I guess it is my fault
that I found John Palfrey’s book, Bibliotech: Why Libraries Matter More Than Ever in the Age of Google (Basic Books, 2015) somewhat disappointing. I was looking for the very thing Palfrey says
his book is not: a paean to the
libraries of the past offering a nostalgic, wistful, sepia-toned wish for a
time now long gone. He does admit that
there is much to celebrate and love “about the libraries of the past,” but he
is administering here what he calls “a dose of tough love.” How can these institutions survive and even
thrive in the burgeoning information age?
That is the question Palfrey seeks to answer.
From the start,
Palfrey makes clear he is a “feral,” a “nonlibrarian who ends up working in a
library.” He believes the institutions
are at risk “because we have forgotten how essential they are” in this age of
Google and Wikipedia. He calls libraries
essential cogs in the wheels of democracy, and believes their presence on the
American landscape is just as important now as when Andrew Carnegie was donating the funds to build these secular temples across the land. Of course, in the information age, what we
have lost is the ability to filter the information. Everything screams at the same volume, so how
do we know what is important?
Librarians, Palfrey argues, must perform a most vital task. They must filter information and make it
relevant to the patrons’ lives.
The down side is that
most municipal libraries are facing diminishing budgets as cities and counties
are squeezed. Because of exorbitant
tuition costs, Palfrey writes that “college presidents are freezing pay in
libraries, reducing the rate of new book purchases, and laying off librarians
and archivists.”
Palfrey offers a brief
history of libraries including the most famous library in history, the historic edifice at Alexandria. He tells us about
how every ship in the port had its cargo of books copied and how scholars
traveled the countryside visiting monasteries to copy ancient manuscripts to
build the colossal collection that was eventually destroyed by a series of
fires leading to a loss of a considerable portion of ancient culture and
literature. In the present, more than a
million books are published each year with the fastest growth in the
self-publishing area. Coupling book
publication with information published on the internet, and we have a tidal
wave of words flooding the digital and actual archives of human thought and
endeavor.
I have noticed that
when working with college level students, they tend to access material
digitally through library platforms and databases. I am in the minority when I advise students
to print out articles and mark them up with annotations. Most do this on their computers or tablets
now, and Palfrey writes that in his research, he, too has seen this
phenomenon. Research has become, in many
cases, paperless. Palfrey makes another
point that many of the sources for research are now non-traditional, including
things like blogs, podcasts, and YouTube videos. He also points out that the machinations for
accessing these digital sources change at a fantastic rate. He calls this “data rot,” and writes the
Library of Congress “holds roughly 150,000 compact discs of audio recordings”
of which one to ten percent already have degraded information. In short, compact discs and DVDs do not last
forever. In addition, some fairly recent
information has been recorded on outdated mediums like computer tapes. This is his argument for the importance of
armies of archivists with expertise in preserving these materials before they
are lost forever. It turns out that
books are probably more stable as a repository of culture and ideas than a polycarbonate
and aluminum CD.
His solution to the
fading funding and the diminished centralized power of the library is to expand
digitally. Already, many patrons use the
library for computer access. Palfrey
claims parking lots are full of patrons using the free Wi-Fi even after closing
time. He proposes that libraries develop
platforms that would allow a patron to utilize materials from several
institutions without having to actually go to the bricks-and-mortar edifice. Once every library’s holdings are digitized
and available over the internet, reference librarians could step in to guide
patrons to the best sources from a plethora of possibilities without concern
for time or distance. This would solve
space and budget issues because no single library can house, or even afford to
purchase, all the materials published each year. Only by combining resources and making them
available in a kind of universal digital library could we move to the next step
in the information age. Palfrey writes,
“Libraries need to recast themselves as platforms rather than as
storehouses…The crucial elements of the library as platform are the access to
information that libraries offer, the expert advice in navigating through the
information environment, and the connections to larger networks.” Libraries could still contain stacks of books
and traditional library materials like magazines and journals but these would
also have digital copies for day-to-day circulation and patron usage.
One such project now
underway is the Digital Public Library of America. Palfrey writes that its goal is “to establish
a national library platform for the United States—and in some respects for the
whole world—in the digital age.” He
quotes from their mission statement that the organizers wish to create “an
open, distributed network of comprehensive online resources that would draw on
the nation’s living heritage from libraries, universities, archives, and
museums in order to educate, inform, and empower everyone in the current and
future generations.” It is quite a lofty
mission.
Palfrey suggests observing
the way universities are opening themselves up to the world by offering online
courses that people from any location with internet access can take for
free. By broadening out into digital
platforms, we break down walls and open up archives so that the information is easy
to access and available to any scholar anywhere in the world. Palfrey calls this “hacking the library”; the
word hacking normally has a negative connotation, but in this case, it is a
positive. It is an opening up of
information, democratically, to the world.
This would have the added benefit that digital access would preserve the
physical copies of art, maps, books, and other materials. They would remain safe in controlled
environments while digital copies could be utilized by patrons. However, for these kinds of platforms to be
built would require collaboration “far beyond what happens today,” says
Palfrey.
Where I think
Palfrey’s writing is less successful is when he discusses classroom usage of
these resources to meet the needs of Common Core curriculum. In this area, the writing is already dated;
many states are jettisoning Common Core and as an educational fad, its luster
is fading. He also drops names
incessantly—teachers, librarians, and other people he believes are at the
forefront of the movement. His
discussion of these individuals is, in some cases, so brief that the name drop
serves only as a distraction.
In fact, my one major
complaint with the book is that there is a lot of redundant writing, a lot of
repeated ideas that should be stated and explicated once. Palfrey includes in his last chapter a
summary of the ten steps to keep libraries alive now and in the future culled
from the book. It is a summation that is
not necessary. I felt as if the book, in
a trimmed down version, might have worked better as a long magazine article in The New Yorker or Harper’s.
Undoubtedly, though,
the prospect for library survival is one crucial to our society and
culture. Of course, it seems like a
no-brainer that digital platforms will be the way to go. Already we can borrow from libraries across
the country and have the materials delivered to our local branches and
universities. There is an abundance of
sharing going on, and I trust that librarians are savvy enough to know that the
way forward is a collaborative one. In
that, John Palfrey is astute and on target.
No comments:
Post a Comment
I would love to know who is commenting. Therefore, please use the selections below to identify yourself. Anonymous is so impersonal. If you do not have a blog or Google account, use the Name/URL selection. Thanks.