"Don't be Evil"...or at least try really hard not to be.

In “The Search: How Google and Its Rivals Rewrote the Rules of Business and Transformed Our Culture”, John Battelle traces not only the history of the company but also the history of the technology that supports the search tool. In doing so, he places it in the context of other great notions of knowledge, the Memex being the foremost example.

In retracing the steps that were taken to create Google, he starts at the beginning with the original idea of a tool that could rank pages (not coincidentally dubbed “PageRank”) according to the significance of the site (itself based on the number of times it was linked to or referenced by other sites. This worked along side of Backrub, which tracked how many sites linked back to a given site.

This method of searching was patterned on the scientific research model wherein the significance of an article, or of a journal was based on the number of citations and the impact of journal in which the citation is published. In theory, this results in not only the most relevant works but also the most popular. In theory if most people have the same search psychology the results given should then be the results that have proven useful to the most people.

Inevitably, this leads to some sites being ranked very high and others being demoted to the rank of also-ran. In the early frontier days of the web this system insulted some who felt their internet-award winning pages should thusly be awarded top placement on search engines as well. Some were reportedly so enraged that they petitioned Google directly to vent their anger. Yet in the end, they had no one to blame but an algorithm.

Whereas the links on a personal webpage are more likely to be handpicked, the links on Google are generated by hi-speed web-crawling spiders that capture not the page, but the information within it. This also caused consternation for some early site owners, who feared for their bandwidth and the intellectual property it contained.

Battelle demonstrates how just as early web-users had to be instructed in searching; early website owners had to be educated about what it meant to be searched.

The process of merchant education having been accomplished, Google evolved into a multifaceted business. From their roots as a search engine, to the sales of prime advertising ranks, to the sale of keywords, Google has established a business based on the way we search, the way we think and the way we organize our lives in the virtual world.

One such organizational innovation that arose out of the corporate creative process is G-Mail. More than a tool to send e-mail, G-mail is a tool for deriving profit by scanning for keywords within users e-mail messages. This is problematic in an era of privacy concerns, however Google tries to sooth these worries with the knowledge that the tool searches only for Keywords, not gossip.

However, in an era when Google saturates the virtual experience of users with its branded content, it is not unrealistic to think that Google could capture everything about your search habits and match it with your identity. When this capability is combined with governmental hypersensitivity to supposed terrorist threats, some are concerned that the company whose motto is “Don’t Be Evil” could be up to no good. With the passage of the USA PATRIOT ACT, the legal mechanism for such nefariousness is all but in place.

In the context of global information commerce, this capability has implications far beyond America. In markets such as China, with repressive governments it can result in total information blackouts. It can also result in the capability to track those deemed dissidents merely for speaking their mind.

Is this the new cost of doing business – cracking down on dissidents in one country and cracking down on supposed terrorists in another to ensure continued profits? Is it idealism to suggest that Google could do better? Is it idealism to suggest that we should demand more? Should innovative technology be innovative enough to move beyond the petty squabbles of governments? Alternatively, is the technology too enmeshed in our culture, and in our government to make this reality indeed realistic?

All of this not to create a parallel paranoia about a new world order. Rather, going forward we, as users of technology need to be conscious of our consumption. Just as we would not throw away that which can be recycled, we should not give away that which should be saved. We can maintain our freedom if we are aware of the risks inherent in any action taken. A holistic approach to information consumption allows for effective communication combined with an awareness of the processes of communication. While we should not live in fear, we should be aware of the way in which our information passes through communication conduits. Within this context should never forget our own accountability for our decisions and the accountability of those we trust with our information in making those decisions.

As the timeline of our course moves forward to be a present day orientation, the articles we read more and more like accurate predictions of our present condition. Articles like Wrights “The Web That Wasn’t”, D’Elia et al and “The Impact of the Internet on Public Library Use” and others weave seamlessly into current discussions around the topic of the internet in our lives. Yet we cannot help but notice that each generation dreams only with the canvas of colors laid before it. It is not yet known what designs might shape our future that have yet to cross the drawing board of future librarians and information scientists.

Wright acknowledges as much in the first paragraph of his essay stating that “Tim Berners-Lee’s invention has already established itself as a world-changing technology (Wright p. 183)”. This articles however he tackles the task of acknowledging the work that lead up to the invention of Berners-Lee. Of the many who labored, most notable in my mind is Paul Otlet who predicted the internet in speaking of a workstation using multiple screens. Like the Memex envisioned by Bush, Otlet’s 1934 prediction of a “networked multimedia space” sees the world at the finger-tips of the information scientists on multiple screens and in multiple formats (Wright P.185).

This was to be expected from someone such as Otlet who attempted, in the “Bibliographique Universel” to create a “master bibliography of the world’s accumulated knowledge” in 1895 (Wright p.186). He would also develop Universal Decimal Classification, which while not popular in the United States is popular elsewhere around the world.

George D’Ella et al write of “baseline data concerning the evolving relationship between the public’s use of the library and the public’s use of the internet” (D’Ella Et al P. 802). Most salient of the study’s goals is to “identify decision criteria” around the choice between internet and computer use and to describe how the library compares on these decision criteria” (D’Ella Et al P. 804).

One expected but unfortunate correlation was found between high education, high income and high library use. The same trend proved to be true in regards to internet use. This documents clearly not only a digital divide, but indeed an information divide. However they found that overall the study “does not demonstrate (at this time) that recency, length or frequency of use of the Internet are affecting why people use the library” (D’Ella Et Al P.808). However the study did note that the average percentage of respondents who used only the internet (20.3%) is twice the number who used only the library (9.7%) (D’Ella Et al. P.810).

Overall the decision-making logic for choosing the internet revolved around issues of convenience, the ability to customize the experience and the perceived immediacy of the information. Decision-making logic around choices for the library involved issues of cost, accuracy and “protection of user privacy” (D’Ella p.812). The reasons for using the internet reflected a desire for convenience, and also for a range of options amongst online resources.

The Halfner article from the New York Times on November 21, 2005 recalls Sidney Verba of the Harvard University Library. It is not merely a fluff piece about a happy librarian, but rather a piece concerning his involvement with the sometimes controversial Google Book Project whose aim is to digitize entire collections. The article notes that in addition to Harvard, the University of Michigan, Stanford and the New York Public Library are all part of the effort, who “expects to scan 15 million books from the libraries”.

