An Anonymous Patron writes “A paper By By: Zapopan Muela.
As for the roles public libraries and voluntary sector agencies in the provision of such services, these are centered on these general axes:
1 roles with social responsibility, and social change
2 roles to seek and foster the welfare of the working classes, the disadvantaged, the poor, the needed and the social excluded
3 roles to alleviate and ameliorate all kinds of inequalities in the society
4. roles with a political and social commitment to foster the values of democracy and respect for human rights such the right to know, the right to be informed, the right to information access and so on; a committment towards the liberation of information;
5 roles to seek for the free of charge production, organization, and dissemination of the information
6 roles to promote community based research, like using the community profiling methodologies to gather accurate data and updating, and monitoring the users needs in their real environment.”
Slammed
“Some librarians or information workers might feel uneasy with trying to play these roles in their working milieus. But many commentators have criticized that even nowadays libraries and voluntary sector agencies play a very downsizing, discriminatory and socially excluding roles “
Says who?
I only skimmed through half of it (sorry but I have my blood pressure to consider) but the main complaint seems to be that we are not socialist enough or that we don’t think in a socialist mindset:
“Another commentator strongly argued that library and information workers in general do not tend to be theory driven, but that they instead are more practical or pragmatic (Muela Meza, Z.M., 2004). And if they in general are not very fond to theories, and are rather fond to practical matters, and if in the way the approach those matters have a hollow or empty commitment towards playing a leading role as to try as much as they can to alleviate social inequalities, then the services rendered in libraries and voluntary agencies would definitively be severely influenced by this lack of social commitment.”
We work in a social institution based on socialist principles but because we’re not socialist at heart that’s not good enough. Phooey.
Libraries as socialist entities.
LOL.. I’m not quite sure where to begin in replying to Greg’s comments.
I take it that he believes that libraries are socialist institutions. Is that because it is a governmental agency? It is because we provide our services to all who come through the door? If that is the standard, then are Police and Fire departments socialist institutions since they will respond to any appropriate emergency within their jurisdictions.
IF libraries are socialist institutions, why wouldn’t someone expect that librarians would act in keeping with nature of the library? If libraries were desinned and created as socialist institutions, wouldn’t acting contrary to those criteria make libraries, and librarians, ineffectual in their jobs? Or, Greg, do you see a different basis for providing library service… is there a Capitalist paradigm for providing library service. If that is possible, doesn’t it call into question the nature of libraries as socialist bulkwarks? If it is possible, how would that look, and how would it look different than now?
Robert
Re:Libraries as socialist entities.
socialism:Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.
I would classify libraries as a collective investment. But its a specific investment in information and a strong investment because it relies on the individual to take advantage of it, meaning we are not a form of handout. The point that the paper is trying to make is that we don’t try hard enough to “alleviate social inequalities”. They want us to become a form of handout, to somehow make ourselves even more available to whoever they see as needing it more then somebody else.
Librarians–take the credit–why not?
I love reading stuff like this and finding out how much power and influence librarians have in society. Who knew that teachers, social workers, and even politicians only had to turn to us! However, in the past 25 years the percentage of families in poverty has decreased; among Blacks, 29.3% to 21.4%; among Hispanics 22.4 to 20.2; among Whites 6.3 to 5.7. Among female headed families, percentage in poverty among Blacks 55% reduced to 37.4%; Hispanics 53.1 to 37.8; and White 24.6 to 19.9. Since 1994, welfare roles have decreased by 50%, and interest rates for home mortgages are at an all time low (were about 10.5% 16 years ago). Lake Erie is so clean you can see the bottom. Nobody smokes in restaurants.
So, obviously, librarians can take credit for all of this, due to our careful book selection on everything from auto repair to investing to zoo keeping, our literacy training programs, after school babysitting and internet connections. And once we start our dating services and planning weddings to discourage female headed families which seem to be the big snag in getting a handle on poverty, things will get even better. Are we good or what?
