The vandals destroying libraries should have the book thrown at them(theguardian.com)
theguardian.com
The vandals destroying libraries should have the book thrown at them
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/13/vandals-destroying-libraries-should-have-book-thrown-at-them
29 comments
>> I'm 48, and I can't remember any other time where I've actually despaired about the future for my (step) kids, and where I've felt that the government really is out of control.
That is said by every generation. Every generation going back hundreds of years. In the 1950s, the glory time for today's elderly, comic books we the craze. A hundred years before that doctors would regularly tell people not to read as it could cause illness, especially in women. Some thought chess angered the blood. But they all drank and took opium with abandon. Today doctors tell kids to reduce screen time, while loading them up with ADHD meds. Nothing changes.
The definition of "old" is when you start lecturing on how young people were so much better in your generation. It's just nostalgia. Old people forget the evils of the past and see new evils everywhere in the present.
That is said by every generation. Every generation going back hundreds of years. In the 1950s, the glory time for today's elderly, comic books we the craze. A hundred years before that doctors would regularly tell people not to read as it could cause illness, especially in women. Some thought chess angered the blood. But they all drank and took opium with abandon. Today doctors tell kids to reduce screen time, while loading them up with ADHD meds. Nothing changes.
The definition of "old" is when you start lecturing on how young people were so much better in your generation. It's just nostalgia. Old people forget the evils of the past and see new evils everywhere in the present.
Everything changes, yet nothing is new under the sun.
I know this - I've spent plenty of time studying the phenomenon, and I'm careful not to use terms like 'snowflake', etc.
I don't think 'things were better in my generation', but I do think we now have the UK's Donald Trump in charge, and without any worthwhile opposition to keep them in check.
Do you think that a country without libraries and state education in 'non-academic' subjects like music, drama and art is a good idea?
I don't think 'things were better in my generation', but I do think we now have the UK's Donald Trump in charge, and without any worthwhile opposition to keep them in check.
Do you think that a country without libraries and state education in 'non-academic' subjects like music, drama and art is a good idea?
I like libraries, in principle.
However, I'm concerned about literacy rates. Access to libraries and literacy are not related. Examine the Pisa rankings, for instance. Furthermore, why is it that literacy rates in Scotland are falling, but rising in England?
Access to a library does not make you interested in reading.
However, I'm concerned about literacy rates. Access to libraries and literacy are not related. Examine the Pisa rankings, for instance. Furthermore, why is it that literacy rates in Scotland are falling, but rising in England?
Access to a library does not make you interested in reading.
> why is it that literacy rates in Scotland are falling
This accusation has been doing the rounds in the Scottish press for a while and was debunked:
https://theferret.scot/one-in-five-children-dont-leave-prima...
This accusation has been doing the rounds in the Scottish press for a while and was debunked:
https://theferret.scot/one-in-five-children-dont-leave-prima...
> Access to libraries and literacy are not related.
I can't speak to the UK but in the US this is demonstrably not true. Libraries are the typical entry point for people who want to take advantage of the programs designed to encourage literacy in children outside of school, and perhaps more importantly the adult literacy programs of a more remedial nature.
> Access to a library does not make you interested in reading.
It sure as hell provides fuel for the fire, provided there is even a small spark.
I can't speak to the UK but in the US this is demonstrably not true. Libraries are the typical entry point for people who want to take advantage of the programs designed to encourage literacy in children outside of school, and perhaps more importantly the adult literacy programs of a more remedial nature.
> Access to a library does not make you interested in reading.
It sure as hell provides fuel for the fire, provided there is even a small spark.
I'm 25 and from the UK, I'm incredibly optimistic about the future of our country.
Having listened to the doom-mongering from select circles for the last 9 years, I now find it to be quite amusing. Since 2010 and with 2016 thrown in there for good measure, it seems that said people are going through multiple stages of despair, as each stage passes, the claims become more and more absurd. I usually predict that people will grow out of it, but in your case, there isn't much time.
Your last sentence crosses into personal attack. None of that here please.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I would suggest that spending some time in any state-run education establishment will temper your enthusiasm for the course that we're going in.