For those of us who have had the pleasure of reading works such as “Doublefold” by Nicholson Baker, we wait for the part of the story where someone decries digitization. Yet it was not Baker who voiced his concern in a litigious manner. It was understandably, the book publishers who own the rights to the materials being digitized. All of this leaves the project with only public domain materials to scan.

Meanwhile one has to wonder about the efforts of publishers to digitize their materials independently. If it was a battle for the preservation of profit or a worry over the loss of the printed word none can be sure. One thing is for certain though; there is a lot of paper involved either way. Verba speaks of scanning samples of works to give the reader an idea of a title’s contents. However, some such as Patricia Schroder, a congresswoman from Colorado who happens to be President and Chief Executive of the American Association of Book Publishers decries efforts outside those of the publisher’s themselves to digitize works that they do not hold the copyright for.

Anthony Grafton’s “Future Reading” quotes Kevin Kelly who wrote for Wired Magazine of a future in which “all the books in the world become a single liquid fabric of interconnected words and ideas (Grafton P.1).” Kelly further tells of a future in which texts could be merged and analyzed to distinguish between that which civilization knows and that which is left to be learned.

Readers of this blog and attendees of this class will clearly recognize the continuation of a theme within the words of Kelly. It is the same theme that lead to the development of the Memex and indeed the same theme that lead to the development of the Cutter and Dewey cataloging systems. Some men and women set out to write the great American novel, others set out to catalog each one of their attempts. Grafton’s article tells of the work of but a handful of the organizational luminaries throughout the ages who stared down vast swaths of knowledge and dared to classify it.

According to Grafton, the cradle of life, Mesopotamia is also the cradle of organization. For it was there in the third century B.C.E. that attempts were made to catalogue the famed Library at Alexandria. This would be followed some six centuries later with “The Cannon Tables” developed by Euseibus to gather and organize all of the early Christian writings.

Such efforts continued, into the 16^th century which found skilled librarians advising notable printing houses. As history moved forward, and the amount of information available increased, librarians were used to make sense of the increasingly complex ideas and works.

In more modern times, we have seen the rise of the micro-film and the rise of Google. Unlike micro-film machines, a large portion of the public owns computers. This allows them to scroll through information faster and with greater ease than they were previously able. According to one source quoted in the article “95 percent of searches begin at Google” (Grafton p.3).

Yet even as Google attempts to synthesize all the information from the world’s greatest libraries, it too has limitations. The article notes that works previous to 1923 are not subject to copyright restrictions with regards to digitization. However works written after that date are out of the public domain. It is limited also by the technology it uses for digitization. Some books are too fragile to be digitized safely. These efforts will be taken up by other concerned parties with adequate facilities for the job. Furthermore, the article notes that the archives of the patent office, a treasure trove of “brilliance and lunacy” is not included in Google’s efforts (Grafton p.4). Grafton’s article “Adventures in Wonderland” further documents the logic behind even attempted digitization by noting that there are a great number of organizations with a wealth of information, and a great number of places with few information sources.

Bernard Frischer’s “The Ultimate Internet Café” foretells a future in which the great research libraries embrace their destiny as repositories of knowledge through use of theatrical projection displays akin to a modern day interactive MovieTone Newsreel adapted to the needs of the academic and professional community.

The article tells of one such project in use in 2002 at UCLA. In his essay, the author argues for the standardized implementation of software for, and space in which such experiences might be possible in the library. This argument is based on a supposition that future libraries will be judged on the “quality of the experience” they offer (Frischer p.44). The author argues for a future need that encompasses multi-screen memex-esque experience. He flatly states that books should be digitized and placed into storage. The newfound space should be used for such systems as he proposes.

The article also makes the case that such an effort will assist not only users but publishers as well. It will in theory allow them to deliver up to date information in High bandwidth formats. Such materials not suited for display over computers, he advocates should be reserved for viewing in the theatre mentioned earlier by the author.

In focusing also on the architecture of the library, he suggests that libraries are about more than books and knowledge. Rather they are also about the experience of reading such books and finding such knowledge. He states that users of technology love places in which to show off such wares. He suggests that this is the reason why internet cafes are popular. This despite the many apartment dweller who might state the reason for their use of such space as having to do more with the upstairs neighbors fascination with 80’s hair metal. In the world of Frischer (p51) the library should be modeled after “the ultimate Internet Café”. One has to wonder what the lattes will cost in such a space given the tax base needed to build it.

In the writings for this week, many authors and scholars comment on the changing nature of libraries as it relates to issues of automation. These changes have affected not only the way in which we practice, but also the way in which the public perceives the practice of librarianship.

W. Boyd Rayward’s “A History of Computer Applications in Libraries: Prolegomena” suggests the reasons the difficulties encountered during the automation. He further underscores the importance of organizations such as the American Library Association. Efforts toward shared cataloging and services that provided ready-made card catalog entries also proved helpful, such as the OCLC. Later, innovations such as the MARC records laid the framework for full-scale digitization that would come later with the development, and widespread popularity of the World Wide Web.

Yet before the mechanization and digitization of records could occur, a period of standardization needed to happen. Both Dewey and the Library of Congress systems of classification were developed (LC was developed due to perceived deficiencies in the Dewey system according to Rayward). As with any great cultural change, the evolution of the cataloging process was arrived at through countless hours of dialogue between stakeholders.

This new use of technology had the effect of professionalizing what is seen by some as a clerical-level occupation. Not only did the work itself take on a more tones of information professionalism, Rayward notes that the education underpinning the training for the occupation underwent professionalization as well.

In his article “The Librarian and the Univac: Automation and Labor at the 1962 World’s Fair”, Greg Downey notes the way in which the devices we use to accomplish our tasks as librarians have an effect on the public perceptions of our status as professionals.

The 1962 World’s Fair, held that year Seattle, Washington under the theme “Century 21 exposition provided a space to showcase the modern library. At the height of cultural fascination with science fiction, fast food and innovations such as the Supermarket, the 1962 World’s Fair set out to be the Futurist’s conceptualization of every facet of society some half century forward.

