design issues. . .boundaries not evenly defined, or perhaps too much so. Money. . .how distributed, how not distributed. . .building is too big, building is too small. . .the books are in alcoves, the books are too, "out there". . .the librarian is in a centralized "open" area, "she" is too reticent. The list goes on and on and on. Can't please all the people all the time! These libraries started out as a means to educate the masses and distribute knowledge via the best means possible. I believe they did just that. And, I believe Carnegie was onto a good thing. As the author states (p219), the Carnegie program, "supported larger cultural trends." These libraries reinforced the public view of how knowledge was obtained. I believe they would have influenced me to believe I was important in the overall scheme of things. I would have felt important upon entering such a grand building knowing that I was increasing my potential as as human being. Small towns were more appreciative of this value than larger cities due to the impact they had on the role they played. Women became more involved in the planning process, as well as, the business aspect of administrative duties. This was the late 19th century and early 20th century. . .what does one expect? The Victorian attitude could not be changed. I'm digressing. . .overall, if anything, this book and subject has made me more aware of how politics rule. One can't escape the mighty influence of capitalism and government control. As well as, criticisms of others.
Monday, February 25, 2008
Carnegie Libraries
I was excited to discover that we would be reading a book about Carnegie. I love the libraries that bear his name. When I travel I make his libraries a "must see" on my travel itinerary. I was a bit disappointed to read that his philanthropy was seen as somewhat misguided. I just read the book from a designing point of view and thought. . .these things happen. Planning and
design issues. . .boundaries not evenly defined, or perhaps too much so. Money. . .how distributed, how not distributed. . .building is too big, building is too small. . .the books are in alcoves, the books are too, "out there". . .the librarian is in a centralized "open" area, "she" is too reticent. The list goes on and on and on. Can't please all the people all the time! These libraries started out as a means to educate the masses and distribute knowledge via the best means possible. I believe they did just that. And, I believe Carnegie was onto a good thing. As the author states (p219), the Carnegie program, "supported larger cultural trends." These libraries reinforced the public view of how knowledge was obtained. I believe they would have influenced me to believe I was important in the overall scheme of things. I would have felt important upon entering such a grand building knowing that I was increasing my potential as as human being. Small towns were more appreciative of this value than larger cities due to the impact they had on the role they played. Women became more involved in the planning process, as well as, the business aspect of administrative duties. This was the late 19th century and early 20th century. . .what does one expect? The Victorian attitude could not be changed. I'm digressing. . .overall, if anything, this book and subject has made me more aware of how politics rule. One can't escape the mighty influence of capitalism and government control. As well as, criticisms of others.
design issues. . .boundaries not evenly defined, or perhaps too much so. Money. . .how distributed, how not distributed. . .building is too big, building is too small. . .the books are in alcoves, the books are too, "out there". . .the librarian is in a centralized "open" area, "she" is too reticent. The list goes on and on and on. Can't please all the people all the time! These libraries started out as a means to educate the masses and distribute knowledge via the best means possible. I believe they did just that. And, I believe Carnegie was onto a good thing. As the author states (p219), the Carnegie program, "supported larger cultural trends." These libraries reinforced the public view of how knowledge was obtained. I believe they would have influenced me to believe I was important in the overall scheme of things. I would have felt important upon entering such a grand building knowing that I was increasing my potential as as human being. Small towns were more appreciative of this value than larger cities due to the impact they had on the role they played. Women became more involved in the planning process, as well as, the business aspect of administrative duties. This was the late 19th century and early 20th century. . .what does one expect? The Victorian attitude could not be changed. I'm digressing. . .overall, if anything, this book and subject has made me more aware of how politics rule. One can't escape the mighty influence of capitalism and government control. As well as, criticisms of others.
Monday, February 18, 2008
Thursday, February 7, 2008
Week 4
Dee Garrison, Apostles of Culture: The Public Librarian and American Society, 1876-1920, updated edition (Madison: UW Press, 2003)
The “Apostles of Culture” was an interesting read in that it presented the progression of library history in a manner of how and why of libraries and the American society. Dee Garrison split the book up nicely by beginning with an overview that focused on the 18oos and the elitists (men). They formed what we refer to as our profession. Is it a profession? Dee Garrison has attempted to prove to us (the readers) that it really isn’t a profession because women made it that way. If men were the librarians of the world, it would be a profession. Hmmmm, sounds similar to most “professions.” I don’t think librarians have been singled out, only in Dee Garrison’s mind. I don’t necessarily agree with her evolutionary research, though an interesting attempt.
