goblin cartoons

I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately. Looks like I’m not the only one. Maybe it’s a (dare I use the word?) zeitgeist thing*.

On the very same day, Skagirlie laments that her OPAC sucks because it doesn’t do what Amazon, iTunes and LibraryThing do and Libraryman wonders why libraries don’t do what Pandora does. In the comments of her post, Maire says, “It’s just a bummer that a 3rd party has to offer something that should be intuitive.” I absolutely agree, it’s a bummer. Heck, I think it’s even worse than that.

On YouTube, people can upload and share their own videos with others. They can also collect other people’s videos, catalog videos, rate videos, and comment on videos. On del.icio.us, people can collect web pages, catalog them, and share them with others. On LibraryThing, people can organize and catalog their libraries, share them with others, start and join book discussion groups, and get recommendations for other reads. These are all free to use…just like libraries.

I’m usually not much of an alarmist, and I really hate to sound like Chicken Little, but…if libraries aren’t asking themselves “What do we provide that these other services don’t?”, we’re just begging to be kicked in the Higher Power of Lucky. If people can create and organize their own libraries and share them with each other–and do all sorts of other things to boot!–then asking them to use sucky OPACs and expecting them to learn the Dewey Decimal System isn’t just mean, it’s shooting ourselves in the collective foot. If a library’s best bet is the digital divide (”Don’t have a computer? This is the place for you!”), then when the digital divide disappears (Think it won’t? How many people do you know who don’t have a telephone or a TV?), libraries will be screwed. It’s well past the time for libraries to be dipping their toes in the water. It’s high time we dove right into this stuff. When one joe in Maine starts a killer library site, that’s the sign that the time for exploratory committees has come and gone. It’s time for action. Let’s not waste any more time talking about the great services we could be providing for people, let’s actually provide them. Forget about jam tomorrow, I want my jam today.

* That one’s for Maire.

This has been preying on my mind for some weeks now, and I feel it’s finally time to get it off my chest: I hate the Dewey Decimal System.

Wait, let me be more precise. I think the Dewey Decimal System works just fine for cataloging materials in a library. From a librarian’s point of view, I have nothing against the Dewey Decimal System.

But a few weeks ago, I was staffing our reference desk when a patron came up and asked for books on a particular subject. She knew they were nonfiction, but she wasn’t sure where in our nonfiction section the books would be. I looked up the subject in our catalog, found some titles that might suit her, and led her back to nonfiction, telling her what Dewey number the books would be found under.

And I suddenly felt like a dick.

The patron wasn’t stupid by any stretch. But here we were, expecting her to learn our Very Clever Indeed system of cataloging materials, just so she could find the books she was looking for. Frankly, I think that makes us a bunch of dicks.

Libraries are not bookstores. In general, I’m not in favor of the bookstorization of libraries. But would it kill us to put books in sections that non-librarians understand, like “Travel” and “Science” and “Self Help”? Most public libraries I’ve been in (including MPOW) put the biographies and autobiographies in their own section (in alphabetical order of the subject, not in Dewey order). I haven’t seen a public library yet that didn’t put works of fiction in separate sections (in alphabetical order of the author, not in Dewey order). So why is the majority of our nonfiction set up in such a way as to push patrons to ask us for help in finding materials? How does having books in Dewey Decimal order help patrons find library materials all by themselves?

I don’t mind helping people find the materials they’re looking for. In fact, I rather enjoy it. But I’m tired of library users feeling like they have to ask me for help because they haven’t gotten their Dewey Decimal System decoder ring yet. I’m tired of having to instruct people in how to locate books in our small branch library, even if it makes me look like a Very Smart Person. I’m tired of feeling like a dick.

Ryan Deschamps’s very brainy “no-brainer” top-10 list of Library 2.0 applications should be required reading by…well, everyone in Libraryland. So, hop to it! And spread the word!

Inspired by David Lee King’s series of posts on “Inviting Participation,” I wrote a post for MPOW’s public blog in which I raised issues about our library and libraries in general, openly inviting people to respond. Being the hotspur that I am, I went ahead and published the post…and then thought, “Maybe I should’n'a done that.” I went to my supervisor and asked her to read it and give me feedback. “So far,” she said, “the blog has only had posts about library news and programs. This is really going in a new direction.” Her advice was to pull the piece and run it by the library director for approval. I moved the post back into draft form, then decided to run it by the entire Web Committee (which includes our director).