Yet Downey reveals that it was not so much the work of Futurists as it was of the military industrial complex and corporate underwriters. If that would not have been enough to shatter the viewer’s faith in the authenticity of the events, perhaps you might have been dissuaded by the lack of actual librarians running the technology, the failure of the technology itself (which did not come with manuals or a repair contract) or perhaps the emphasis placed on the physical appearance of the librarians, who were required to provide headshots along with their application for this sought-after position as the overseer of a boondoggle.

A further discussion of automation takes place in the article written by F. Wilfrid Lancaster. Writing in the late 1970’s as public databases were just on the horizon and the card catalog was perhaps a decade away from the threat of composting.

At this point in library history, the author notes, the information capacity for shelves full of journals is rapidly dwindling. At the same time, the author notes the emergence of greater numbers of journals with the rapid specialization of many occupations. The result of this is the “scatter” of information amongst many journals (Lancaster p. 348). While key journals remain at the forefront of the professions, other minor journals may on occasion have groundbreaking work published in their pages. Not only does this present an issue of space, but also for each publication, there is a cost of acquisition attached. Multiplied many times over for each profession and multiplied by the number of new professions arising out of new technology and the situation quickly becomes also an issue of cost.

Immediately after questioning the future of the library in the face of such digitization, the author answers more interesting questions – namely that of the early technology that underpinned the development of the online library, as we know it today.

Speaking of such innovations as TeleNet the author notes the high cost of such connections during this time. He also notes the efforts of the academic institutions to bring this cost down.

At this point in history, access to databases cost anywhere from $3 to $50 per hour of operation - and that was merely in a demonstration (Lancaster P.351). Just think, 30 years later – he could have witnessed technology crashing for a greatly diminished amount of money.

In his article, Clifford Lynch traces the transformative effects of automation on the practice of librarianship. He notes the importance of shared copy cataloging systems which according to his article paved the way for further “collaboration” between libraries to share resources and cut costs (lynch p. 62). Like many others before him, he notes that many innovations were first tested in campus libraries and across campus high-speed internet networks. In their infancy he notes, the catalog could be browsed but no part of the book in its actual form could be seen online, given the lack of technology at that time for direct digitization of large amounts of text.

As these systems became more widely used, they had the effect according to Lynch, of making materials more “accessible” (Lynch p.63). Amongst the major databases to gain prominence in the research field were Medline. As the technology improved, other hindrances to information transparency appeared. Amongst these are the rights of authors and the now ubiquitous issue of copyright.

In “Automating the Library: The Council on Library Resources”, Deanna Marcum traces the 45 plus year history of the organization. She traces the influences of Louis Booker Wright at the CLIR who collaborated with Fred C. Cole of the Ford Foundation to develop the ideas and funding mechanisms (respectively) that would enable projects such as the MARC record to be developed and tested.

A group so committed to innovation, however was not without its fair share of infighting. Within the group, members of the leadership such as Wright disdained public librarians so much that he withheld positions of authority from them, He saw himself as a “scholar-librarian” as opposed to a professional librarian (Marcum, P. 3). His distinction being that professional librarians were devoted less to innovation and more to professionalization.

In the 1960’s it concluded, “a number of services could be improved through the application of computers” Marcum p. 5). With this mindset, the CLIR set about working toward its goal of a technology linked “national library system” (Marcum p. 6). The work on increasing library cooperation would continue into the 1970’s, with work on NELNET and the Bibliographic Service Development Program.

Later the CLIR would work with the Digital Libraries Foundation to increase the sharing of digital resources. These collaborations may not have resulted in the national library system envisioned some 45 years ago, but via technology, they have created a modicum of access to resources across the nation via the internet and its ancillary networks.

(Note to Greg - this post was written earlier, but failed to post to the blog)

The writings for this week are in many ways foreshadows of current technology. In other ways they are the dream ideas of brilliant Futurists. Aspects of both types of thought can be seen in the Memex conceived by Vannevar Bush (no relation to George W. Bush).At its core his ideas were based on the premise that we did not lack the ideas or thoughts to propel society forward. Rather we lacked a way of accessing ideas and creating connections between diverse and divergent concepts. His Memex sought to “store” and “extend” concepts in order that they should be “useful to society” (Bush p.2). He places his technology and ideas within the framework of other advances, such as photography, film and recording devices and in many ways sells his ideas as a product that will revolutionize the way we think about information and ideas. His Memex is said by some to be an early form of the internet, sans worldwide connections, for its ability to place ideas in web-like frameworks of connectivity.

In the world of Bush and his allies, the world-wide web is not computer based but micro-film based. Surely he never considered the way that the technology degrades as Nicholson Baker would decry many decades later in DoubleFold . Such is the drumbeat of progress, considering more the desire to get someplace new than the ramifications of the journey. One has to wonder what the value of historical archives are if they are all degrading. Yet there is no consideration for the preservation of documents in their original form within the Memex.

The work of Bush sidles up nicely to Leigh’s The Public Library Inquiry inasmuch as one considers the way in which information can be shared for the purposes of research, and Leigh considers the way in which resources can be shared amongst libraries to build an efficient network of libraries that would share materials for the enjoyment of users and the cost-savings of taxpayers. It is rare in our society when bastions of culture and the arts as libraries are, are put under the microscope of scientific analysis in dry calculations that seeks to quantify all the meanings derived from the place and from the services derived within. How do you measure something that is at once the “People’s University” and at the same time (but perhaps in a separate room), a place for the education of children (p.225)?

Written in the 1950’s during the rise of the interstate fast-car society, the chapter entitled “The Direction of Development” calls for centralization to take advantage of economies of scale, and provide an equalization of resources between smaller and larger libraries. The document further tells of the expansion of the libraries role as educator of adults and children. At the time of writing, the school library as we know it today had not yet come into being. Therefore it was impressed upon both the schools and the public library to make materials and staff resources available to younger students. To this end, the document calls increased training of librarians for this role, in both school libraries and in the public library sector.

While the document touches on many topics, the ultimate theme is the need for streamlining, Definition of duties and the efficient provision of resources to carry out those duties.

