This posting is a departure from my normal subject range, which consists of musings on libraries, Otis Library in particular, or the general field of librarianship. However, the recent death of British-American photojournalist Tim Hetherington while covering the Libyan conflict, and his close association with Evening with an Author speaker Sebastian Junger led me to this unscheduled detour. His work with Mr. Junger would be reason enough to warrant a post, but other intersections and commonalities made this essay necessary and in some ways unavoidable. On the day Mr. Hetherington died I was reading James Brabazon's memoir My Friend the Mercenary a recent addition to our collection which recounts Brabazon's experiences as a photojournalist during the ineffable horrors of the Liberian Civil War, and his evolving friendship with his South African body guard and sometimes mercenary Nick du Toit. One of the other protagonists featuring prominently in Brabazon's memoir is Tim Hetherington.
The second connection was Hetherington's Directorship of the Academy Award nominated documentary Restrepo based on the time he and Sebastian spent in Afghanistan's Korenghal Valley embedded with the 173ed Airborne Brigade at the eponymous base named for medic Juan Restrepo. That film, and the companion book WAR have personal resonance. My eldest son Jon served with the 173ed in the valley and was acquainted with both Sebastian and Tim. For Christmas, Jon's gift to me was Tim's book Infidel a photo essay composed of images taken during the 173ed's deployment.
Clearly, there are many connections and the sense of loss evoked while not based on a personal relationship is something more than the predictable emotions triggered by the death of a well know public figure or personality. It may be his relative youth-he was only 40-or the disbelief that someone who had escaped so many physically proximate encounters with death would perish as the result of a anonymously launched projectile meant for no one in particular. My emotions may also reflect a profound belief that wars ought not be and their coverage a moribund or extinct profession. Whatever their genesis, I firmly believe that the world is a lesser place without Tim Hetherington in it.
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Sunday, April 17, 2011
Social Media
Recently I began following a site dedicated to discussing social media. On my last visit I encountered an effusive post encouraging readers to "Be Real and Be Credible." It ended with the following call to action:
"The days of talking at people are over. It’s time to start talking with people. In order to do that, we have to take down our walls, step out from behind the desk and podium and (in the wise words of an MTV series) 'start getting real.' It’s time to show our humanness.
(Personally, I would much rather talk with someone than post 140 character summations of my eating habits or current status in the coffee machine queue.) The core message of this post seemed to be, based on a survey of college students,that "scholarly" posts are less palatable and human than squibs that describe yesterday's lunch buffet. My response, which I hoped would elicit a riposte, was as follows: "There is something troubling about this line of reasoning, or I am missing a point. Is the point that saying something intelligent or using multi-syllable words is 'talking down' or pontificating? My biggest complaint with social media is its tendancy to oversimplify, or default to plainly vacuous commentary. I do not equate simplicity or banality with humanness." No responses thus far, but I am hoping for some. Honestly, this is not a cheap shot at social media. I am just not sure what it is supposed to accomplish. I mentioned a few weeks ago that I had ceased putting posts on Facebook. I still have a personal Twitter account, but I am beginning to feel much the same way about it. Before putting it on hiatus too, I am going to explore my use further.
I recently read an essay in the book Is the Internet Changing the Way You Think? that concluded the Internet is facilitating a "shift from information scarcity and low levels of interpersonal interaction to an environment of information abundance and high levels of interaction and feedback." I concur, to the extent that we are awash in information and opportunities for interaction and feedback. I can find enormous quantities of information, and often I feel like I know bits about many things. Have information access and social media vehicles improved the content of our discourse? A surfeit of information enhanced my knowledge, to borrow a thought from T.S. Eliot? That remains to be seen. While reading an essay on the poet Wallace Stevens reflecting his empathy with an observation by Henry James, I identified the type of satisfaction I have not achieved from social media, and more generally from my reading and research experiences on the Internet:
"To live in the world of creation-to get into it and stay in it -to frequent it and haunt it-to think intensely and fruitfully-to woo combination and inspiration into being by a depth and continuity of attention and meditation-this is the only thing" I am looking for that "thing" using the Internet, and while dissatisfied with the results to date I continue the search.