She delves into, in great length, Melvil Dewey and his maniacal actions that made him so popular. And even goes so far as to name a chapter, “The Formation of a Savior.” Her characterizations of him are a careful examination of his accomplishments without saying what she truly thinks. He was basically a nut!
The part of the book that I found most enjoyable was the last section on “The Tender Technicians.” This really was interesting because it made me think of the profession, yes, I refer to it as a profession, of a nun. Most people wouldn’t think that being a nun was a profession either, but I do. They, nuns, play an important role in our society, as do librarians. I found that the life that Garrison described/s was/is very monastic. The profession really hasn’t changed much and the people that are a part of it are strong, intelligent, independent women. Sounds like a profession to me . . . what exactly is the definition of a profession, anyway? Women have always had a difficult time trying to prove themselves, hasn’t changed much even in the 21st century. People are afraid of women. People think that women belong in the kitchen (domesticity) and/or in the bedroom. I could take this all the way back to the middle Ages and prove just how afraid people are of women, but I digress. (Just a quick plug for Hillary . . . America is afraid of having a woman running the “Old Boy’s Club,” God forbid a woman should be in charge. We all want change . . . a woman would be a change!) Maybe someday people will understand!
Just makes ya think. .what’s the VALUE of it all?
The “Apostles of Culture” was an interesting read in that it presented the progression of library history in a manner of how and why of libraries and the American society. Dee Garrison split the book up nicely by beginning with an overview that focused on the 18oos and the elitists (men). They formed what we refer to as our profession. Is it a profession? Dee Garrison has attempted to prove to us (the readers) that it really isn’t a profession because women made it that way. If men were the librarians of the world, it would be a profession. Hmmmm, sounds similar to most “professions.” I don’t think librarians have been singled out, only in Dee Garrison’s mind. I don’t necessarily agree with her evolutionary research, though an interesting attempt.
She delves into, in great length, Melvil Dewey and his maniacal actions that made him so popular. And even goes so far as to name a chapter, “The Formation of a Savior.” Her characterizations of him are a careful examination of his accomplishments without saying what she truly thinks. He was basically a nut!
The part of the book that I found most enjoyable was the last section on “The Tender Technicians.” This really was interesting because it made me think of the profession, yes, I refer to it as a profession, of a nun. Most people wouldn’t think that being a nun was a profession either, but I do. They, nuns, play an important role in our society, as do librarians. I found that the life that Garrison described/s was/is very monastic. The profession really hasn’t changed much and the people that are a part of it are strong, intelligent, independent women. Sounds like a profession to me . . . what exactly is the definition of a profession, anyway? Women have always had a difficult time trying to prove themselves, hasn’t changed much even in the 21st century. People are afraid of women. People think that women belong in the kitchen (domesticity) and/or in the bedroom. I could take this all the way back to the middle Ages and prove just how afraid people are of women, but I digress. (Just a quick plug for Hillary . . . America is afraid of having a woman running the “Old Boy’s Club,” God forbid a woman should be in charge. We all want change . . . a woman would be a change!) Maybe someday people will understand!
Just makes ya think. .what’s the VALUE of it all?
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Week 2
J. P . Quincy, "Free Libraries" 1876
My thoughts, though a bit tardy, on this piece range from interesting, I didn't know that, to when was this written? Many of the statements ring true to the library system that we, in the 21st century know and love. So, I was a bit confused. Early in the article Perkins sets the stage for what has become an ongoing argument. That argument is, "should an institution, supported by tax-payers to promote the general interests of the community, hasten to supply any books which people can be induced to ask for. . ?" We are still dealing with this topic in the so-called 21st century, ie, Banned Books. If people want to read, let them read! Quincy states that "boys and girls will read what is put in their way, provided their attention is judiciously directed." Do people aways have to have someone telling them what they can and cannot do? As history has proven, if one tells one not to do something; all the more reason to do it. Interesting thought to ponder. . .that in 1800s control of what one could or could not read was, in a way, controlling society. (Italics represent my words as a rich, controlling money monger of the late 1800s) We need to attract the poor, illiterate people into our "free libraries" to teach, read and utilize our services. . .but we will limit/judge what they read. History has a way of repeating itself. I digress. . .The article goes on to explain that the "free Library will gradually become the centre of the higher life of its community." Which I believe is true and very profound. Quincy seems to be very much an advocate for what is to become of libraries in the future. Also, he is very telling of how they will function and the benefits that they will employ. Grandiose aspirations. . .although very much ahead of his time and very true.