If you have the means to build libraries and universities there's a world of things you can hardly do worse.
i found this article to be very poor. instead of trying to formulate an argument for why libraries should be kept open, it lashes out in some petty political scoring.
my opinion is that the age of the library has ended. the library model is from a bygone age. it's role has been taken over by the internet. and any other features (such as events etc) have been nullified by changes in society. this is backed up by extremely reduced numbers of borrowers (and falling) and the incredible growth rate of the internet, and especially mobile as a whole. the digital disenfranchised have the same issue as the people who couldn't read and write back when libraries were one of the main the sources of knowledge. the difference today is that the price to access the internet has never been lower, will continue getting lower, and the benefits of the internet massively outweigh any nostalgic dreams about libraries.
there will still be libraries, but i don't foresee anything other than a continued decline until a more sustainable model is found. even then, i don't think another age of the libraries would be back anytime soon.
my opinion is that the age of the library has ended. the library model is from a bygone age. it's role has been taken over by the internet. and any other features (such as events etc) have been nullified by changes in society. this is backed up by extremely reduced numbers of borrowers (and falling) and the incredible growth rate of the internet, and especially mobile as a whole. the digital disenfranchised have the same issue as the people who couldn't read and write back when libraries were one of the main the sources of knowledge. the difference today is that the price to access the internet has never been lower, will continue getting lower, and the benefits of the internet massively outweigh any nostalgic dreams about libraries.
there will still be libraries, but i don't foresee anything other than a continued decline until a more sustainable model is found. even then, i don't think another age of the libraries would be back anytime soon.
I do not have hard data on borrowing rates etc. but the two libraries I go to (western suburbs of Paris) are full.
Full of older folks, full of children, full of the children's parents. Purple sit to read and borrow impressive stacks of books.
There are also plenty of students. They could study at home (taken into account the average population wealth) and yet they come to cluster in sub-optimal conditions.
I do not have any concerns for these libraries to dissapear.
I do not know how this works for other countries but French consulates often hold a library as well. They mirror this system of "meeting space" for national and francophones. Last time I tried that was on Krakow, Poland and the experience was great.
Full of older folks, full of children, full of the children's parents. Purple sit to read and borrow impressive stacks of books.
There are also plenty of students. They could study at home (taken into account the average population wealth) and yet they come to cluster in sub-optimal conditions.
I do not have any concerns for these libraries to dissapear.
I do not know how this works for other countries but French consulates often hold a library as well. They mirror this system of "meeting space" for national and francophones. Last time I tried that was on Krakow, Poland and the experience was great.
You are wrong, libraries are extremely important and provide access to both books and the internet for many many folks. They are a cultural, social and intellectual nexus. The thinking that libraries are outmoded because we have the web is short sighted.
This is article is outlining the destruction of the libraries in the UK by the conservative government, an educated and engaged population is a cure for the right. This is the same reason we have a war on education in the US, to make more right wing voters.
> Because nobody has worked as doggedly to this end, as unsentimentally, and with a greater commitment to the suppression of literacy, than our own Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport.
This is article is outlining the destruction of the libraries in the UK by the conservative government, an educated and engaged population is a cure for the right. This is the same reason we have a war on education in the US, to make more right wing voters.
> Because nobody has worked as doggedly to this end, as unsentimentally, and with a greater commitment to the suppression of literacy, than our own Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport.
I think he was referring specifically to their traditional function as a repository of information. I think in that regard, libraries are outmoded.
Of course they have been and can be transformed to perform other important community functions.
Of course they have been and can be transformed to perform other important community functions.
They are not outmoded for this function, which is the function of a repository of information free to all citizens. They are critical for it, and they are giving up on it, by and large, thanks to the current generation of professional librarians.
What is described in the article is also happening in the US, and over the last 15 years the public library has largely ceased to be a repository for information or even a kiosk to access information, which would be it's primary modern function. It has become a place to deliver entertainment, and even more importantly to warehouse children of working parents and in some areas, homeless people. These are perhaps useful and important functions, but not a primary rationale for a library. But in order to perform these functions, the libraries have eliminated ... the books.