"The days of talking at people are over. It’s time to start talking with people. In order to do that, we have to take down our walls, step out from behind the desk and podium and (in the wise words of an MTV series) 'start getting real.' It’s time to show our humanness.
(Personally, I would much rather talk with someone than post 140 character summations of my eating habits or current status in the coffee machine queue.) The core message of this post seemed to be, based on a survey of college students,that "scholarly" posts are less palatable and human than squibs that describe yesterday's lunch buffet. My response, which I hoped would elicit a riposte, was as follows: "There is something troubling about this line of reasoning, or I am missing a point. Is the point that saying something intelligent or using multi-syllable words is 'talking down' or pontificating? My biggest complaint with social media is its tendancy to oversimplify, or default to plainly vacuous commentary. I do not equate simplicity or banality with humanness." No responses thus far, but I am hoping for some. Honestly, this is not a cheap shot at social media. I am just not sure what it is supposed to accomplish. I mentioned a few weeks ago that I had ceased putting posts on Facebook. I still have a personal Twitter account, but I am beginning to feel much the same way about it. Before putting it on hiatus too, I am going to explore my use further.
I recently read an essay in the book Is the Internet Changing the Way You Think? that concluded the Internet is facilitating a "shift from information scarcity and low levels of interpersonal interaction to an environment of information abundance and high levels of interaction and feedback." I concur, to the extent that we are awash in information and opportunities for interaction and feedback. I can find enormous quantities of information, and often I feel like I know bits about many things. Have information access and social media vehicles improved the content of our discourse? A surfeit of information enhanced my knowledge, to borrow a thought from T.S. Eliot? That remains to be seen. While reading an essay on the poet Wallace Stevens reflecting his empathy with an observation by Henry James, I identified the type of satisfaction I have not achieved from social media, and more generally from my reading and research experiences on the Internet:
"To live in the world of creation-to get into it and stay in it -to frequent it and haunt it-to think intensely and fruitfully-to woo combination and inspiration into being by a depth and continuity of attention and meditation-this is the only thing" I am looking for that "thing" using the Internet, and while dissatisfied with the results to date I continue the search.
Saturday, April 9, 2011
Socrates, literacy, and the 21st century library
Part of the planning for the future of Otis library involves assessing the services we provide, including the technologies. This is especially important now, in a time of complex transition from the unquestioned dominance of print to one where the common wisdom is digital formats will predominate. Maryanne Wolf, author of Proust and the Squid: The Story and Science of the Reading Brain compares our current situation to the fifth and fourth centuries BCE, a time when questions about literacy were raised by Socrates and mirror concerns equally resonant in the protean environment of the early 21st century. As she eloquently observes, the questions raised more than two millennia ago by Socrates about literacy in the context of the transition from an oral society to a literate one are similar to her own concerns about the immersion of our children in a digital world: “Like the ancient Greeks we are embarked on a powerfully important transition-in our case from a written culture to one that is more digital and visual.”
Socrates felt passionately that written words posed serious risks to society, and posited 3 critical objections that deserve thoughtful consideration as we examine our own intellectual transition to new modes of acquiring information. I will discuss one in this post. Socrates embraced the probative value of orality, specifically its efficacy as a dynamic means of expression, “full of meanings, sounds, rhythms, ready to be uncovered through examination and dialogue.” Written words by contrast were mute, incapable of riposte. This inflexibility of written words doomed the dialogic process Socrates saw as the heart of education.
With the benefit of 2 millennia of evidence Socrates misgivings were demonstrably unwarranted. The process of reflection, writing, revision and committing ones thoughts to paper creates an inner dialectic similar to that he espoused and valued so highly. The dialogue remains, albeit in a modified form.
