Re: What Library2.0 Means to Me

Snagged from the blog of the Librarian Avenger. Don’t know where she got it from, but I like it.

What Library 2.0 means to me is new tools to accomplish the old work of the library. I’ve knocked around in the profession long enough to know that while the technology we use changes, the main work of the librarian never really does. Librarianship in the 21st century is very much like that of the 19th. That doesn’t mean librarians are adverse to change: far from it. But it does speak to the eternal nature of the library—or maybe just human nature.

I would, however, like to take a moment to confront some of the myths currently being bandied around, directly or indirectly, about libraries and Web 2.0.

Myth #1: We going to be left behind if we don’t blog/wiki/game/hire a bunch of dancing pandas/supply current buzzword or catchphrase here. Usually accompanied by fearful handwringing.

Guys, we can’t fall behind if we were never out front to begin with. Libraries, by their very nature, are not and have never been at the cutting edge of things. We don’t write the books or create the DVDs that are a part of our collection. We don’t build the A/V equipment that our patrons use (if we did, it would be substantially better and adaptable to older formats. Don’t get me started). We are the ultimate middle men, dealing in and with products and software that have already been created. And because private companies are interested in their own profits, not the public good, we find ourselves coping with the problems created by obsolete formats and out of print works on our own.

Could that change? Could libraries/librarians become generators of content rather than passive receivers of same? Sure. In fact, it’s already happening. When my colleagues head out to collect oral history interviews which are then cataloged by me and added to our collection, we are in essence creating the content of our archive. But that’s not new. It’s simply an updated version of what scribes were doing in medieval scriptoriums during the Dark Ages.

Myth #2: Libraries are not relevant to the general public or they will become irrelevant shortly. Usually accompanied by more fearful handwringing.

Read my lips: there will NEVER be a time now or ever when libraries do not exist. I am as certain of that as I am of the sun coming up every morning. Saying that we’ll never need libraries again is like saying that eventually we won’t need a police force or a fire department. A developing community will always build a library, sometimes before it has a police force or a volunteer fire department—sometimes even before it has a city council. A library is both a community service and a reflection of its community. A library that has been let go or is no longer used says more about the disintegration of that community than it does about the relevance of the library.

Myth#3: Librarians have been, are being, or will be replaced by the Net/Google/search engines in general/giant, sentient computers/insert latest technological wonder here. Even more fearful handwringing followed by pouring ashes on head and tearing of clothes.

Yeah, right. The greater the amount of information, the greater the need to organize it. And because the organizational scheme (and the information in question) needs to be understandable to people, human beings have to be the ones doing the organizing. And because information doesn’t keep itself in order, tending the information needs to be someone’s job. And because something that’s everyone’s responsibility rapidly becomes no one’s responsibility that job will have belong to a specific (or specialized) someone or someones—read librarians (no pun intended).
Librarians have been around ever since the Chief Scribe at the Library of Alexandria looked up and said, “Hey, you, Memorex! Do something with these scrolls, will ya? We can’t find a thing.” And regardless of what our official title is, we will always be.