I think Allen's summary is pretty good. But I'm disappointed that Mark
and Jane seem so ready to accept this potential abandonment by LC. I
think it would have some pretty major repercussions, not just on
libraries but on our society as a whole. Research and libraries are
pretty important to our economy and culture, and we may be too confident
in the power of something like Google Books.
I'm not 100% sure, but I've always read Mann's critique as being mainly
about #2 rather than #1, LC's role. In his writings around 2000, he
seemed to talk a lot about the dangers of the PCC program, which accepts
PCC member cataloging records as being as good as LC records. But since
then, he seems to have focused mostly on subject searches and index
screens as important tools. Edwin mentioned that people don't use them,
but much of Mann's writing is about how he helped patrons learn to, and
how much benefit they got. This is at least somewhat independent of
decisions LC will make. But those decisions may make #2 less
sustainable.
I wanted to say a little more about the readiness to "accept the
inevitable." One of the great things about librarians is that we're
generally nice people. I remember when I left a Ph.D. program in history
and entered library school, I was struck by how much nicer the people
were. That's a great thing. I'm really proud to belong to a profession
that is about helping people with research. But I think sometimes we
don't fight enough. In another posting, I quoted a bit from Herbert S.
White. I thought I'd quote a little more here. I know this is kind of a
"curmudgeonly" piece, but he makes some points worth considering. My
apologies to American Libraries for copying quite a bit of the short
article, "Ruminations after retirement" (Mar. 15, 2006). And also for
any typos, since I couldn't find any quick way to copy and paste.
"For those of you who've ever read anything I wrote or heard me
speak--and I've done a lot of both--you know that I have always been a
great follower of the recently deceased management guru Peter Drucker.
Drucker predicted fearlessly that the profession with the most promising
future was that of "knowledge worker." Isn't that supposed to be us?
What happened?
"What's happened is that we, as a profession, haven't protected the
boundaries of our field as we should, even as less formally educated
practitioners like plumbers and mechanics do. I only had the opportunity
to work as a reference librarian for about ten years before I moved into
full-time administration and teaching. But I still recall what I'd say
when patrons would ask me how I had successfully answered their
reference question. "Why would I want to tell you?" I would say. "I want
you dependent on me whenever you have a question. That is job security,
isn't it?" Everyone understood, nobody ever argued.
"Today, however, we seem determined to teach our clients everything we
know, and I find that suicidal. Shouldn't we instead be teaching them
what they shouldn't try to do on their own? Shouldn't we let them know
where their brimming self-confidence, especially among students, is
misplaced?
"When I was dean at Indiana I was once urged to discipline one of my
library students who was apparently earning a little extra money on the
side by doing computer research for other students. "Was her research
good or inferior?" I asked. I was told it was excellent, indeed so
excellent that it led the professor to be suspicious of his student.
Whether the work was original or not was his problem, I told the
professor. As for me, I was proud of my student and intended to tell her
so, because what she did is exactly what librarians do.
"We now hear and read a great deal about how some corporations,
universities, and communities are no longer able to afford quality
libraries. Every manager knows or should know that this kind of
propaganda has been spouted at all times, good or bad. If it were really
true, then, obviously, there must be a reduction in the quality of
service being provided. If not, aren't we simply setting the stage for
the next budget cut?
"Of course, everyone must pay lip service to doing more with less. It
seems, however, no one except librarians actually does this. When police
budgets are threatened, dire consequences are predicted and that seems
to work. When a faculty line is removed, a school provides fewer
courses. No one ever volunteers to add extra sessions.
"Yet, when our budgets are threatened, we promise to work harder so no
one will notice the difference. Weren't we working hard before? Drucker
put it simply: "Make sure you reward your friends and punish your
enemies."
"... My concern now is for the librarians who follow me, particularly
those who are just entering or contemplating entering the profession. I
question whether they will have the opportunities that I had, and for
that I don't blame outsiders and I don't blame circumstances. I blame my
fellow librarians."
[End of quote]
I wouldn't ever refuse to tell someone how I found information, and I
doubt Thomas Mann would, either. But I think White's point about
protecting our boundaries has a broader validity. I think we librarians
tend to lack confidence vis-à-vis other fields, especially computer
science, and are too quick to think we can give up our own principles
for their principles. I also think that while both the Mann and Calhoun
viewpoints span generations, to some extent a younger generation
(especially males) has been recruited into librarianship with the idea
that "we've put tradition behind us now. This is now a cool field.
Everything is computerized."
But I did just read Markey. I was impressed. She's certainly done a lot
of research. The only mild critique I can make at this point is this:
when she says "users prefer Google," she fails to document "which
users?"
--Ted Gemberling
-----Original Message-----
From: Next generation catalogs for libraries
[mailto:NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Andrews, Mark J.
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 4:05 PM
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Mann's critique of the Calhoun report
Sounds like a fair summary to me. For discussion's sake let's imagine
what we'd do if Allen's #1 came to pass. LC stops providing shared
cataloging - and the Congressional committee overseeing LC management
back's management up.
What other ways are there to meet the need for the intellectual tools
for shared cataloging, and that substantial portion of cataloging work
we're used to LC providing?
M. Andrews
-----Original Message-----
From: Next generation catalogs for libraries
[mailto:NGC4LIB_at_listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of MULLEN Allen
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 3:52 PM
To: NGC4LIB_at_listserv.nd.edu
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Mann's critique of the Calhoun report
Would it be fair to briefly summarize Mann's critique of Calhoun's
report as follows:
1. LC is threatening to abandon its commitment to provide the
intellectual tools and accomplish a substantial portion of the
cataloging work of the nation's libraries
2. LCSH and browsing are useful to scholarly researchers
3. Calhoun wants to abandon library catalogs in favor of Google Book
If I'm off the mark, how would you summarize it?
Allen Mullen
Cataloger
Eugene Public Library
Received on Wed May 23 2007 - 18:31:14 EDT