Whether the essence of the dialogue persists or mutates in the “interactive dimension of communication in the 21st century” as Wolf phrases it, remains a matter of speculation. Perhaps, like Socrates assessment of literacy versus orality it is too early to judge the efficacy of communications often circumscribed by a few hundred characters. There is no sin in brevity or glory in prolixity. I do like Wolf’s closing comment on this matter: “whether [the essence of dialogue] are being developed in ways that sufficiently reflect the true, critical examination of thought would be for Socrates and for us the essential question.”
Socrates articulated a second, more subtle concern which resonates with Wolf, the illusory nature of words. Words, he feared, would be mistaken for reality. Shorn of the probing and modifying effects of the dialogue, written words would delude people into “empty arrogance, leading nowhere, contributing nothing” because words “seem…as though they were intelligent” While the dialogic component of writing is demonstrable, the same remains unproved for the digital environment. In this worry Socrates anticipated the misgivings of “thousands of teachers and parents who watch their children endless hours before computer screens, absorbing but not necessarily understanding all manner of information.”
My purpose is not to deny the need for or usefulness of digital formats vs. analog. However, Socrates fears and Wolf’s open ended speculation regarding the “powerfully important transition” described above are part of the equation we must contemplate as we plan and implement our vision of a responsive, responsible and sustainable 21st century library. Our planning requires a carefully framed and forthright dialogue, featuring decisions based on examination, discussion, and understanding rather than by default, on the allure of new formats and platforms.
Socrates felt passionately that written words posed serious risks to society, and posited 3 critical objections that deserve thoughtful consideration as we examine our own intellectual transition to new modes of acquiring information. I will discuss one in this post. Socrates embraced the probative value of orality, specifically its efficacy as a dynamic means of expression, “full of meanings, sounds, rhythms, ready to be uncovered through examination and dialogue.” Written words by contrast were mute, incapable of riposte. This inflexibility of written words doomed the dialogic process Socrates saw as the heart of education.
With the benefit of 2 millennia of evidence Socrates misgivings were demonstrably unwarranted. The process of reflection, writing, revision and committing ones thoughts to paper creates an inner dialectic similar to that he espoused and valued so highly. The dialogue remains, albeit in a modified form.
Whether the essence of the dialogue persists or mutates in the “interactive dimension of communication in the 21st century” as Wolf phrases it, remains a matter of speculation. Perhaps, like Socrates assessment of literacy versus orality it is too early to judge the efficacy of communications often circumscribed by a few hundred characters. There is no sin in brevity or glory in prolixity. I do like Wolf’s closing comment on this matter: “whether [the essence of dialogue] are being developed in ways that sufficiently reflect the true, critical examination of thought would be for Socrates and for us the essential question.”
Socrates articulated a second, more subtle concern which resonates with Wolf, the illusory nature of words. Words, he feared, would be mistaken for reality. Shorn of the probing and modifying effects of the dialogue, written words would delude people into “empty arrogance, leading nowhere, contributing nothing” because words “seem…as though they were intelligent” While the dialogic component of writing is demonstrable, the same remains unproved for the digital environment. In this worry Socrates anticipated the misgivings of “thousands of teachers and parents who watch their children endless hours before computer screens, absorbing but not necessarily understanding all manner of information.”
My purpose is not to deny the need for or usefulness of digital formats vs. analog. However, Socrates fears and Wolf’s open ended speculation regarding the “powerfully important transition” described above are part of the equation we must contemplate as we plan and implement our vision of a responsive, responsible and sustainable 21st century library. Our planning requires a carefully framed and forthright dialogue, featuring decisions based on examination, discussion, and understanding rather than by default, on the allure of new formats and platforms.
Sunday, April 3, 2011
Interlibrary Loans and Community Libraries: Endangered Species?
