Comments on: The bookless librarian

By: just me

just me — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 16:57:04 +0000

I am taken by surprise that some find it amazing there are librarians who don’t “like” to read very often. I used to be that way. I didn’t really enjoy reading until I finished my undergrad degree and then I couldn’t put my books down. Now, working full-time, taking care of my home and yard and driving an hour one way to work, I have little time for reading, other than keeping up on LJ and other sites I frequent at work. I do however, feel that all librarians, in any aspect of their work, should encourage reading and education in general. Without educating ourselves, we will remain ignorant of life going on around us, and never really be part of “that” life. I am one who tends to start 5 different books and it takes me months to finish them because I am so busy with life. Reading is a rare blessing for me right now, so I certainly understand those who say they don’t read too often. Besides, working in a library is about helping others and being available to teach the little things we librarians take for granted.

By: Mary Broussard

Mary Broussard — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 01:14:43 +0000

One of my MLS classmates declared once in class they didn’t like to read, which sent the rest of the class in an well-humored uproar. I’m sure she’s an excellent librarian, and I’m grateful that she likes cataloging because I don’t. I don’t understand video games, but lately wish I did so I could make my instruction more like them. I prefer a good book, either in paper or audio format.

However, avoiding reading seems like a weird traing of a librarian… I wonder if anyone admits that in a BI class.

By: Jenny Levine

Jenny Levine — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 23:21:03 +0000

I didn’t take it negatively, Rachel – I was just trying to differentiate between “reading” and “reading print books” and note how a library needs staff with all kinds of different interests in order to provide quality service to all patrons. Luckily, Joshua said it more eloquently, so I’ll just echo “ditto.”

By: rachel

rachel — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 23:08:08 +0000

Jenny — To clarify, this certainly wasn’t meant as an anti-Jenny post, given that I hold you in the utmost respect and awe! More a musing on my own knee-jerk brain. (And I won’t even go there re: the new book nonsense, btdt…)

Joshua — good points all — and we could start (or, OK, rehash…) a whole different conversation about academic writing; there’s another reason I never finished that PhD .

By: joshua m. neff

joshua m. neff — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 20:41:18 +0000

I love reading comics and role-playing game rulebooks, and while I love reading books in general–and have a love of books–I’m usually a very distracted and slow reader. Movies & TV shows, video games, RPGs, board games and web surfing just hold my attention more than reading books (with a few exceptions), and there’s some reading (like, say, academic writings) that I can only do if the alternative is torture or death. My brother is very intelligent and knowledgeable, but he’s never been the strongest reader. I definitely think there are different forms of literacy, different ways of getting and sharing content, and that while books may be the “brand” of libraries, we should basically be container-agnostic. Librarians making books a fetish is like transportation professionals making zeppelins or steam trains or jets a fetish.

By: librarybob

librarybob — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 20:13:51 +0000

There are aspects of librarianship that are not *about* books, per se, but rather the “intellectual content” … reference and cataloging are the obvious examples. Books are how intellectual content has been packaged these many years but are not necessary for the reader/viewer/listener to convert such content to his/her internalized knowledge.

BUT that are still the most effective format for transmitting a significant volume of such content. One undoubtedly can absorb a great deal by reading web-based pamphlets, and I do a lot of this myself, but the web (as we generally access it today) is an awkward choice for reading long-form material.

That said, there are a couple different arguments *for* books that are generally ignored. One is what may be called a celebration of individuality. When one reads a fiction book, much of what is “read” is actually the reader’s creation — sounds, smells, scenes, implied relationships played out against the reader’s sense of the possible.

By: Jenny Levine

Jenny Levine — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 19:42:24 +0000

Just to be clear, I read *a lot,* I just don’t read a lot of print books cover-to-cover. And as we’ve commiserated in the past, when I go to my local public library to check out a new book, I CAN’T CHECK IT OUT. Sorry for the shouting, but that’s aimed at my library and they know it.

I’ve always subscribed to the “different strokes for different folks” philosophy because I don’t want to catalog or be a library director. Much love to those who do, but those aren’t my strengths. I love the variance in our profession, and I would hate to see everyone devoted to any one thing. Besides being boring, it would be poor customer service. I agree with your point about different media serving different parts of our soul – I very much believe that, and I just wish there were more fun hours in the day to partake of them all.

By: laura

laura — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 17:53:05 +0000

I’m grateful for the existence of librarians who are more into gaming and movies than I am, and it is only reasonable to allow those people to care more about games than they do about books, since I care about books far more than I care about games. But on a strictly personal level, I’m always shocked by people who don’t read. It’s such a big part of my life that I can’t quite imagine how anybody could live without reading — but then again, if reading has taught me anything, it is that the world is far vaster, and contains far more kinds of people than I could imagine on my own.