![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
owlectomySo, here are some things I hear from liberal-ish people about libraries:
"Libraries aren't really relevant anymore because so much information is on the internet."
"I go to the library, but they never have what I want, and there are always homeless people sleeping at the tables."
"I used to use the library a lot, but these days I don't. I just use Google."
I sympathize with all of this! I would say it about myself, basically! If I did not go to the library every week for work, I am sure I would find it more convenient to buy the e-book of everything I wanted to read -- which would be kind of expensive, but not prohibitively so; I'm not a book-a-day reader -- and not even have to deal with lots of paper books piling up around my home.
(I'm glad for the library because I read a lot of books I expect to feel only lukewarm towards for my committee, and I definitely wouldn't want to pay full price for those even at e-book prices, but if I didn't have a library job then I would read fewer of those!)
The thing is, library funding existed for a long time on a Social Security-like model. Everyone pays into it, everyone benefits from it, so it's really popular even though some people benefit much more than others. Everyone pays a little; everyone gets to borrow books; and even if you can afford the new Danielle Steel hardcover, you know it's not really something you'd pay $25 for, so you're happy to be able to borrow it for free (even if you're #123 on the hold list.)
I think it's harder now to make that argument, because the same book you wouldn't pay $25 for is often one that you would pay $10.99 for, especially when you don't have to deal with the library's wait list and limited opening hours, or even deal with going outside. I think a lot of middle-class people who aren't really voracious readers perceive -- not incorrectly, necessarily! -- that they don't get as much from the library as they put into it. And maybe the only way to advocate library funding, when you start from there, is to make an argument the same way you'd argue for welfare -- from either a noblesse-oblige standpoint, or a pure utilitarian standpoint of "we'll all be better off if lower-income people are more able to apply for jobs online, and study for the GED, and take ESOL classes, and read books."
The flip side of that is that as soon as you talk about libraries being for poor people, rather than libraries being for everybody, there starts to be a question of controlling what information you think poor people deserve to have access to. Like when people go off about people buying soda or organic beans with food stamps. And I suspect that the end result would be a lot less popular fiction on the shelves because it's not "useful" or "improving" enough.
I get a twinge of feeling disrespected when I see library director jobs that aren't full-time, that don't even require a Bachelor's degree, that kind of pay enough to live on, and certainly I'm worried about the deprofessionalization of library jobs, but when I start thinking about how you even advocate for library funding when my friends don't go to the library... that's when I get really worried.
(I don't want to open up a can of worms about how library competence isn't measured in terms of a degree. But if you think that you're going to get a good library director for $15 / hr, 20 hours a week, then you are hoping for a miracle or a doormat. Or a miracle doormat.)
"Libraries aren't really relevant anymore because so much information is on the internet."
"I go to the library, but they never have what I want, and there are always homeless people sleeping at the tables."
"I used to use the library a lot, but these days I don't. I just use Google."
I sympathize with all of this! I would say it about myself, basically! If I did not go to the library every week for work, I am sure I would find it more convenient to buy the e-book of everything I wanted to read -- which would be kind of expensive, but not prohibitively so; I'm not a book-a-day reader -- and not even have to deal with lots of paper books piling up around my home.
(I'm glad for the library because I read a lot of books I expect to feel only lukewarm towards for my committee, and I definitely wouldn't want to pay full price for those even at e-book prices, but if I didn't have a library job then I would read fewer of those!)
The thing is, library funding existed for a long time on a Social Security-like model. Everyone pays into it, everyone benefits from it, so it's really popular even though some people benefit much more than others. Everyone pays a little; everyone gets to borrow books; and even if you can afford the new Danielle Steel hardcover, you know it's not really something you'd pay $25 for, so you're happy to be able to borrow it for free (even if you're #123 on the hold list.)
I think it's harder now to make that argument, because the same book you wouldn't pay $25 for is often one that you would pay $10.99 for, especially when you don't have to deal with the library's wait list and limited opening hours, or even deal with going outside. I think a lot of middle-class people who aren't really voracious readers perceive -- not incorrectly, necessarily! -- that they don't get as much from the library as they put into it. And maybe the only way to advocate library funding, when you start from there, is to make an argument the same way you'd argue for welfare -- from either a noblesse-oblige standpoint, or a pure utilitarian standpoint of "we'll all be better off if lower-income people are more able to apply for jobs online, and study for the GED, and take ESOL classes, and read books."
The flip side of that is that as soon as you talk about libraries being for poor people, rather than libraries being for everybody, there starts to be a question of controlling what information you think poor people deserve to have access to. Like when people go off about people buying soda or organic beans with food stamps. And I suspect that the end result would be a lot less popular fiction on the shelves because it's not "useful" or "improving" enough.
I get a twinge of feeling disrespected when I see library director jobs that aren't full-time, that don't even require a Bachelor's degree, that kind of pay enough to live on, and certainly I'm worried about the deprofessionalization of library jobs, but when I start thinking about how you even advocate for library funding when my friends don't go to the library... that's when I get really worried.
(I don't want to open up a can of worms about how library competence isn't measured in terms of a degree. But if you think that you're going to get a good library director for $15 / hr, 20 hours a week, then you are hoping for a miracle or a doormat. Or a miracle doormat.)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
20/8/14 07:12 (UTC)(no subject)
18/8/14 20:52 (UTC)That's until the cumbersome two or three part download process stopped working on my computer, but the nice lady at the library says that if I will bring it in, she can probably fix it.
(no subject)
18/8/14 21:24 (UTC)I'd like to see publishers change, because it really is cumbersome.
(no subject)
19/8/14 00:11 (UTC)I still love my library, and I love paper books (which I now reserve and renew online, even though I pick up the physical paper copy at my branch). I keep hearing librarians say their libraries are seeing more visits and usage nowadays, not less.
(no subject)
19/8/14 02:22 (UTC)Cost is not as big a deal, I think, as the whole DRM infrastructure for library ebook checkouts.
At my branch we have 6 full-time librarians, 3 full-time paraprofessionals, one full-time technical person, and I'm the only one who knows how to borrow an ebook from the library and get it on your Kindle or iPad or Nook. It's a frustrating process. It's not an intentionally frustrating process -- but I'm dubious about whether any ebook infrastructure can be easy and intuitive to use *and* secure enough that publishers can trust there won't be pirated copies flying around all over the place.
In my system, stats are down all across the board from what they were in 2010-2011; that might be partly because we came out (at least a little) from the recession. It may be because in a time of deep budget cuts we spent money we could've spent on books or librarians to get our logo redesigned. But I do know that it's really hard for librarians to find jobs, and it seems like every library system seems to be wishing on miracle doormats instead of offering full-time jobs for decent pay.