Pennavaria’s 2002 work Representation of Books and Libraries in Depictions of the Future captures a more modern perspective on our never diminishing fascination with The Library of the Future. She divides tales of the future into the categories of “utopian” or “dystopian” (p.230). That is to say happy tales and sad tales. Pennavaria speaks of Orwell’s 1984, and provides this writer a means of connection to another of this week’s writings, Bush’s “As We May Think” *(1945), which she notes is both hopeful in its offer of salvation through technology, but also cautionary in his plead that technology can be peaceful, even as he is aware of the constant drumbeats for war.

One has to wonder if the futuristic idea of “Libraries as community center” came from librarians as a gift to the writer, or if the futurists gifted us with this concept (p.237). Just as little thought was given to the mechanisms that would increase the speed of knowledge acquisition according to Pennavaria, so too was little consideration given to the types of people that would use the library. Could they know that libraries would collect GLBT works, that they would house original copies of infamous works such as Mein Kampf? Just as they had no idea about the mechanics of technology, so too it would seem that they had little idea about the human mechanics of support for libraries – staff members and interest groups that form the backbone coalition for the support of any library.

Sapp’s Early Visions of Future Librarianship begins with Ranganathan’s 5^th law of Library Science that “the Library is a growing organism’ (p.xi). He begins with Dewey’s hope for the future of the library and uses that as a catapult to discuss the dreams of other library greats. During the early years, were obsessed with notions of professionalization, such that it had to be overtly stated that librarianship existed as Bibliothecal Science (P.xiv).

As was noted in the readings for last week, wars played an important role in defining the mission of the library. They also played a role in increasing the visibility of librarians, even as it came late to the idea of the library as a proponent of democracy. The writer notes the “technical” aspects of early training and efforts to develop curriculum that reflected the desired higher status. Specialization was one method used to both enhance the status of librarians and enhance the level of service available for the growing needs for academic and corporate librarians. The overall training was touted alongside aspirations for the increase in cultural impact and relevance of librarians in wider society

Other descriptions sought to clarify divisions of labor, monetary support for librarianship through endowments and the role of librarians as intelligent gatekeepers of the new information economy. Throughout the work, one has to wonder where the line between the formation of new mission statements and pure aspirational wishes lay. At some point like the rantings of those who insist on the existence of extra-terrestrial races, one has to wonder if the fantastical writings of Futurists enhanced or in fact diminished the credibility of librarians in the mind of the public.

In the absence of discourse, we are merely a people gathered together, reading alone.

This week's readings begin with Nyquist's "Poverty, Prejudice and the public library". It examines the ways in which the library has been complicit in maintaining the status quo in society and in the collections. Written in the 1960's it asks that we make stakeholders of the poor and the disenfranchised. Not only taking them into consideration in our discussions but actually holding discussions with them.
It is a challenge - If we actually believe that libraries are a social good for communities then we should invest in all communities, geographic,ethnic, racial and experiential. The authro rightly calls us on our "hypocrisy" for believing only in the value of our communities, and not striving to make a wider impact.

While the article's proposal that the flight of white's means a loss of leadership is both racist and outdated, the article does make good points with regard to the economic impact of suburbanization on the urban core of the American city. Yet at the same time it neglects the lack of governmental and other investment in that same urban core. It neglects to speak of the Interstate system which cut mighty swaths of roadway through the middle of vital communities. I should hope that we have moved beyond the point of viewing the poor and disenfranchied as mere " social dynamite" to take a term from Harvard President, James B. Conant (p.81).

It is furthermore naive to assume that the same parents who want the best for their kids are also those who are not bringing their kids to the library. To say that the library audience is comprised of only the middle and upper class ignores the head-start classes that flood story-times. It ignores the illiterate man "reading" the magazine. To a certain extent this article is a measure of progress, but it is also a picture that deletes the obvious.

The short essay " Libraries to the people" was interesting for its rage and interesting for its almost mimeographed presentation style. It puts to words the lack of attention that emerging audiences can feel when their newly ackowleged needs are not met by a library stuck in its traditions. While it is a trip down memory lane, to a time when Rolling Stone and The Village Voice were truly independent and interesting, it is also a present day call to be away of the print media available that are commonly ignored by the mainstream of society. It is these ideas, the new and the cutting edge, that the library should be giving voice to in our collections.

It is also a call to be aware of things as simple as subject headings. As much as it is rude to speak disparaging of someone without cause we should not catergorize people and subjects into demeaning and limiting subject headings. This practice limits the discourse around the marginalized topics and further hinders discussion about them in a serious manner. I should hope that we are more open to the idea of many perspectives that we are not still insisting that the majority religion can determine what is God and what is not.

Following the theme of the previous essay, Samek's "Intellectual Freedom and Social Responsability in American Librarianship" challenges what it means to be a librarian. We are called by this essay to be activists for the right of expression in all forms. We are to expect support from A.L.A. in this work and when it is not presented, we should demand it. The "Library Bill of Rights" is mere words until we back it up with our deeds and our refusal to back down from our principles.

Changing the pace, Miller's " Shopping for Community..." analyzes the ways in which the idea of the public lbirary has been merged with that of a commercial bookshop (think Borders or Barnes and Noble). With the establishment of such mega-bookstores our notion of how books and community function have changed. We no longer rely exclusivly on the library for our literary community. Instead we have the opprotunity to go to large spacious stores that sell books, true - but also offer coffee, and exclusive Author meet-and Greet sessions.

The author places this in the context of not only the library world ,but also the bookstore world. In doing so she puts the library in the same place as the independent bookstore that wants to respond to the new market presence but also maintain a sense of individuality. She finds many independent ( and I can back this up with my own research) bookstores making an appeal to the moral highground of supporting local business. She suggests that some of the support for the independent bookseller is based on a distaste for the "commericalization of the printed word".

Research suggests that modern life has changed as well. We view communities as "lifestyle centers" according to Miller, and this week's readings from Nyqist suggest that a certain segment of the population has abandoned the urban core - long the home of the independent bookseller. While the trend may be reversing with recent banking troubles, one need only look to downtown Madison to notice the lack of independent peddlers of new printed works.

Furthermore, Miller finds herself frustrated with the marketing efforts that libraries must undergo to make their services known, and popular. She decries value-added services such as coffee-bars, feeling that they displace the printed word. Yet, anyone who has enjoyed a good book in a quiet place will tell you, that it goes much better with coffee - at least in my opinion.