Re:Libraries as socialist entities.
It sounds like your trying to rationalize your work ethics, which given your interest in libraries would tend to lean towards providing for the common good, with a conservative mindset that hates to give anything to anyone. When I read the article, I didn’t get that the author somehow lambasting librarians for not being ‘socialist enough’. The points I took from it were that libraries could do more to help the disenfranchised. There are really two main points the author is calling for.
1) That we empathize and genuinely care about the problems our patrons have and need answers to.
2) That there be more outreach programs.
The first is really nothing more then excellent customer service. That’s something that conservatives get most vocal about when it isn’t present. If the library staff treats its patrons dismissively, then those workers are “lazy city government employees just trying to rip us off”. So step up to the plate and expect your dollars to be spent on civil servants that are civil. Good customer service across the board is apolitical.
2) Does it bother you that some libraries have literacy programs? Maybe a Spanish Language section? My hometown has programs for it’s growing Vietnamese population, many of whom are recent immigrants. Why is it a ‘Handout’ to have special programs that target communities that might otherwise not even know what a library does? One of the groups mentioned in the article are Asylum Seekers. Do they just ‘know’ that they have free access to all that information? Can they even read it?
You want my opinion about your reaction to the article?
• You saw some buzzwords that are at odds with current conservative dogma, immediately taking the most reactionary stance against it.
• After clicking the link, you contiued to skim the article, applying your already worked up filter to the text.
• Then you started posting on Lisnews.
It’s a shame really, normally your posts are better thought out and less like a reactionary talk radio host.
long winded but…Re:Libraries as socialist
“It sounds like your trying to rationalize your work ethics, which given your interest in libraries would tend to lean towards providing for the common good, with a conservative mindset that hates to give anything to anyone.�
Yes, though I would alter that to say I hate the idea of taking a book off the shelf, going to a person’s home and saying “Here, you need this to make your life better.� The book is there on the shelf, its my obligation to advertise we have that and other books on the shelf, it’s the patron’s obligation to come in and get it (the only exception is the elderly and severely handicapped).
The author’s last statement in their conclusion concerning the prostitute says very clearly what they have in mind:
“Suaiden (2003: 381) shows also a story of social sadness and pain where Silvana, a prostitute who died at the age of 17 in Brasil of AIDS, because she severely criticized before her death that she blamed the government and the public library where she got customers around, because no body told her what a condom was for and that librarians and most other people looked at her over the shoulders and downsizing her, rather then helping her with all the crisis that led her to prostitution after being abandoned at the age of 5 before a cathedral frontispiece.�
Do I excuse anyone looking down on her? No. But it’s not my responsibility as a librarian to make sure she knows how to use a condom.
Empathy is not a learned trait, some people have it some don’t. I think you can learn to fake it, which is probably the definition of customer service. The implication is, however, that we are there to help fix a person’s life and I don’t except that. We guide +their energy+ to the right resources; we do not infuse our own.
Literacy programs and Spanish or any language sections should be considered mortal enemies in a public library. If you work in a community that needs a literacy program due to poor language skills then you need to divest yourself of any language sections that would be considered a crutch to avoid adapting to the English language. If you work in a community that is strongly assimilated but also a strong Spanish or other culture then by all means invest in materials they would enjoy.
In terms of helping the disenfranchised that is the mother of all red herrings in the library world. If poor person places a hold on a book and a rich person places a hold after is the rich person going to get the book first? Everything in a library is free to everyone regardless of who you are. Nobody is disenfranchised in a public library; it is the very essence of our nature.
Buzzwords or not, the article is pushing a philosophy that is the opposite of what Andrew Carnegie had in mind (and I agree with) when he donated so much to libraries:
“I choose free libraries as the best agencies for improving the masses of the people, because they give nothing for nothing. They only help those who help themselves.�
Oh, and I happen to like reactionary talk radio hosts.