Children's Books discussion
Conversations: books & readers
>
OT: Librarians on administrative leave for attempting to save classic books from deletion
date
newest »
newest »
Wow. Thanks for sharing the story - I'll be sharing it too. I have a feeling it's too late for our local library system; this is so sad ....
You would think that educators would be devoted to the ideals of education. You would think that librarians would be devoted to books and literature. But no, I can tell you from BITTER experience, many of them are devoted to primarily to bureaucracy and their own petty power. And those, unfortunately, are the ones whom the systems reward and who get ahead.
Mod
Patrick wrote: "You would think that educators would be devoted to the ideals of education. You would think that librarians would be devoted to books and literature. But no, I can tell you from BITTER experience, ..."I know several librarians who are not readers. That has never made any sense to me. It's like being a veterinarian who doesn't like animals or a pediatrician who can't stand children.
However, all of those people exist.. lol
It's a basic philosophy that needs to change. At one time (earlier in the 20th century), public libraries were viewed as the people's university. They had much more of the perspective and approach taken by academic libraries. They acquired books for the long term and built collections that had substance, so that someone who wished to research a topic would have appropriate resources. The current view is that libraries are "free" bookstores (at best - they are also trying to be community centers, "third places," homeless shelters, video arcades, etc.) and just as bookstores only carry what is current and popular, libraries feel they must do the same. Once it's off the bestseller charts, it's off to the dustbin. Stats like gatecount and circulation are used to justify everything. There is no ideal of what a good collection should contain.If libraries changed their attitude somewhat, they might win the support of all kinds of people who are absolutely disgusted about their tax dollars being wasted on books that get tossed after just a few years. If libraries could assure those people that they have created strategies to acquire wisely and to preserve last copies of titles (the way that academic libraries and consortia are currently working toward), then they might see fewer calls for cutting library budgets and maybe even more donations!
Michael, I agree completely with what you say here.
This is so sad. I can't tell you how often I try to check a book out of the library, only to find that it's no longer in circulation. I've even seen copies of the book I want labeled as "warehouse", meaning it's no longer on the shelves and is now inventory for the annual book sale. I understand they can't keep everything, but I hate to see the books go off the shelves.
Michael wrote: "It's a basic philosophy that needs to change. At one time (earlier in the 20th century), public libraries were viewed as the people's university. They had much more of the perspective and approach ..."I think the complicating factor is that space is a resource. How do you justify shelf after shelf of space inhabited by items that there is a possibility that no one will look at again?
Our large library system owns a copy of "Hitty, Her First Hundred Years". It has been checked out only 3 times in the last 10 years.
"The Pickwick Papers" by Dickens had a replacement copy purchased in 2008 which has only circulated 4 times.
How do you make people read the classics when all they want to read is the latest Patterson?
Mod
Step one: don't buy 20 copies of the latest Patterson. Step two: don't display the latest Patterson, but do display the older treasures. Step three: don't worry about keeping books that are available in the public domain, but focus on the out-of-print but still in copyright.
It's a running joke right now here. I have "Miss Hickory" on display and have had it on display since I read the book back in September. It is literally on the checkout desk. It is the only book featured on the desk. I recovered the jacket to make it look prettier. I created a bookmark with a brief synopsis of the book. I have it tagged to designate that it was a Newbery winner. I suggest it to people when it's my turn at the desk.
It hasn't checked out in 4 months of being displayed right on the desk.
I'm not sure what else to do.
If it makes you feel any better, I certainly would have checked it out.
Patrick wrote: "If it makes you feel any better, I certainly would have checked it out."I appreciate that Patrick.. I'm lucky to mostly work with other people who are readers and who also find it soul-crushing to delete quality books. Which is why they tolerate my odd need to get Miss Hickory checked out to someone.. lol
Sure, space is a resource, and it should be put to best use. But all shelf space doesn't have to cost the same. It's been more than 30 years since Harvard implemented their first high-density storage depository. Some wise publics have started getting involved (for example, some county systems in NY are members of the Empire Shared Collection, alongside both public and private academics in the region). That needs to happen more. For those who really want to know more on this, try http://www.oclc.org/content/dam/research/publications/library/2007/2007-01.pdf - it's now 10 years old.