In thinking about the cultural economy of a city. One must consider that the culture is not merely what we want it to be - it is its own animal. in some places the culture is very mall oriented. We can make attempts to change that but it might not go so well. In other places where there is more of an established downtown, an effort to preserve that space is valued. But what are we if not impostors if we go so far as to build imagined downtowns just to support our urbane cultural whims.

Buschmann's On Customer Driven Librarianship further decries the bookstoreishness of some new libraries. The author alleges that it focused the patron and the taxpayer ultimatly on the profit margin derived from such services, when the value of literacy is seldom measurable explicitly in tax revinue or in the number of books circulated. He argues that we must not only offer what is popular, we must also offer what is unpopular. Customer counts are for retail he argues, and we should not be modeling ourselves so much on that big-box format that we do only that which is screamed for the loudest. The meek amongst us might want something different, and if they whisper in our proverbial ears for a small but unpopular request, we should value that as well. We are not measured by our customer counts because the value of discovery cannot be understood in financial terms or in how many times the gate clicks. Our best brand identity is that of the availablity of knowlege. Knowlege he argues is not for consumption but for discourse. It is through this discourse that we grow as a society. It is in in it's absence that we are merely a people gathered together, reading alone.

LIBRARIES AND WAR!

The substance of this week’s readings revolved around the role of the library during the time of World War I. As we have read from other writers, and heard in our lectures, the library has at times and in places failed to live up to its role as a beacon of intellectual and social freedom. We have heard already how African American’s were virtually non-existent from the idealized library. This week’s reading’s document and demonstrate the expunging of dissent in the early 20^th century library as the United States entered World War 1. Ours was a just cause and it was seen as just at the time that the libraries should be converted from information clearinghouses into wartime propaganda factories.

Perhaps it was a demonstration of the public trust in the library and the honesty of its information that it was sought out among other institutions war information dissemination. Perhaps it was done out of desperation. It could have been yet another attempt for the library to establish a role for itself, justify its existence or maintain its viability. Just as Uncle Sam would declare on posters “I Want YOU!”, so too did the libraries call for books for Troops in the same manner. Children were enlisted in writing letters to the troops as well, making sure that every generation felt the same about the war. These programs were used to demonstrate the “wholehearted and unconditional loyalty to the United States”.

While libraries did provide meal ideas for rationed recipes throughout the wars, it was only after the war intensified that some felt the pressure to remove books in German and weed books offering dissenting opinions. This was done partially because of fear, and partially because of community sentiment. It was not done with any concern for library ethics.

Yet some such as Howard Kunitz deplored the jingoism of the day. Yet to read the article it would seem that men and women of such integrity were in short supply during this time.

It was noted that some turned to the library for reassurance that the sky was not falling. Questions about the citizenship potential for Japanese persons were often the topic of reference interviews during this time. Perhaps this was out of fear, or perhaps it was done to sift through the noise of wartime hysteria.

The effort to provide “correct” information about the war and how to ration throughout America’s libraries was taken up by The United States Information Service. The effort to use film to spark discussion (only pro-war discussion), was taken up by many libraries with the support of the ALA. Many times, the literature notes, the films shown were produced by the Armed Forces themselves.

Just as the war affected the materials collected by the libraries, so too did if affect the employees it was able to sustain. Given the state of women in the workforce, and the low pay of librarianship, it is noted that many left the library for war-time labor, seeking less feminized work and better pay. Into their place stepped war-time volunteers, and in some places, even Japanese-American workers.

In wartime, words such as Military Necessity took on ominous tones (Becker, p57). Would this signal only minor information blockades or would it be an invitation to widespread censorship? It is clear that some libraries bent over backwards to government demands in order to justify their existence, however it would be wrong to say that all were guilty of such intellectual cowardice.

It is clear though, in the writing “Errors of Omission and Cultural Destruction in Iraq, 2003), that America is not alone in this war-time intellectual fear. Cited in the chapter are events in Afghanistan, and Iraq. Though, not all damage was caused by the Taliban or by Iraqi looters. Some damage was caused by Americans, who in their effort to gain control of oil, lost sight of the books, and cultural treasures. Said the American Library Association in 2003, “Cultural Heritage is as important as Oil”. The targeting of historic buildings for bombings and the lack of protection provided for sites susceptible to looting left Iraq looking less like a picked over garage sale. This according to the writer told Iraq that America was less interested in its history, and more interested in American victory. Swept over by war, it would seem that America stole from Iraq the very institutions that could have provided for democratic inquiry. In the chaos of war and the excitement of a fallen leader, one can only know what idea a book might have given to a fighter. It may not have stopped the war, but it could have provided a modicum of reason in the state of anarchy.

Free to All

The world of libraries and library architecture in the late 19^th and early 20^th century was heavily circumscribed and highly organized. During this time, devices for transporting books from one area to another and architectural devices for the separation of the social classes would be both invented and standardized. During this time, industries developed to mass produce the means of library production. Just as the devices and the designs became standardized, so too did the gender and class roles also become standardized within the life of the library

In many respects, the early library represented the last stand of the American gentry. While they would later populate the Society Pages of many newspapers, their power as social arbiters was rapidly being diminished. Thus they sought out charitable causes as a means of securing their power over the lower classes. One traditionally genteel cause has been the library. Not only did the Gentry affect the way in which libraries were run, they also affected the way in which libraries were designed.

The early Carnegie Libraries, and the Boston and New York public libraries reflected not so much the purpose of the building, but the prowess of the donors and board members. Envisioning themselves as heirs to European royalty, many on library boards insisted on great and grand fortress-style libraries based on Greek and Roman designs. While they sought to give something to the community, they also wished to signify, if only in design, that the use of the library by the middle-class and poor was a privilege.

However, unlike the other libraries that were built by benefactors, the Carnegie Library developed a reputation for austerity in design as his secretary, and supervisor of library development sought to refocus the spaces on reading materials. This was no doubt influenced by the efficiency of others such as Dewey who had formed a company known as The Library Bureau (formerly formally associated with the A.L.A), which sought to streamline the bookplaces and workspaces of the library.

