It’s the end of 2006, and I’ve been thinking lately about the idea of “library” in these times, times when folks think libraries are (perhaps?) going away, made obsolete by Google and Flickr and iTunes.

I admit I’ve been thinking along these well-tread lines, not because of work, but because of two non-work related spurs in the old horse-sides of my mind.

The first was a digital photo that my brother emailed to me of my two nieces in Maine, holding their brand new library cards. The photo was taken by the librarian and emailed to my brother’s family. This is the traditional American image of the free library – in the grand Carnegie bloodline – where a library card means freedom, pure and simple, and life-long learning.

The other spur was rereading W.G. Sebald’s Austerlitz, a novel that incorporates archives and libraries into its system of images of loss, endless disorganization, the jumble of past and future, and so many other themes (other images are vast fortresses, museums, train terminals).

At the end of this amazing novel, Austerlitz mourns the decline of the original, cathedral-like Bibliotheque Nationale and maligns the new Mitterand building and its four Babylonian towers as “inimical” to human beings – too focused on complicated systems and lacking human faces.

These have led to my usual self-reflection – finally appropriate as a new year begins. What roles do our libraries need to play today to remain relevant? What roles bridge these two conditions – the children proudly showing their new library cards and the sometimes alienating advance of “databases”, “off-site reference”, and Google Print? And are our libraries stepping up?

1. One thing I think libraries need to think harder about: the actual production and presentation of, and not just the collecting of, cultural materials (especially locally-minded cultural materials). I noticed that the British Library is producing podcasts of talks by authors, which people can subscribe to via a RSS feed.  We are in a unique place to excel at this kind of programming and production (the Library of Congress is doing similar work). How do others feel about this?

2. Libraries need to be places where new scholarship can be presented, as well as places where new creative works – writing, music, art, and theater – are presented and performed. Are American libraries excelling at this? I think they are, actually, but I’d be glad to hear from others.

3. Libraries have always been places for advice, but I wonder – are we going further than ever before? As an example, look at this innovative program from Chicago Public Library, “Law at the Library“.

These three items seem to me to be a conscious response on the part of libraries and librarians to experiences like those fictionalized by Sebald. Or, a conscious effort to amplify the sentiments in the photo of my nieces.

I ask these questions because I wonder if the real definition of “library” is undergoing a change that we barely perceive, or is this something that has always been happening, and I’m just becoming aware of it now. These initiatives take expertise that exceeds a librarian’s master’s degree – so I wonder, is our ground shifting, and how do we cover it?

No tags