In reading the Five Perspectives I see that for every person there is a different point of view (not a surprise) when it comes to Libraries and Library 2.0.
The guy from the University of Nevada (read his article here)
sees libraries easily moving from books in a building to information online. He thinks we hold to closely to past ideas that not longer serve the library or the public... His 'icebergs' include realizing that there is not longer a need for a "just in case" print collection, becuase everything is, or could be accessed online. I am a huge fan of the computer, and I understand that books are a very old information delivery method. But I still love to read books, not a computer screen. He says we need to eliminate the barriers between patron and the information they seek, and I agree with this, but as an employee in a Public Library I don't see all MY patrons happily learning or using only online resources. His third iceberg is to bring services to the patron rather than the patron to the services. I get that in the grand scheme of things it is a good idea to make more and more of the information available in the library available to the public without having them have to come into the building. This will help with the last minute "My son has a 5 page report about the Inca due tomorrow. I know you close in 5 minutes but I was hoping you could find me the 6 resources he needs..." Yesterday I was in a training and we learned all about ValueLine. At my library we have the print information as well as access to the online database. While in the training I was not able to see the online info because we have a cretain number of lisences and had maxed out our users. While the idea that all information should be available to all people all the time is a great one, it is just not feasible. Many times online information is more costly than the print version, and as I learned yesterday, not always as readily available.
I know that I have ranted on and on about this one guy and his opinion, but he seems to be speaking only to, and for academic libraries, and I wonder if he is even speaking for most of them. As a public library girl, I see that while we should be learning more and more about what is new, we cannot forget that we are here for the public. Everyday we have people wanting copies of books in regular print, large print, on compact disc. In the 5 years that I have been working in this library I have never had anyone angry with me because the newest most popular books were not available digitally. I am not saying this will never happen, but for me, I am still a lover of the book, and will be until it is safe to take my computer, or my Kindle reader into the tub!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I think what you say makes sense, and the fact that no patron has ever gotten angry over a book not being available digitally is telling. I also think the people who think the library as a building will/must go away are overlooking the fact that while patrons maybe would benefit greatly from being able to do reference/research online, most still prefer to do their reading for pleasure by going to the library/bookstore and browsing for it (by "pleasure," I don't just mean fiction but also recreational non-fiction reading). Even the best computer sites for listing books don't offer the same experience of going to a shelf, picking something off of it and turning to a random page to get a taste of it.
So while I haven't read the iceberg article, I don't the guy is thinking subtly enough. The future is more likely to be something in between no building and all building.
Yes to all you said, Melissa. We need to strive for better ways to provide digital access, and we do all the time, but I heartily believe this author doesn't represent the needs of most library patrons: not academic and certainly not public.
There is no shortage of proof that print still matters and is an effective technology for many reasons (do you know The Myth of the Paperless Office?). The author also ignores "library as place" - for recreation, study space, social gatherings, programs, civic discussion and debate and even computer access for the many who have none elsewhere. Erin
Post a Comment