The design of libraries then was a statement not only about the majesty of the literate educated, but about the circumscribed divisions between those who were devoted to serious scholarship, and those who were reading the paper; those who were working in library management and those who were managing the volume levels of patrons with the infamous “Shhh”. Some were so bold as to worry about “the Newspaper reading rooms attracting the tramp element “as was expressed by Arthur Bostwick of St. Louis (Van Slyck p. 121). This view, however rude or backward it may seem today, reflected a move toward enlightenment according to Van Slyck, by denoting that indeed not all library patrons were vagrants that need not be trusted. As poor as a reader may have been, as long as they looked respectable they would be respected.

Just as the worker-librarians were situated amongst the patrons to denote their occupational status (by lack of walls for their office), so too does Van Slyck argue that buildings were purposefully placed next to majestic art galleries and other cultural landmarks to increase the status of the library. Only later would library branches emerge. Branch libraries, however, like female librarians were thought of as less than in some (but not all) cases. The majestic design that announced the library is all but gone from libraries that are placed in storefronts.

One improvement that did come from the formation of branch libraries was the increased space for service to children. While some of the older libraries did provide for children’s spaces, young patrons were often discouraged to use the library by age restrictions or by the design of the library that placed children’s books in far-off spaces. Yet even in children’s spaces, the rules of adult decorum prevailed. Van Slyck details how the young who wandered amongst the many books were told to “go to the park” and those who raised a fuss, as children are wont to do from time to time were promptly asked to leave. The same perfect posture demanded of adults was proscribed to the children in miniature. Lacking any evidence of the higher-order thinking ability of very young children, they were none-the-less expected to rise to the level of behavior befitting a businessman. Just as the adult library was seen as a means for the education of the educated and the uplift of the poor, so too was the children’s library seen as a preparatory nursery school for the development of future owners and workers.

For all of the failure in design and the pompous classism (to say nothing of the racism) the early library established a modicum of best-practices that are still used today in terms of cataloguing. As has been said in many classes, it is hard to judge history without having lived in the time-period. We can only compare and contrast today and yesterday. We can only understand the past, we cannot change it. Yet we can do the best honor to its best attributes by working to improve that which was built from those early foundations.

The Mission: Consensus and Contradiction

The dilemma of popular materials versus educational materials is perhaps one of the oldest philsophical questions to have faced librarians. While popular materials naturally cause circulation to rise, what good is a rise in circulation, some argue, if their is not a corresponding rise in the "diffusion of knowledge" (p. 13).
Where once the materials offered by a library were seen as a good in and of themselves, with the changes in social values and the role of the library in many communities, some argue that the expectation for the role of the materials distributed should change as well.
One might suggest that the notion of the "library faith" holds up not just the printed word, but elevates certain words, books and authors above others for their supposedly high moral content. Yet the way in which materials are being used does not suggest the quest for moral and social direction that some in librarianship suppose it does. While laws increasing funding for school libraries have increased the presence of those libraries, not every library user is browsing for academic reasons.
As neighborhood needs changed, places such as Detroit established ready reference information sites to distribute social service information. During this time libraries across the country looked more at the needs of community versus the goals of the library. With the rise of the shopping mall taking place during this time, libraries became consumer-driven, and focus marketed. It was less about having the greatest books and more about having enough copies of best sellers.

Pawley article

Christine Pawley's "Advocate for access: Lutie Sterns and the traveling libraries of the Wisconsin Free Library Commission" reminds us of the work that was undertaken by early library advocates to cultivate and expand libraries throughout America. while her focus was on one particular state, her tactics were no doubt copied or practiced elsewhere in America to promote the same goals.

Sterns saw herself as a radical and feminist in the model of Susan B. Anthony and Jane Addams. She is quoted as saying that "a liberal is a man who has left the room when the fighting begins." If this statement is not evidence enough, Sterns decried that women were secondary to men in Late 19th\ Early 20th century America.

In addition to the political climate, her work took place during the era of the Carnegie Library. According to Pawley, there were only 6 states that established more Carnegie Libraries than Wisconsin (Pawley 438). While steel moguls such as Carnegie were establishing libraries, and many places were glad to receive them, still others questioned the new role of money and power in relation to the state. Issues of goods production and wealth distribution became topics of debate in an era when Socialism and Progressive populism had the ear of many Wisconsinites.

The Wisconsin Free Library Commission's work was a response to the isolation of rural Wisconsin from print culture outlets such as libraries and newspapers. Traveling libraries, contained in suitcases were composed to combat this problem. Working with county boards and local librarians in towns across the state this program was expanded. This expansion was made possible by the political savvy of Sterns and the realization of the citizens demand for such services once the idea was proposed.

Fain Article

Elaine Fain’s Books for New Citizens: Public Libraries and Americanization Programs 1900-1925 tells the story of reformers such as Pratt and Carnegie who saw the library as a means of “social Improvement” . They supported and encouraged the development of small neighborhood libraries. Libraries such as the Carnegie in Pittsburgh had literally hundreds of distribution points. During the time-frame of 1890-1910, the public library would literally branch out and diversify its services. The formation of reference desks, children’s services and multiple sites revolutionized the way libraries operated, and indeed the way they saw themselves.

No longer limited to one central location, they began to reach out and (attempt to) meet the needs of immigrant and poor communities. New York claimed Settlement Houses, the social home for many new immigrants, as branch sites. However, as Fain notes, the development of such services was hindered by a sometimes limited understanding of how to meet the needs of diverse communities. While some had worked for immigrant organizations, others remained uneducated in the cultures and customs of those that they were trying to serve.

The work of Hull House, founded by Jane Addams, rested partially on the same beliefs that the poor lacked culture and beauty in their world. She and others sought to infuse such attributes in to their space by providing reproductions of art that could be taken home.

Later, as the fears of Communism and of the Japanese radiated throughout America, patrons were concerned that Yiddish works contained calls to revolution (Fain 270). Yet even with these fears permeating the culture. According to Fain, the library remained a place where the new immigrant could find himself, as a person, as an immigrant, and as a new American.

