Tim, I realize running a book enthusiast website makes the authority
on how to run an ARL library, but let me try to offer some counter
arguments.
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:06 PM, Tim Spalding <tim_at_librarything.com> wrote:
>> Or, yes, as Tim seems to suggest, and like many academic libraries do, you can ignore the needs of students and focus solely on faculty (and MAYBE grad students, a little).
>
> The needs of students to find a place for young people to socialize
> and study—the cited motive here—can be satisfied in any number of
> buildings on campus and off. If a library does not feel its spaces
> should relate to finding and accessing information, it should stop
> hiring LIS grads and turn to the cruise ship industry for help.
>
The library serves a lot of different purposes. If setting aside some
space that would actually be used for a purpose that brings people to
the library (which would, then, promote all of the other services we
do while they're here) that was previously housing materials that,
literally, had not been touched for decades, why not use the space for
actual, real-life, not-potential-but-really-happening activity?
It would be like saying, "you know, honey, the basement would be a
great space to turn into a play room for the kids, but you never know
when the leftover pieces of scrap wood, old cans of paint and boxes of
ancient, out of fashion clothing might actually be needed. I guess
the kids will have to make do without, because a basement really
should just be left a basement."
>> It would be nice if we could have all the space we want for free.
>
> It would be nice if libraries used the spaces built for libraries as libraries.
>
What does this even mean? Seriously, we're not taking the books that
used to occupy these spaces and throwing them in huge bonfires to make
space for keno parlors.
With the reclaimed space, you can place things like temporary
collections, exhibits, all sorts of things to pique the public's
interest. All the while keeping the least used materials in an out of
the way location that gets about as much traffic as when they were in
the public space.
>> Given that we're talking about ~600,000 items
>
> I'm sure Widener's circulation rate is WAY over 40%. That's why
> Harvard is a worse institution.
>
Yeah, that's exactly what I meant, Tim. Thanks for the confirmation!
That said, I'm sure Widener has got plenty of volumes that would be
better served in storage. I'm pretty sure they probably agree.
-Ross.
Received on Thu Sep 30 2010 - 23:42:31 EDT