This turned out to be a Very Good Thing. A vigorous discussion started through emails and ended with a spirited (but at all times polite and respectful) Web Committee meeting. Some of the committee members and I argued that the point of having a blog is to invite discussion and participation. One of my coworkers said, “Look at the discussion we’ve been having here today. We should be having these discussions with our customers.” It was a great discussion, and it ended with the decision that I rewrite the post somewhat (and everyone on the committee gave me good feedback), then submit it for final approval. It’s now up on our blog. It will be interesting to see if anyone submits a comment. Heck, I’ll be happy just to know that patrons are reading what I wrote.

Casey Bisson won the Mellon Award for his WPopac. The first time I saw his proposal for a library OPAC based on WordPress, my mind was fairly blown. So it’s great to see him getting an award for that. (Getting an award for creating the WPopac, that is, not for blowing my mind. There’s no award for the latter, although if Casey digs chocolate, I’d be happy to send him some of my wife’s fantabulous brownies, just for firing my neurons in new and exciting ways.)

Steve Lawson jumps on the fun train, referencing Tim’s “fun OPAC” post and Casey’s big win. Steve makes a point similar to the one I made, that a library’s whole website should be fun. Right on, Steve!

I haven’t seen a library website yet, even the really good ones with integrated CMS and nice visual designs, that didn’t start with the premise “What useful information do we need to get to our patrons?” rather than “What awesome and fun experiences can we give our patrons?” They all seem to begin with “Where is the library? When is it open? What events and programs are coming up?” and then moves on to “Here’s our OPAC, here are links to other websites–if you have any serious questions, just ask.” Library websites started as internet-based information and advertising for library services, and they haven’t really moved away from that. Just as the OPAC has basically been a physical card catalog on HyperCard, the library website has basically been the library’s pamphlets and flyers on HyperCard. (If anyone knows of a library website that isn’t like this, please point me towards it. I’d love to see something different.)

Steve makes another great point:

It also got me thinking about what kind of user community you would need to support a library website that was more–as one commenter said on Thing-ology–more MySpace than Google.

Indeed. I’m gonna think on that one for a bit.

I’m a fan of rants and manifestoes (especially when I agree with what’s being said) and I’m a fan of LibraryThing. Throw both of those in a blender, add some chocolate syrup, and I’m one happy camper.

And so, Tim Spalding’s latest post on the Thing-ology blog: “Is Your OPAC Fun? (a manifesto of sorts).”

When I was in college, I rarely went to the library to do homework. That may sound shocking for a librarian to say, but the reason was this: it was too hard for me to get any serious work done. The library was too much fun for me. Wandering the library labyrinth, getting lost in the stacks, stumbling upon fascinating books and periodicals I hadn’t realized I was looking for, meeting other people and having conversations–that was my library experience.

I didn’t become a librarian because libraries perform an important public service. I didn’t become a librarian because I wanted to help people find information quickly and cleanly. Not really. I became a librarian because I discovered libraries are fun and sexy. And I want to help other people discover that, too. The OPAC, the library website in general, the physical library itself should be a memorable experience, fun and exciting and weird. Libraries should be about “exploration, serendipity,” and getting “entertainingly lost.” And yes, libraries should get you laid.

Using a library shouldn’t be work, it should be play.

Let the games begin!

I was going to call this post “Knee Deep in the Hoopla,” but decided a Starship reference would be a crime against good taste.

Anyhoo…

MPOW’s general public blog has gotten a couple of comments. From patrons. Yes, patrons are actually reading our blogs and making comments. This makes me very very happy indeed, because honestly, I wasn’t sure how long it would be before we started getting comments, but I feared it would be quite a while. And yet, we’re getting comments.

(Swelled head moment: the two comments we’ve gotten on the general blog have so far both been on posts I’ve written.)

I particularly like the comment on the post I wrote today. It’s appreciative, and with a nice dab of style and humor.

