competed with Shakespearian comedies.

Wiegand notes that bibliographic works are of particular interest to scholars in this area due to the vast numbers of unpublished histories. Other sources of information include Master’s and doctoral thesis, dissertations and seminar papers. Wiegand examines the available work on such library leaders as Melville Dewey who has been covered by multiple authors due to his life and his work.

Pawley’s work explores the rationale for the inclusion of library history within the wider body of library scholarship. According to the American Historical Association’s website, Peter Stern’s articulates the idea that such scholarship increases the understanding of people and the wider systems in which they operate. Furthermore, Stern articulates three benefits for studying history – “moral understanding, fostering identity and good citizenship “(Pawley p.227.)

According to Pawley, the goal creating a more historical perspective within librarianship can be accomplished by starting at the point where future librarians receive their education. Using this focus in practice means that both current and previous trends should be made a part of each course. To facilitate this broadening of focus, Wayne Wiegand in particular has called for collaboration with innovative scholarly areas such as American Studies departments, which have a reputation for exploring literature within a wider context of both historical and modern stances. Furthermore, Pawley notes, growth in scholarly discussion of library history could be spurred by greater collaboration amongst LIS scholars around this topic.

No comments: