Is sentimentality killing libraries?
Thursday, May 19, 2011 at 06:03PM
In Oak Park, Illinois, when I was in high school, I went to the library two or three times a week, though in my classes I was a middling student. Even in wintertime, I’d walk the dozen blocks to the library, often in rain or snow, carrying a load of books and records to return, trembling with excitement and anticipation at all the tantalizing books that awaited me there. The kindness of the librarians, who, of course, all knew me well, was also an inducement. They were happy to see me read so many books, though I’m sure they must have wondered in private about my vast and mystifying range of interests. Charles Simic, A Country Without Libraries, NYT Book Review, May 18, 2011.
The learning commons, sometimes called an “information commons,” has evolved from a combination library and computer lab into a full-service learning, research, and project space. The modern commons is a meeting place, typically offering at least one area where students can rearrange furniture to accommodate impromptu planning sessions or secure a quiet place to work near a window. In response to course assignments, which have taken a creative and often collaborative turn in the past two decades, the learning commons provides areas for group meetings, tools to support creative efforts, and on-staff specialists to provide help as needed. And yet the successful learning commons does not depend solely upon adaptable space configuration or the latest technological gear. Its strength lies in the relationships it supports, whether these are student-to-student, student-to-faculty, student-to-staff, student-to-equipment, or student-to-information. Effective learning commons are alive with the voices of students working together, establishing the kinds of connections that promote active, engaged learning. 7 Things You Should Know About the Modern Learning Commons, Educause, April 2011.
Both these writings came my way today. Both address the need for libraries.
And they could not be more different.
Simac's elegiac reminiscence, while moving, will do nothing to help libraries. Relying on sentimentality to save the profession will be a fatal error.
Educause's straight-forward prose offers a pragmatic, even likely, view of tomorrow's library. As a profession, if we strive to created models such as the learning commons, libraries and librarians will evolve, endure and even thrive.
The warm bath of memories of the libraries of our past (we all have them) is soothing; the different and difficult world of of our children's future is stressful.
But I'm going for stressed - and relevant.
Reader Comments (10)
I'm totally embracing the "new" vision of the "library!" Even now offering internet terminals has changed the "library" into a different place. Imagine what we'll be doing there in ten years!
I think there is room for both--the learning commons and quiet reflection and reading. The Educause article even mentions that the learning commons includes a space for quiet study and reading. Why does it have to be an either/or proposition? While the tone of Simic's post is sentimental, what he is talking about is a space that allows communal reading and learning as well as time to reflect. These activities can still be a part of the learning commons, it doesn't all have to be hustle and bustle and technology.
Hi Lona,
It's people like who are excited, not dreading, the future of libraries that will make sure libraries actually have a future!
Doug
Hi Robin,
Well said. I would agree tomorrow's libraries must fulfill multiple roles, including spaces where one can concentrate and reflect. Where else is there in a school one can do this?
I'm just worried that nostalgia as a primary reason for libraries just ain't gonna do it!
Thanks for the comment,
Doug
Hi Doug-
I grew up in Oak Park, cut my teeth at the Dole Branch of the Oak Park Public Library. and eventually served as a library page there during high school (honing my shelving skills even then), before becoming a teacher librarian. Am I sentimental about that period in my life? Of course-but having the opportunity to experience what a really great library can offer, whether it is a traditional story hour held amongst the musty shelves or a terrific learning commons where a dazzling array of resources are at your command, is what really inspires passion-the kind that led me to a lifetime of ilbrary work and what I hope will inspire my students as well.
Hi Ann,
My experience as a child and our public library was very similar as well and I have always had happy associations with libraries. My only point here is that we can't rely on everyone having these associations as the strategy for keeping libraries valued, as the NYT Book Review article seemed to imply.
Doug
My memories of a public library seem to be in sharp contrast of Charles Simic's. Although I did check-out books, I often went to the library to listen to music, to hang out with friends, and to even talk with the librarians. I grew up in Norfolk, Virginia and visited the main library downtown. I never encountered the bun-haired, maintain silence in the library type. Never. I guess my point is that the public library was never just a place for me to improve my reading skills, a place with lots of books, or even a place to access information. It was all of that and more. For me, the information commons seems to be an evolution of what I experienced in public libraries.
Hi Johnnie,
Your comment is a great example of why we can't depend on people's memories of library service for support - everyone has different experiences with yesterday's libraries.
Appreciate the response,
Doug
Is this the Ann Schuster who was at the Walt Disney Elementary school in
Millard Ne, let me know - I have often wondered after you moved to Kansas
where you ended up.
Tom Adams - Omaha
tadams6695@aol.com
Hi!
It's the NYRB, not the NYT Book Review.
Nice blog!
Thanks, Jill.
I stand corrected (as I do quite often.)
Have a great summer!
Doug