105 ‘useless’ librarians


Filipino Librarian writes "In "105 ‘useless’ librarians" (Manila Bulletin, 28 July 2005), Adrian Cristobal says:

Having been accredited by the Professional Regulatory Commission, 105 librarians, just like 101 Dalmatians, make us wonder what to do with them? Their only possible employment lies with Powerbooks, National Book Store, and all other book companies which probably have more books than all the public libraries in the country.

In the next paragraph, Cristobal writes, "I exaggerate, of course," but what exactly did he mean? Was he exaggerating when he compared librarians to dalmatians? While Cristobal will probably call me humorless, I fail to see the need to imply that librarians are like dogs just to make a point. More..."


Was he exaggerating when he compared librarians to dalmatians?

WOOF!I'm willing to believe that thinking of the number 105 naturally led to 101, which led to Disney's movie.Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. On the other hand, why pick on librarians when every field has lots of useless (in economic terms) people?

Well, as I said, I see the point he's trying to make. In fact, when I found out about it, I thought that the person who told me about Cristobal's column probably misread it or was overreacting.Did he really have to make the reference to dalmatians? I think not.And then there's the fact that he ends by suggesting that what the people learn from television is more important than what they learn through books. It seems to me that this completely negates the point he's trying to make.

Was that he was criticising the govt for not funding libraries sufficiently, meaning that the librarians would have little to do. Not that he was calling librarians per se "useless".

thanks! but it's not the term "useless" i found insulting. would any profession be flattered by a comparison with dogs?

Subscribe to Comments for "105 ‘useless’ librarians"