APOSTLES OF CULTURE

Dee Garrison’s Apostles of Culture is an engaging look at the development of librarianship in America. It provides an unflinching view of the luminaries of the library and explores the way in which their own history, combined with their place in history has affected the work we do today. From the very beginning the leaders of the library sought to advance culture, education and social status. In many ways those struggles and our role in them as professionals is the focus of great debate to this day.

From the establishment of the earliest American libraries, the motivations of culture, morality and literacy have been bound together. At once part of the social reform movements of Temperance Unions, at times leaders such as Dewey were themselves in need of social reform, being driven more by personal habits than by the desire for progress.

Coming into being at the end of the Victorian era, the library became the last stronghold of the gentry. Their social standing greatly diminished with the rise of industry, they sought to maintain influence and relevance by exerting control over the affairs of culture. As is the case today, many in this social class sought leadership within the world of the library to express their social and cultural leadership.

While men of industry would build great libraries, and impose their vision upon them, others would come to positions of leadership within the profession itself. Just as Andrew Carnegie was instrumental in constructing many of America’s libraries, leaders such as Samuel Swett Green lead movements to encourage reading amongst school children and laborers. Men such as Dewey and Cutter developed classification systems that allowed for easy retrieval of materials as collections expanded greatly.

For his part Carnegie would bring the “Carnegie Library” to towns across America, sometimes in the face of great opposition. In particular, union members and Socialist leaders were repulsed by the idea that the Carnegie libraries were nothing more than an attempt to polish the image of a union-busting industrialist soon after the Homestead Strike. The formation of such libraries was seen not as a deed of altruism, but as a further effort to lull workers into complacency and quash their expansion with bland fiction.

Furthermore, at this time the library was seen as the place of the leisure classes, with workers shut out by the social mores of the institution. Such refined halls reflected an air of upper-class exclusivity that made many working men feel unwelcome. At the same time as working men were feeling shut out, the feminization of the library was taking hold. Women began to remake the library in the image of the home. This suited the gentry quite well as the gentry began to find their power, rooted this time not in industry or money, but in morality. Thus they saw themselves as protectors of women and savior-teachers to the worker; and guardians of morality for all.

Just as the gentry struggled to redefine their status at this time, much of the struggle experienced by early library leaders revolved around matters of status. In the economy of ideas they wanted to be seen as more than department store clerks selling literacy to the masses. Rather they saw themselves as professionals, akin to educators. While they espoused high culture ideals, they were often forced to reconcile this with the demand for the dime novel. Efforts were made to curtail this demand by culling from the collection works of fiction and works that were deemed morally questionable. Yet the desire for fiction never waned. Even as the library would be re-imagined as the University of the working- man, librarians were forced to understand that their students did not always want to study the Classics. Thus, as the society changed, so too did the role of librarians. Where once they were cultural ambassadors, infusing the masses with the works of Shakespeare, and Chaucer, librarians began to understand the place of recreational readers in the life of the library.

At its core, Apostles of Culture is a story about the development of the library, sometimes in spite of those who are viewed as pioneers within the field. Between Carnegie’s anti-Labor views, and Dewey’s eccentric refusal to write in standard English, it is amazing that a public backlash to the idea of the library did not develop. More than anything then the book is a story about the persistent draw of the written word in spite of those who sought to control it. In the modern world of media saturation, one has to imagine that such personalities properly projected and distorted could have derailed the development of the American library. It is fortunate then, that the library took hold before the quirks of the personalities took over the public imagination.

Public Library Purposes

The readings for this week focus on “Public Library purposes”. F.B. Perkins writes from the perspective of the smaller library, while Michael Harris decries the supposed elitism of the larger library. Dain refutes the main points of Harris’s arguments and Ditzion examines the rise of the library based on the culture of the Northeastern United States.

F.B. Perkins, writing in 1876 on behalf of the U.S. Department of the Interior, writes about the need for the consideration of business models when establishing new libraries. He notes that collection choices, similar to merchandise choices must be made in consideration of the patrons of the library. While he vehemently comes out against pulp novels, he suggests that there is a gulf between the idealized serious reading librarians envision for their space, and the actual, more recreational reading that will take place within most libraries. A full 75% of the circulation is “light reading” according to Perkins (p.422).

In making such suggestions, Perkins goes on to provide an early model for accessions records, and catalogues of the library’s contents. While these ideas seem practical and rational, other ideas such as his sexist remarks with regards to women as being particularly catty in the workplace seem passé. However, he does provide some clear insight into his philosophy about librarianship when he suggests that “the library should do whatever is asked of it (p. 428).

Ditzion’s “The Humanitarian Idea” focuses on the early marketing and promotion of libraries in America and abroad. The author suggests that early library funding appeals were based on the library’s perceived ability to preserve morals and cure perceived social ills.

Rising out of the same era that would see the formation of the Y.M.C.A. movement, the library movement flourished in such places that catered to women working in the factories of the day. The formation of such libraries would eventually lead to larger libraries, such as the Boston Public Library and eventually, the New York Public Library.

Coinciding with the rise of public education the mission of these new public libraries was not only social uplift, but social up-keep. In this era, a librarian wasn’t merely a librarian; he\she was also a guardian of moral standards by as judged by the books that were allowed to circulate within her\his domain. Reading was thought to be a salve for social ills so much that book distribution programs were established in prisons of the day. Many of the early leaders of the library movement were also leaders in the temperance movement. As a consequence of this connection, many books, such as Swiss Family Robinson that are now considered classics were banned from the Temperance Society libraries for their references to the demon drink.

As is noted in the Conclusions section, the war against alcohol was not won in the early libraries. The author of the text, and this author are both doubtful of the ability of librarians to cajole people into choosing not to drink when even the most qualified doctor has a high failure rate in such efforts.

Yet, even as that rationale proved to be a pipe-dream, the library did\ does provide a place for the working person to study trades, and gain job skills.

Ever the contrarian, Michael Harris writes with the tone of Rush Limbaugh, and an eye towards revisionist history (sans a comprehensive perspective about his subject). No one in their right mind would pretend that the world of 1800’s America was a utopia, Harris insists that this is the world view that library historians have taken. My own experience studying librarianship alone disproves his theory, given my exposure to the horrifying racism of Dewey and my knowledge of segregation as it relates to Libraries in 20^th Century America. He pretends that everyone is rosy-eyed about the past of librarianship by focusing on narrow examples of “authoritarian” librarians who practiced “censorship” negating to mention the cultural climate at the time. To critique in such a way as he does calls into question his own views on equality, such is his mocking. Rather than offering insights he offers sly condemnation that removes his own responsibility as a student of the craft, and places the blame on others. The name dropping of Hitler and fascism further renders his critique amateurish and devoid of serious inquiry.

