GILES Gordon's threnody (December 12) awakened memories and passions in me that I had come to think were long dead. Having spent my working life in public and college libraries I thought that, after nine years' retirement, I had reached a suitable state of detachment concerning their sad fate. Librarians may largely have themselves to blame but the main burden of responsibility must surely rest with local and national politicians not all of whom are wild enthusiasts for that most basic of freedoms: access to information and knowledge.
In the 1950s and 60s librarians chose four false roads to go down: book-loan statistics as the main indicators of library testosterone levels, managerial rather than bibliographical qualifications as the main route to advancement, a distaste for subject specialist posts, and, along with many other para-professions, engagement
in the general hyperinflation of academic qualifications.
The booksellers are taking back territory that is rightfully theirs, as Giles Gordon implies, but public libraries are not making a good case for playing down the provision of light entertainment and providing that for which they are most needed: support for all educational and cultural activities, unique local repositories and information services, and an informed and skilled interface between the punter and the information explosion, whether audio, visual, digital, or bound in pink buckram.
Good libraries are trying to do these things already but they are fewer and doing worse than the profession would like to think.
Good librarians are still to be found but I suspect that their average age is greater than formerly and that they lurk among the lower branches of the managerial tree. Perhaps someone should compile a Library Lover's Directory of Excellent Librarians and Library Assistants.
In the meantime there is the pleasure of finding routes to informational satisfaction through an increasingly uncertain jumble of provision standards and of speculating why, in my own neck of the woods, our most excellent Chief Librarian should resign in mid-career and go to work for Borders.
Geo. S Neil Mochrie,
16 Heugh Street, Falkirk.
December 13.
GILES Gordon's call (December 12) for ''a distinguished and fertile public library service'' will be supported by librarians and library users. However, he does his case little service by some of the assertions he makes in his article. To say that the advent of Public Lending Right has stopped librarians recommending particular books is ludicrous. The very successful ''Now Read On'' scheme organised by the Scottish Library Association and the Scottish Arts Council recommended and actively promoted a wide range of authors and titles to the public.
The recent #500,000 lottery award to the Scottish Library Association to provide copies of the work of Scottish authors is designed to promote Scottish writing in schools.
Libraries are facing financial difficulties and book expenditure in some services has been badly hit, but to say that librarians see ''libraries as a business'' does not bear scrutiny. The total income generated by libraries is less than 3% of total expenditure.
It also has to be said that the present Government is breathing new life into public libraries by placing them at the centre of its efforts to promote both new technology and education. The Government is also providing funding for training, the development of digital services, and the improvement of the existing IT infrastructure.
The future of public libraries is bright, but they are changing, and a good thing too. For libraries to stand aside from developments such as the Internet and CD Roms would indeed be a ''head in the sand'' policy, and would benefit neither libraries nor the people who use them.
Robert Craig,
Director, Scottish Library and
Information Council,
1 John Street, Hamilton.
December 13.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article