LISNews: Library Futurists

I'm not sure why the library alphabetizes fiction by the author's last name. They should be divided into labeled subjects, such as mystery or Sci-Fi or Romance. This also very neatly divides the lirbary users into different types as well.

Actually, dividing by broad categories works well in small collections, especially where there are not many titles in a single subject area. You don't need to find what you are looking for, sometihing similar will do.

However, this does not teach library organization to those who will one day go beyond a general library, and may run into a medical library, an university library, or something more specific. Then they will be lost, but this isn't the care of the general librarian. Afterall, they do not havea teaching role, only a small role in supplying that stuff which is already known to the patron.

This also encourages people to memorize the collection, rather than the system. This also is typical of library technology, where each library is unique. Someone who has been there for years has an advantage over someone who simply knows standard librarianship. As a result, anyone can run this library. What they can't then do is learn to run another one.

The same with a patron. Knowledge of a Barnes and Noble bookstore does not prepare you for using a Border's bookstore. A patron who uses a local public library with no system at all is not prepared to use another public library that also doesn't have a system. Neither prepare the patron for an organized library.

But that's OK. Give the patron what he wants, rather than what he needs.

R. Lee Hadden (These are my own opinions!)