Shera, Jesse, "Causal Factors in Public Library Development" 1949
This is a very interesting article in that it goes into detail why libraries are libraries. The who, what and why factors? Could it possibly be the need to help educate the masses? Or, perhaps the need to control society? Economics are always a factor when it comes to, "building it and they will come." During the time of library growth many other new and exciting endeavours were on the upswing. An age of industrialization. . .the money was abundant and so was philanthropy. Though stated this was a "contributory factor" instead of a causal factor. I believe it was a major factor! Preservation of cultural heritage became apparent and people of forethought believed that the way to do so would be to store that heritage in a place that cares about it. These rich guys were on to something! Also, the educational purpose of what a library could offer was a factor. To teach, one must have books, "what shall they read.?" (Horace Mann) With the educational system growing and becoming more complex a new wave of libraries were required to form. . . no longer just a library, but a library to educate the educated. Social libraries formed, as well as, theological and vocational. All for the purpose of universal education. Very causative.
Williams, Robert V., "The Public Library as the Dependent Variable: Historically Oriented Theories and Hypotheses of Public Library Development" 1981
This article is a re-statement of "why" were libraries developed. What "exactly" were the causative agents that formed public libraries. He rebukes previous theories in a long and repetitive discourse on variables. Are the historians correct, or are the librarians correct? In other words it all narrows down to. . .more research/study needs to be done.
My thoughts, though a bit tardy, on this piece range from interesting, I didn't know that, to when was this written? Many of the statements ring true to the library system that we, in the 21st century know and love. So, I was a bit confused. Early in the article Perkins sets the stage for what has become an ongoing argument. That argument is, "should an institution, supported by tax-payers to promote the general interests of the community, hasten to supply any books which people can be induced to ask for. . ?" We are still dealing with this topic in the so-called 21st century, ie, Banned Books. If people want to read, let them read! Quincy states that "boys and girls will read what is put in their way, provided their attention is judiciously directed." Do people aways have to have someone telling them what they can and cannot do? As history has proven, if one tells one not to do something; all the more reason to do it. Interesting thought to ponder. . .that in 1800s control of what one could or could not read was, in a way, controlling society. (Italics represent my words as a rich, controlling money monger of the late 1800s) We need to attract the poor, illiterate people into our "free libraries" to teach, read and utilize our services. . .but we will limit/judge what they read. History has a way of repeating itself. I digress. . .The article goes on to explain that the "free Library will gradually become the centre of the higher life of its community." Which I believe is true and very profound. Quincy seems to be very much an advocate for what is to become of libraries in the future. Also, he is very telling of how they will function and the benefits that they will employ. Grandiose aspirations. . .although very much ahead of his time and very true.
Shera, Jesse, "Causal Factors in Public Library Development" 1949
This is a very interesting article in that it goes into detail why libraries are libraries. The who, what and why factors? Could it possibly be the need to help educate the masses? Or, perhaps the need to control society? Economics are always a factor when it comes to, "building it and they will come." During the time of library growth many other new and exciting endeavours were on the upswing. An age of industrialization. . .the money was abundant and so was philanthropy. Though stated this was a "contributory factor" instead of a causal factor. I believe it was a major factor! Preservation of cultural heritage became apparent and people of forethought believed that the way to do so would be to store that heritage in a place that cares about it. These rich guys were on to something! Also, the educational purpose of what a library could offer was a factor. To teach, one must have books, "what shall they read.?" (Horace Mann) With the educational system growing and becoming more complex a new wave of libraries were required to form. . . no longer just a library, but a library to educate the educated. Social libraries formed, as well as, theological and vocational. All for the purpose of universal education. Very causative.
Williams, Robert V., "The Public Library as the Dependent Variable: Historically Oriented Theories and Hypotheses of Public Library Development" 1981
This article is a re-statement of "why" were libraries developed. What "exactly" were the causative agents that formed public libraries. He rebukes previous theories in a long and repetitive discourse on variables. Are the historians correct, or are the librarians correct? In other words it all narrows down to. . .more research/study needs to be done.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