The other thing that ought to be considered are shared acquisitions plans. In a city with 20-some branches, should each branch have an identical collection? I know some where central ordering purchases a copy of whatever children's book for every branch. If patrons can wait a day or two for a copy from another branch (the delivery systems are already in place), a lot fewer copies could serve the same population, freeing up money for a wider range (and shelves for those not-as-popular titles). Combine this with an off-site storage facility and you are on your way to satisfying a wider variety of library patrons.
If you want depressing statistics, it was reported in 2010 that on average for 4-year colleges, 53% of books published in 2006 or earlier never circulate. I take these with a grain of salt because I know that circulation stats are only known when you have systems to record them. So a book that was published in 1975 and was checked out 10 times before the library got a computer system would have zero from the computer's day one. If that book were taken off the shelf and read, but not checked out, it would still have zero. But to be sure, libraries do spend a lot of money on books that do not circulate. But today I checked out 5 and yesterday 6 more from the 1930s to 1970s - had those been weeded ruthlessly, I'd never have the chance now. If the copy is gone, it will never generate a circulation stat.
I'll not address Jennifer's last point here. That's a topic near and dear to my heart, but the comment box is too small. Needless to say, I do my part in my own family. Parents and teachers are essential to this - as are librarians.
I found out about Miss Hickory from this goodreads childrens' lit group and got it from the public library. I haven't read it yet, but will soon.
Mod
I work in a library and luckily this article is not about my library system.
However, it is about the common practice of weeding books which have not circulated in a set amo..."
Someone who either is NOT a reader or perhaps had some personal issues with the individuals and just wanted to hurt them, sigh.
Mod
I am more upset at the "reporting" and find this kind of behaviour frightening.
Mod
Hear, hear, but you are preaching to the choir, and what needs to change, as you have pointed out, is the general attitude.
I can sympathize with the whistle-blower - I mean, it is dishonest and it is an abuse of power, taxpayer money, etc. I am not entirely sold on the "falsely creating a public record" bit - this isn't a driver's license or passport. I'd get laughed out of the room if I tried to use my library card as an ID somewhere. The quantity and turnaround speed of the transactions, as well as the identity are likely what stuck out. If 24 real conspirators checked out those 2,400 books ten apiece and kept them for a week, it would take ten weeks to achieve the same volume. I would think it would be far less likely that this would raise any flags. And, of course, it wouldn't be breaking any rules at all.
I enjoy preaching to such a nice choir....I have my position on how things could be improved (in my considered opinion), but I am also very much a realist who has seen, both from the insider and outsider views, where public libraries are going. I know that 90% of the world disagrees with me (on so many things....).
So in order to survive and thrive in spite of American public libraries, my family has our own strategies. If there is a book that we must have for our children in 5 or 10 or more years, I put it on a list, find it, and buy it (often as a library cast-off). It used to be that we could count on that library book still being on the shelf, but no longer.
This is not me, but I like knowing there are kindred spirits out there: http://postapocalyptichomeschool.blogspot.com/
Mod
What an awful word, "weeding," to use for this action....
Just as a thought- I've sent a couple large boxes of what I felt were good children's books to OpenLibrary.
Of course, most of you are familiar with them. They scan the book, retain the physical copy and you can checkout the ebook.
Their book drive page is here:
https://openlibrary.org/bookdrive
Once I've read a book to my daughter or she's outgrown it, I verify that Openlibrary doesn't have it yet and toss it in a box. When I have a full box, I pay $12 or so to ship 20 lbs of books to them.
Of course, I retain absolute favorites, but sometimes one read is enough even for good books.
I buy at Goodwill and library sales and yard sales, so I never have too much into them. I wish I'd kept track of what I'd sent because I'd love to know if they've made it on the site yet. :)
Mod
I work in a library and luckily this article is not about my library system.
However, it is about the common practice of weeding books which have not circulated in a set amount of time. Basically, a library assistant and a branch head created a fake account to avoid weeding classic books which hadn't circulated.
Someone reported them and the branch head is on administrative leave.
I guess the takeaway from this is; visit your local library and check out a few classics now and then. Even if you return them in a few days without reading them, you may have bought them another couple years on the shelf.
I can't even imagine who would've reported attempting to save classic books.