Phyllis Dain exposes Michael Harris’s essay as being “without rigorous analysis, solid verification or appreciation of complexity.” Furthermore she states that it rest on “incomplete evidence” and is “too emphatic” based on such limited evidence (Dain, P. 261).

She suggest that leaders such as Ticknor were not mere liberals or conservatives, but rather complex individuals dedicated to raising morals while at the same time providing for the poor. While some might question the stated purpose of early libraries, Dain suggests that the purposes provided a rationale for funding that was less dynamic than the actual purpose of the library in an effort to secure support.

Dain questions the basis for Harris’s conclusions given the relative few works in the Library History genre. She questions his claims of elitism based on her knowledge of the way in which people described as “bookish” typically find themselves employed – in studies of the word.

Furthermore, she couches the claims of elitism in collection development with her knowledge of the early librarian’s desire for professionalism akin to lawyers and doctors. Just as a doctor cannot attain status without prescribing serious remedies, so too can a librarian not attain status without looking after the best needs of their readership, and their community at large. Furthermore, such moves towards morals were not merely the work of librarians, but were, and still are, a function of Puritanical forces within the communities of service.

Dain notes that Harris rests his critique of the library’s usefulness to the community on the spurious statistic of static circulation numbers (while providing no evidence for such statistics). However, just as a patron can leave a store without buying anything, but still find value in what is observed (possibly enticing future purchases\visits for books or programs), circulation numbers do not tell the full story of the value of the library to the patron, or to the community. Is a police station valuable only for the numbers of murders it solves, or is it valuable for those it prevents, and other services provided? Just as the police are an essential community service, functioning in dynamic ways that defy statistics, so too is the same true for the modern library.

The work of Elaine Fain in her article “Manners and Morals in the Public Library: A Glance at Some New History”, points out where Michael Harris has further missed the mark. She contrasts his work with that of Dee Garrison who focuses on the “feminization” of the library (Fain, p.99). Garrison claims that the profession has become feminized, where Harris complains that the library has become in effect, unopinionated about the books it collects and circulates. Harris finds nothing but ill in the situation, where Garrison finds it fits the description of the domesticization of the library, as women recast the library as a “homelike”, inviting atmosphere. According to Fain, Such emphasis can be explained in the fact of Harris’s focus on the larger libraries, and Garrison’s focus on smaller libraries, as noted by the bibliography of each article (Fain, p.103).

READINGS FOR WEEK 2

Free libraries as referenced by J.P. Quincy, Jesse Shera, and Robert V. Williams have a long and storied history in America. All three articles discuss the various motives for the establishment of libraries and the successes and failures of various efforts over time.

Quincy suggests that moral regulation provided reasoning for the opening of many libraries. Libraries it was thought were an improvement on the pubs and taverns of the day. Given this regulatory role, Quincy thought that libraries needed to be selective about the materials they collected such that “sensational fiction” not find its way into the impressionable mind of workers, or children (Quincy p.393).

Furthermore, he acknowledges the fact of the time that most libraries were established by wealthy benefactors, and it was therefore their responsibility as members of the upper-class to guard the morality of the lower-classes. He observed that it was often the case that the lower-classes were fed dime novels rather than works of history or industry.

He suggested that such works could lead to violence, as was the case with one particular youth, known as Pomeroy (p.396). Thusly he thought it best that libraries avoid being purveyors of popularity and instead become institutions of inquiry. Knowledge and recreational reading are not assumed to be analogous in an era when the public library was the public university for the common man.

Yet even as a library should avoid collecting works of low-brow fiction, it was thought that libraries had a role as a cradle of democracy. Therefore, it was suggested that each library make an effort to cultivate works on every side of the serious questions of the day, in an effort that a young democracy not become an “oratory of aristocracy “ in the words of Hobbs (p. 402)

Shera’s work from 1949 suggests many factors for the founding of the early American libraries in New England. Among the reasons suggested are 1) the rise of public education 2) the rise of worker’s education 3) the rise of a sense of morality and philanthropy (the idea of “the native son”) (p.202)

As industrialization swept New England, increasing the concentration of wealth, the wealthy began to sow back into their communities. This in part led to the establishment of libraries. In a time of increase intellectual work, the library seemed a logical way of giving back but also establishing one’s name. At times libraries were established even though the public did not demand them.

Yet, as society developed from more religiously motivated inquiry to a science based frame of mind, the library became a tool of inquiry for the new questions being asked. The 1800’s saw a growing awareness of national history, as the new nation thought about preservation of historical artifacts. This lead to the formation of historical societies and the Library of Congress.

The collection of rare documents gave rise to the notion of a non-circulating collection within some libraries as in the 1840’s many libraries were thinking about ways to preserve documents in their care.

In terms of mission, the library at this time began to realize its role in the education of the masses. The schools of the time were sorely lacking, even as compulsory education became the law of the land. The library then it was thought could be a supplement for the education of the young and a common university for the perfecting of man.

The work of Robert V. Williams further expands upon the reasoning for the establishment of libraries. Williams dismisses the idea that one single theory can explain the rise of libraries in the 1800’s. Neither the rise of democratic participation nor the “social conditions” of religion, vocational aspirations and economic factors can fully explain the rise of the library according to Williams. Many other variables present at the time are left unconsidered by these theories. Often times, the writers fall back on tropes of history – religious Puritanism, education of the poor, and other suspected causes, without, according to Williams, giving hard facts to back up these theories of causation.

Williams notes that question of the library itself being an independent variable in the rise of the library is often left unanswered. Certainly one could make the argument that not only do librarians have an impact on the rise of libraries, but also the influence European libraries gave rise to the desire for great American libraries.

Williams does not question that there are theoretical answers to the rise of libraries; he merely asks that the variables within the theories be fully tested before we make conclusions about our past that exclude key elements, rendering the theories incomplete.

Week 1 Readings

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.