And I don't just mean the physical books, and most of the suburban libraries around here have eliminated by my estimate at least half of their physical collections, both in books and media, largely to open floor space for lounge areas. These books in many cases are now just gone. They aren't available to read digitally either - because libraries are largely outsourcing the whole 'content' thing to for-profit companies that essentially lease books for access by libraries at ridiculous prices. And you'll get what they consider profitable, which is largely content that is ... entertainment.
One of the great functions of the "old" library was access to out-of-print material. This is now largely gone, and because it is out of print, you won't find it in digital distribution, either. And obscure or unpopular material that formerly could be found in a library you now must buy, at a high price because of low individual interest.
I believe that the public library was one of the great democratic institutions in the US, not just because it afforded access to information, but as a place where everyone, rich and poor, would go and have the same right to borrow a book. The only sliver of hope I see here is that most libraries still seem to have large children's sections and it warms my heart to see parents still taking little ones to the library. It's one of the small rituals that help to produce a civil society and one that I fear will eventually be privatized as well.
What is described in the article is also happening in the US, and over the last 15 years the public library has largely ceased to be a repository for information or even a kiosk to access information, which would be it's primary modern function. It has become a place to deliver entertainment, and even more importantly to warehouse children of working parents and in some areas, homeless people. These are perhaps useful and important functions, but not a primary rationale for a library. But in order to perform these functions, the libraries have eliminated ... the books.
And I don't just mean the physical books, and most of the suburban libraries around here have eliminated by my estimate at least half of their physical collections, both in books and media, largely to open floor space for lounge areas. These books in many cases are now just gone. They aren't available to read digitally either - because libraries are largely outsourcing the whole 'content' thing to for-profit companies that essentially lease books for access by libraries at ridiculous prices. And you'll get what they consider profitable, which is largely content that is ... entertainment.
One of the great functions of the "old" library was access to out-of-print material. This is now largely gone, and because it is out of print, you won't find it in digital distribution, either. And obscure or unpopular material that formerly could be found in a library you now must buy, at a high price because of low individual interest.
I believe that the public library was one of the great democratic institutions in the US, not just because it afforded access to information, but as a place where everyone, rich and poor, would go and have the same right to borrow a book. The only sliver of hope I see here is that most libraries still seem to have large children's sections and it warms my heart to see parents still taking little ones to the library. It's one of the small rituals that help to produce a civil society and one that I fear will eventually be privatized as well.
To see them only as a repository is a very narrow literalist view. They have always had other uses than "just storing books".
> I think he was referring specifically to their traditional function as a repository of information. I think in that regard, libraries are outmoded.
It's like people have never heard of e-books.
It's like people have never heard of e-books.
> the digital disenfranchised have the same issue as the people who couldn't read and write back when libraries were one of the main the sources of knowledge.
When libraries in the United States received their first really big financial boost, with lots of money from the likes of Andrew Carnegie, part of the services they offered were instruction in reading and writing for borrowers who might not even speak English. A library today might - depending on where it is and how well funded it is, or how well funded its community's social services are - provide or coordinate instruction in English as a second language, GED, basic job training, remedial Adult learning, computer use, or a ton of other things.
These are important tasks that need to be performed by humans, not "the internet."
> this is backed up by extremely reduced numbers of borrowers
I'm biased by living in an area with a well funded library system (a few, actually) with what are probably per-capita the largest number of borrowers of any libraries in the world. I wonder if maybe your comments are informed by never having lived in a place with a really good library, or by never needing what your library had to offer.
> the benefits of the internet massively outweigh any nostalgic dreams about libraries.
This is a weird false dichotomy. In an era where books in print and physical media are of reduced importance, libraries are lending e-books and music... on the internet. The draw to the physical library space is still a strong one, even for a worshiper of "the internet," since libraries are offering use of tools like 3d printers and laser cutters and other tools, as well as training on their use.
When libraries in the United States received their first really big financial boost, with lots of money from the likes of Andrew Carnegie, part of the services they offered were instruction in reading and writing for borrowers who might not even speak English. A library today might - depending on where it is and how well funded it is, or how well funded its community's social services are - provide or coordinate instruction in English as a second language, GED, basic job training, remedial Adult learning, computer use, or a ton of other things.
These are important tasks that need to be performed by humans, not "the internet."