As the Otis Library proceeds with its strategic planning a new and providential issue faces Connecticut libraries. It also affects our relationship with local libraries. The proposed state budget jettisons entirely the interlibrary loan system. For a savings of less than $1,000,000 a highly successful program is jeopardized, and with it the survival of community libraries as we know them. Why so? That is perhaps an obvious question, but it deserves at least brief consideration. No library can afford to buy every desirable material. This is painfully illustrated by the conditions in small community libraries. Review the monthly statistics for Otis Library and you will find a core group of about 5 area libraries serving small communities that rely heavily on our materials and their availability to supplement the contents of their own financially strapped collections. That reliance is itself sobering and worth pondering, in as much as Otis’s ability to maintain a high quality collection has been handicapped by decreased municipal support over the past two budget cycles. Without the largess of community members such as the Edward and Mary Lord Foundation, Sachem Fund, Norwich Rotary, AHEPA, and the Friends of Otis Library our materials budget would amount to less than $30,000, a starkly marginal sum when compared to the $100,000 invested in materials in 2007-2008.
For certain of these small libraries $30,000 or $25,000, or $15,000 is a princely but illusory sum. Without the means to transport materials from comparatively well endowed peers, their status as community assets is diminished. Their ability to act as centers of community life is dramatically reduced. The question, as of yet unaddressed is, what happens next; Closure and consolidation with larger facilities? and if so under what conditions? Arguably, these communities have lost other services and survived-bus and trains, local high schools and hospitals for example, and they may absorb this added loss stoically.
Rather than face unpalatable choices a proactive decision to alert and influence our state representatives would be in order. On your next visit to the Otis Library pick up one of the concise and instructive advocacy fliers at our service desks. If you are a resident of one of the small municipalities that relies on Norwich, New London, Colchester or another larger community library for access to materials encourage your local officials and library advocates to make interlibrary loans a priority for state funding. It is a modest sum, but its loss has huge and devastating implications.
For certain of these small libraries $30,000 or $25,000, or $15,000 is a princely but illusory sum. Without the means to transport materials from comparatively well endowed peers, their status as community assets is diminished. Their ability to act as centers of community life is dramatically reduced. The question, as of yet unaddressed is, what happens next; Closure and consolidation with larger facilities? and if so under what conditions? Arguably, these communities have lost other services and survived-bus and trains, local high schools and hospitals for example, and they may absorb this added loss stoically.
Rather than face unpalatable choices a proactive decision to alert and influence our state representatives would be in order. On your next visit to the Otis Library pick up one of the concise and instructive advocacy fliers at our service desks. If you are a resident of one of the small municipalities that relies on Norwich, New London, Colchester or another larger community library for access to materials encourage your local officials and library advocates to make interlibrary loans a priority for state funding. It is a modest sum, but its loss has huge and devastating implications.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Decreasing Connectivity
A week ago I put my Facebook account on hiatus. I sent an e-mail to those with whom I interacted most frequently explaining that Facebook had become a means of staying in random contact with a lot of people, but I felt I needed something less mediated as a means of communication, and besides I was not sure that I was saying anything of particular import anyway. I invited them to write a letter, as a compromise proffered a possible e-mail sent to me at work, or invited them to join me on a Saturday morning at my favorite coffee house for a face to face chat. This latter selection is my personal favorite, even if it greatly reduces the number of contacts. I also reset the timing for updates on my e-mail accounts from every minute to once an hour, which has proved to be far more humane and much less distracting. I also discontinued several RSS feeds, and disconnected from a few seldom consulted e-mail updates. So far, at least, my strategic retreat from complete accessibility has gone pretty much unnoticed, not quite on a par with the reaction to the British decision to withdraw from points east of Suez!
I am not dunning one application for some broken promise or undelivered guarantee. There seem to be millions of Internet users who find their expectations fulfilled, and the level of discourse satisfactory on sites like Facebook and Twitter. Initially, I found social media to be a convenient means of staying in touch with my son during his tour of duty in Afghanistan. After his departure the pages languished, but over time an aggregation of old friends, new acquaintances, folks with shared interests and political causes all took up residence as “Friends” as defined by Facebook.
