Chapter Twenty-Two -- Six Thousand Bodies a Day
Isn't it interesting that this idea of slow burning caught on like wildfire among librarians? This huge movement to microfilm and otherwise preserve (but not conserve) items has to have had something else -- even aside from space -- behind it. Sure, there was the lure of easy money, but I think that the whole growth of the movement shows that librarians needed a reason for being. They needed a way to justify their existence to other people, and this crisis -- when properly disseminated -- gave validation in spades. It's a chant, it's a dogma, it's a way of uniting and closing ranks while showing the world that the job matters, that it's relevant.
Chapter Twenty-Five -- Absolute Nonsense
Why, if Peter Waters thought (and thinks) that this idea of slow fires is nonsense, did he willingly participate in the photography that helped spread the erroneous idea that books were falling apart at the drops of hats? Was there pressure from above to participate? Or did it take a lot of work and expertise with books to come to the conclusions he has? Is it possible that he has other motives (like keeping his job) to think that books are more sturdy than the traditional view? I wonder if books and their paper lie somewhere in between, with vocal proponents on either side and not a whole lot of truth anywhere.
Chapter Twenty-Seven -- Unparalleled Crisis
Finally, something that Baker sees as useful! The de-acidification movement, a movement that will help with the preservation of books printed on pH neutral paper. But weren't we just talking about how efforts to de-acidify papers containing acid are faulty and not proven to work, anyway? Or was it just that they're dangerous? So, according to Baker, steps taken to prevent deterioration due to acid are only okay when taken by printers and papermakers, but never when they're taken by librarians. That's useful. We're not supposed to do anything to prevent books from falling apart if we can, but we should gladly accept and just place on the shelf items that are printed any old way and not touch them ever again. I don't find some of Baker's positions all that useful for librarians in the trenches.
Chapter Thirty -- A Swifter Conflagration
It is sad that items were just pulled wholesale by preservators. It would seem that the costs would go down if you send fewer items out for the whole guillotine and scan treatment, but evidently not. Besides, there's no sense in saving money that's not coming from your budget, but from the taxpayers. I guess that's something that really bothers me. Librarians are spending all this money on behalf of taxpayers, and they have very little say as to what gets kept, what gets scanned, what those librarians are doing. We already know that people dislike microfilm and microfiche, and they don't really like reading things in PDF format on a screen, either. We, as a field, aren't paying attention to what the patrons want, and that's dangerous.
Isn't it interesting that this idea of slow burning caught on like wildfire among librarians? This huge movement to microfilm and otherwise preserve (but not conserve) items has to have had something else -- even aside from space -- behind it. Sure, there was the lure of easy money, but I think that the whole growth of the movement shows that librarians needed a reason for being. They needed a way to justify their existence to other people, and this crisis -- when properly disseminated -- gave validation in spades. It's a chant, it's a dogma, it's a way of uniting and closing ranks while showing the world that the job matters, that it's relevant.
Chapter Twenty-Five -- Absolute Nonsense
Why, if Peter Waters thought (and thinks) that this idea of slow fires is nonsense, did he willingly participate in the photography that helped spread the erroneous idea that books were falling apart at the drops of hats? Was there pressure from above to participate? Or did it take a lot of work and expertise with books to come to the conclusions he has? Is it possible that he has other motives (like keeping his job) to think that books are more sturdy than the traditional view? I wonder if books and their paper lie somewhere in between, with vocal proponents on either side and not a whole lot of truth anywhere.
Chapter Twenty-Seven -- Unparalleled Crisis
Finally, something that Baker sees as useful! The de-acidification movement, a movement that will help with the preservation of books printed on pH neutral paper. But weren't we just talking about how efforts to de-acidify papers containing acid are faulty and not proven to work, anyway? Or was it just that they're dangerous? So, according to Baker, steps taken to prevent deterioration due to acid are only okay when taken by printers and papermakers, but never when they're taken by librarians. That's useful. We're not supposed to do anything to prevent books from falling apart if we can, but we should gladly accept and just place on the shelf items that are printed any old way and not touch them ever again. I don't find some of Baker's positions all that useful for librarians in the trenches.
Chapter Thirty -- A Swifter Conflagration
It is sad that items were just pulled wholesale by preservators. It would seem that the costs would go down if you send fewer items out for the whole guillotine and scan treatment, but evidently not. Besides, there's no sense in saving money that's not coming from your budget, but from the taxpayers. I guess that's something that really bothers me. Librarians are spending all this money on behalf of taxpayers, and they have very little say as to what gets kept, what gets scanned, what those librarians are doing. We already know that people dislike microfilm and microfiche, and they don't really like reading things in PDF format on a screen, either. We, as a field, aren't paying attention to what the patrons want, and that's dangerous.
posted by Julia Faith | 9:26 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home