Twice in the past week I've been asked to opine publicly about the future of books and libraries for children, first at the NYLA conference in White Plains and then at the investiture of Eileen Abels as the new dean of the Simmons GSLIS. I had far fewer answers than questions, which I present to you for possible mastication:Whenever I worry about the future of publishing and, in particular, the demand for professional book reviews in an increasingly Amazoned world, I think, “well, I could always go back to being a librarian again.” I’m twenty-five years out from the Chicago Public Library but I still hold my union card in the form of an MA from Chicago’s Graduate Library School (itself gone for almost a quarter century as well).
But then I think, could I? My library school curriculum included no courses in electronic reference, never mind the web, which did not yet exist. In Don Swanson’s required computer class, we learned assembly language and how to program IBM punch cards. As a children’s librarian in the early 80s, I worked at a branch that boasted the first public-access microcomputer in a public library, the brain child of branch manager Patrick Dewey. Adults used it to access BBS networks; kids used it to play Pong-like games and use very elementary, black-and-white, educational programs. For story hours, our idea of high-tech was a filmstrip projector.
Still I tell myself that the basics of library work with children remain the same as when I was working in the 80s and in fact when Anne Carroll Moore and Alice Jordan, cheered on by the Horn Book’s Bertha Mahony Miller, were establishing children’s librarianship as a profession a century ago: Library service based in book collections and storytelling, presided over by librarians with deep knowledge of literature and methods of bringing children and books together. Last week I was at the White Plains Public Library in New York and while the place was so high-tech that I expected lasers to shoot from the ceiling, books—regular old print books—were everywhere.
How long will this remain true? As reading becomes increasingly at one with the ether, will librarians have a place? As even reader’s advisory becomes more automated and egalitarian, to whom do we give advice? If there is no physical collection of books to maintain and promote, what do our jobs become? I would like to believe that there are 21st century Alice Jordans ready to colonize and civilize the brave new digital world, and I hope that our library schools are getting these pioneers packed and ready.
We are currently offering this content for free. Sign up now to activate your personal profile, where you can save articles for future viewing.
Add Comment :-
Comment Policy:
Comment should not be empty !!!
Sarah
It's interesting, because I think the conversations about race and children's publishing (wide ranging discussions that have occurred on the pages of the Horn Book, and which are now actively taking place on all kinds of platforms) and questions about traditional vs. new media are not unrelated. There is, of course, a general societal shift towards digital media (and I agree that librarians have not necessarily been behind the curve when it comes to this transition.) With this, there has also been a tendency to see content itself as expendable-- or at least, as something that should always be offered for free, not just at the library. But along with these overall trends, I think one can look at something like the statistics from the CCBC, and see in them a certain intractability that has pushed large numbers of potential readers to leave traditional trade publishers and gatekeepers for other outlets. Amazon offers ready access to content that the major publishing houses simply aren't supplying (and which they still insist has no market.) As long as diverse perspectives on topics such as race are stifled within traditional venues, I think those discussions will tend to move to less traditional arenas, like twitter and tumblr. And as long as the statistics on diversity stay flat among traditional print publishers, I think the move towards more open and fluid platforms will persist. Again, I'm not saying this is the only reason for the shift-- nor judging whether it will ultimately be a positive or negative one... nor how best to negotiate it! But I do think these two conversations are related.Posted : Apr 16, 2014 03:08
Mary Beth Dunhouse
While I don't believe physical children's books will disappear from children's rooms I am concerned about the fate of children's books that become part of the historic record. Research collections such as the Alice M. Jordan Collection in the Boston Public Library were committed to maintaining a copy of trade titles published for children. Circulating collections must change to meet user needs so weeding or deselection is inevitable. Digital copies, while more accessible, are not long term preservation. Multiple electronic files in many locations (LOCKS=Lots of copies keeps stuff safe) will help but if unknown computer disasters destroy those files where are hard copy books for re-creating the files going to come from? The Internet Archive,one of the mass digitizers like Google Books, has been storing physical books discarded by libraries. This will be fine as long as Internet Archive continues this commitment. There are many research collections devoted to children's literature. Most have institutional support, but in these times, priorities and administrations change. Libraries should be maintaining hard copy collections, where possible, and not relying on outside entities to maintain the historic record.Posted : Apr 16, 2014 02:28
Roger Sutton
Ongoing but changing--children's librarians were never so much interested in convincing non-readers that reading was valuable as they were in convincing people that BOOK-reading was valuable. It will be interesting to see what happens as books become less discrete objects. I've already heard one elder statesman in our field declare that texting was proof of teens' engagement with reading. (I wanted to shoot myself. No, him.)Posted : Apr 16, 2014 01:59
Janice Del Negro
Part of the difficulty with new formats is that the technology (not just books, but all kinds of digital media) drives the content; that is, the tech allows a certain presentation of content, so that is the presentation we get. While many elements in this discussion are fluid, some elements stay the same: the fight to convince non-readers that reading is valuable is ongoing.Posted : Apr 14, 2014 10:48
Roger Sutton
Harry Potter had given me so much hope, not because I thought they were great but because they were so darn book-like, and I hypothesized that their appeal was a reaction to all the fast and shiny things around us. Maybe not.Posted : Apr 14, 2014 02:20