I have some questions for the library professionals out there:

1. Why did you decide to make a career for yourself in libraries? What is it about libraries that made you not just want to patronize them but work with them and be involved in their continuing development? It’s obvious from reading professional library journals, librarian blogs, and the comments on this blog that you all have a great love of libraries. Where does that come from?

2. Do the people who use your libraries share your love of libraries? Are they enthusiastic about the continuing use and development of libraries? Are your patrons as geeky about libraries as you are?

3. If your patrons aren’t as geeky about libraries, why aren’t they? What could we do to get our patrons as enthused about libraries as we are? How can we get library users to care as much about libraries as library professionals do?

4. Or is that even important? Do we care if library patrons are as passionate about libraries? Is it enough that they use libraries, without being geeky and enthusiastic about them?

I recently upgraded my laptop’s operating system from Ubuntu’s “Dapper Drake” release to the latest release, “Edgy Eft.” The upgrade went more smoothly than the last time I upgraded (from “Breezy Badger” to “Dapper Drake”), when I had quite a few problems. I’m not anywhere close to being a topnotch Linux guy, so when I have problems with my system, I jump onto the Ubuntu discussion forums and ask for help. I usually get a quick response to my questions, and the people who have given me help have always been patient with me and my bumbling computer ways. And if the forums aren’t enough, there’s also an Ubuntu wiki, IRC channels, mailing lists, and local community groups. There are also multiple blogs where I can get news about Ubuntu and its continual development. On top of all this, any Ubuntu user can contribute ideas for how Ubuntu develops, what features and products it will have, what changes will be made.

The Ubuntu community is an open community, where anyone can participate, get questions answered, give suggestions and requests, and see how decisions are made, with many, many access points for participation. How many libraries and library associations are like this?

Linux is an open source operating system. Not only can anyone participate in Linux communities, anyone can change the programming, tweak it, which is why there are so many different distributions. Firefox is open source, too. Anyone can make an extension or theme for Firefox. WordPress is also open source, and it’s “easy to hack” (as Maire Kruppa said at Internet Librarian). Anyone can make a plugin or theme for WordPress. To quote the WordPress site, “You are also free to do whatever you like with the WordPress code, extend it or modify in any way or use it for commercial projects without any licensing fees.” The communities for Linux, Firefox, and WordPress share and spread these hacks. They make it easy for anyone to share tweaks, programs, extensions, plugins, and themes they’ve developed. How many libraries and library associations do this with their products and services?

Ubuntu’s latest release came out a couple of weeks ago. The developers (and community) are already working on the next release (”Feisty Fawn”), which is scheduled to come out in 6 months. Firefox and WordPress also release frequent upgrades. These upgrades are free (as in speech and as in beer) to all users and are announced with fanfare, not just to their communities but to the world at large. When new releases come out, people in the communities are excited, eager to start using the upgrades, even when there are glitches and bugs. How many libraries and library associations can say this about their products and services?

What if…? What if libraries offered:

• Frequent, free upgrades in services and products, promoted widely and supported by the community (of employees, volunteers, and users);
• Open source services and products that are easy and fun to hack;
• An open community (of employees, volunteers, and users) that is encouraged to participate in what the library is and what it’s becoming, that trusts and is trusted by the library;
• An enthusiastic community (of employees, volunteers, and users), fostered by the library, that is excited and positive and involved in change in the library;
• Every possible access point for members of the community to communicate with each other, exchange ideas, share problems and successes, ask questions and get answers.

Are there any good reasons why libraries aren’t doing this right this second?

The Librarian in Black blogging about Stephen Abram’s CLA 2006 speech:

He quoted Karen Schneider’s famous line: “The user is not broken.” We are trying to turn our users into little librarians. We should not market “information literacy” — we are calling users illiterate before they come to us for help. That does not begin that person’s experience in a good way. Over 40% of online users create their own content for the web. They are online. Where are we?

Oh, brother, YES!

That’s just the tip of the great, thought-provoking iceberg of things Stephen said. I’m sorry I couldn’t hear his talk in person. I thank my lucky stars Sarah Houghton-Jan is such a great conference blogger.