> this is backed up by extremely reduced numbers of borrowers
I'm biased by living in an area with a well funded library system (a few, actually) with what are probably per-capita the largest number of borrowers of any libraries in the world. I wonder if maybe your comments are informed by never having lived in a place with a really good library, or by never needing what your library had to offer.
> the benefits of the internet massively outweigh any nostalgic dreams about libraries.
This is a weird false dichotomy. In an era where books in print and physical media are of reduced importance, libraries are lending e-books and music... on the internet. The draw to the physical library space is still a strong one, even for a worshiper of "the internet," since libraries are offering use of tools like 3d printers and laser cutters and other tools, as well as training on their use.
"Vandals", being the politicians cutting back funding, not actual library vandals.
I'm fairly certain the calibre of reader here is able to make that distinction without it being pointed out. Or they could read the article to find out.
Sure, but it's a misleading/clickbait title.
"Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport". Just the name makes you cringe. Digital, Media, and Sport is what a library is about avoiding. Its about deep thinking and healing through reading, not the mindless pleasure of the screen. How did these technocrats get in charge of such a precious institution?
The upside I see is illegal online "libraries", which are free public printing presses.
It's a revolution that went quite unseen, thanks to the copyright lobby's persistent noise about copied videotapes and bootlegging.
May good health find their operaters, and may the next Library of Alexandria make it to the heat death of the universe.
It's a revolution that went quite unseen, thanks to the copyright lobby's persistent noise about copied videotapes and bootlegging.
May good health find their operaters, and may the next Library of Alexandria make it to the heat death of the universe.
> Its about deep thinking and healing through reading
While that may be what a library is to you, it may not be what it is to other people. To me, a library is about public good and the storage and dissemination of knowledge for all (and the degree to which each of those is important depends on location).
I'm sure other people think it differently as well. The important part is that while we have ideas about what it means to us, neither you nor I get to dictate what it is, as that could exclude any number of other people.
While that may be what a library is to you, it may not be what it is to other people. To me, a library is about public good and the storage and dissemination of knowledge for all (and the degree to which each of those is important depends on location).
I'm sure other people think it differently as well. The important part is that while we have ideas about what it means to us, neither you nor I get to dictate what it is, as that could exclude any number of other people.
While I understand your scepticism, in the age of the internet and digital content, technology - whether we like it or not - is fundamental to library services.
How about https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Ministry_of_Transpor...
Sure, it's all infrastructure, so it makes sense, but it still feels like "Information Highway? Transport Ministry it is."
Sure, it's all infrastructure, so it makes sense, but it still feels like "Information Highway? Transport Ministry it is."
This is silly. For starters, books are media. More importantly, your idea of what a “library is about” is staid and pretentious.
I love books. I always have done, and most of my Christmas presents this year have been books (only 3, but you get the point). They are so incredibly important for opening up the vistas of thought and imagination that are available to you, that I don't think it can be overstated. And the UK government has been on a course of destroying libraries and a wide range of other cultural and societal infrastructure that it can't be overstated how scary this is.
Gove was responsible for stripping out a great deal of the syllabus in the UK - support for 'meaningless' subjects such as music, and music technology which I used to teach until the funding was removed from schools and it fell by the wayside for most schools as it was too expensive to keep going once equipment needed to be replaced. He is a man who feels he is an expert in every area, despite being anything but. Others in the government seem to be much the same, not seeing the point in anything they can't personally profit from.
Many of the subjects that are now struggling aren't public interest, and I wasn't too surprised. But this will destroy any chance that a generation will have to have access to the many-faceted wonders that a library can provide. The UK is sleep-walking into a desolate, dystopian future where knowledge is derided in favour of three-word soundbites and self-interest. The BBC will fall foul of the government once Brexit is out of the way, with all that brings.
I'm 48, and I can't remember any other time where I've actually despaired about the future for my (step) kids, and where I've felt that the government really is out of control. The way that the last election went was a damning indictment of the (pathetic) opposition in this country, and Johnson and his cronies (such as Gove) now have carte blanche to do as they please. By the time they are finished, so much structural damage will have been done to this country's institutions I think it will be next to impossible to repair what's been done, even if there is the political will to do anything about it.