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.