What Library 2.0 means to me . . .

Hi there, so this week's assignment involved reading several articles discussing web 2.0, library 2.0, and the like, and then blogging about my opinion and reaction. I'll come right out and say it - I found some of the articles to be much more readable and user-friendly than I did others. A couple authors, Chip Nilges and John J. Riemer, went completely over my head, reminding me once again of the simpleton that I am when it comes to technology. I felt indifference towards Michael Stephens' article, but would like to respond to a couple items discussed by Rick Anderson (Away from the "icebergs") and Dr. Wendy Schultz (To a temporary place in time . . .)

One thought that struck me as I was reading was that, as a library, we are serving a very broad scope of patrons when it comes to technical savvy. Sure there are a growing number of folks that pride themselves on being up-to-date and current on the latest technological innovations, but there are still others, many, many others who are clinging to the tried and true traditions of the past. Rick Anderson made the statement that it's important that we be "placing library services and content in the user's preferred environment (i.e., the Web)." True, for many people the internet is now the preferred environment through which to obtain services and information. However, there is still that part of our population that relishes the institutions and traditions of yesterday and refuses to give them up. They love the touch, feel, smell, and experience of reading from a book. They enjoy browsing crowded collections as opposed to sitting down at a computer. I'm not saying one way is better than the other. What I am saying is that in an ideal world, it would be nice to figure out a way to accommodate both groups. That we figure out a way to serve those individuals that enjoy existing in the technological realm, while at the same time not forgetting those folks that refuse to surrender the practices and routines that they have grown up on and with which they have become so comfortable.

In order for Library 2.0 to be successful it requires that there be a system-wide acceptance of the internet as well as other new technologies. By "system-wide" I'm referring to the need of schools and other organizations outside of the library to begin making similar evolutions. I speak as a children's librarian here. Rick Anderson talked about the necessity of doing away with the "just in case collection" (a collection of materials which are rarely used but which libraries continue to hang onto just in case a patron comes in looking for them.) I'm all for doing away with those parts of the collection that are no longer being used, but then again, teachers need to allow for adjustments when assigning students reports. I often serve students whose assignment requires that they obtain their information from a book, RATHER THAN THE INTERNET. Most things these days can be found on the net, and it's often much easier to find it there (ever heard of a little thing called Google?), but until teachers more readily embrace the tools on the net, that "just in case collection" continues to be an important part of the collection that I can't justify discarding.

In regards to Dr. Wendy Schultz, let me just say, Wow! She's got some pretty grandiose ideas for the future! Library 3.0: the 3D experience? Sounds like a pretty exciting IMAX movie! Whoa, how about that one - Library IMAX? I mean, in Library 3.0 we'll already have librarian avatars and all that so why can't we take it a step further and experience libraries the IMAX way. You know, with really big letters. =D But seriously, as my friend Patrick pointed out in his blog, "How we go from underfunded inner-city urban libraries to exquisite brandy, aromatic cigars and the smell of leather is beyond me, the librarians of the future must be better fundraisers than the librarians of today."

Schultz referred to a service called SecondLife - where there are "subscribers who spend more than forty hours a week online, immersed in its virtual graphic world." More than FORTY HOURS A WEEK?!?! What the heck is wrong with us? Are our lives that boring that we now have to live vicariously through made up second lives? Did I miss something? What's next? People whose SecondLives have become so mundane that within the SecondLife World a new virtual world is created known as ThirdLife? I can see it now - "ThirdLife: for those of us whose first two lives just don't cut it." People, get a life! A first life!!!

There has been considerable discussion regarding libraries and how dramatically different they'll be in the next ten to fifteen years . . . with some even worrying that our jobs are in jeopardy and that libraries will become obsolete. Schultz stated, "Libraries are not just collections of documents and books, they are conversations, they are convocations of people, ideas, and artifacts in dynamic exchange. Libraries are not merely in communities, they are communities: they preserve and promote community memories; they provide mentors not only for the exploration of stored memory, but also for the creation of new artifacts of memory." LIBRARIES ARE NOT MERELY IN COMMUNITIES, THEY ARE COMMUNITIES. Certainly that is the mission of the City Library. Our former director saw the library not only as a building meant to house a collection of materials, but also to serve as an important community gathering place, where ideas and services can be shared. Looking around I see so many people in the library who are not sitting at the computers but are instead browsing the book shelves, talking to friends, attending a storytime or some other program, working on homework, utilizing our public spaces such as the "Crystal Cave" and the "Attic Room", or simply enjoying the view. Maybe I'm short-sighted but I don't see computers and/or Library 2.0 completely filling that niche just yet. And to be honest, I don't think I want to see that happen either. Library 4.0? No thanks.