The principal factors involved in my decision rested largely on a sense, well articulated by Nicholas Carr in his book The Shallows, What the Internet is Doing to Our Brains that the relentless connectivity of the Internet, social media and alleged “smart phones” scattered my thoughts and words, and provided too frequent and unnecessary distractions from what I should focus on at work and home. There was also that inchoate feeling that what was happening was less frequently communicating and more often announcing or launching a comment into cyberspace. There is a passage in The Heart of Darkness in which the protagonist encounters a French warship off the African coast lobbing explosive shells into the interior, so far into the interior that there is no visible impact. A lot of my Facebook use felt like that.
There are other less easily articulated reasons for cutting back on the several categories of connectivity. I have yet to develop full descriptions of them all, but as I do I will offer them here for comment and consideration. For the moment at least the withdrawal has been relatively smooth and pain free. I am also keeping a seat open at the coffee house.
I am not dunning one application for some broken promise or undelivered guarantee. There seem to be millions of Internet users who find their expectations fulfilled, and the level of discourse satisfactory on sites like Facebook and Twitter. Initially, I found social media to be a convenient means of staying in touch with my son during his tour of duty in Afghanistan. After his departure the pages languished, but over time an aggregation of old friends, new acquaintances, folks with shared interests and political causes all took up residence as “Friends” as defined by Facebook.
The principal factors involved in my decision rested largely on a sense, well articulated by Nicholas Carr in his book The Shallows, What the Internet is Doing to Our Brains that the relentless connectivity of the Internet, social media and alleged “smart phones” scattered my thoughts and words, and provided too frequent and unnecessary distractions from what I should focus on at work and home. There was also that inchoate feeling that what was happening was less frequently communicating and more often announcing or launching a comment into cyberspace. There is a passage in The Heart of Darkness in which the protagonist encounters a French warship off the African coast lobbing explosive shells into the interior, so far into the interior that there is no visible impact. A lot of my Facebook use felt like that.
There are other less easily articulated reasons for cutting back on the several categories of connectivity. I have yet to develop full descriptions of them all, but as I do I will offer them here for comment and consideration. For the moment at least the withdrawal has been relatively smooth and pain free. I am also keeping a seat open at the coffee house.
Sunday, February 13, 2011
A Philosophy for Hard Times
Frequent readers of this site are aware that these are hectic times at Otis. We are engaged in an exciting but stressful process that envisions a new model for delivering library services. The first full iteration will be presented to the staff on March 1 and 2 for vetting, followed by a thorough review, revisions as necessary and a formal presentation to the library’s board at our March 19 retreat. In addition, there is the prospect of another challenging fiscal year in 2011-2012, and all the attendant stress uncertainty causes. Aside from attacking a voluminous pile of literature on corporate culture, embracing change and the future of libraries, I find myself spending a lot of time reading the Stoic philosophers, especially Marcus Aurelius’s Meditations. I am not promoting him or the Stoics as THE answer for coping with hard times, but a philosophy that values reason, thoughtful deliberation and moderation as guides to right conduct in an uncertain world has obvious attractions. There is one caveat I must offer: if you do most of your reading at night you run the risk of entering a deep and sonorous sleep. I speak from personal experience. Try to set aside time during the day if you are committed to a full appreciation of the Stoic world view. The results will be rewarding. For those readers who balk at the thought of reading philosophy in depth, there are places to cultivate a familiarity without a full immersion. In particular, I recommend http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Philosophy-Marcus-Aurelius.htm. At the moment I am particularly drawn to the following observation from Marcus Aurelius: “The noblest kind of retribution is not to become like your enemy. “ Amen!
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Response to the YMCA proposal
Below is the text of a note sent to the members of the Norwich City Council earlier this morning.
Good morning Ladies and Gentlemen,
I do not know if you have had an opportunity to read Bill Kenney's response to the Norwich Bulletin article "Norwich mayor says YMCA purchase proposal not ready for public." In his riposte, Mr. Kenney note,
"Sadly, revenue shortfalls in recent years have resulted in the City Council approving budgets that less than fully fund programs provided by, and supported through, the Norwich Public Schools and the Otis Library. I believe the latter has actually seen a double digit decline in the level of municipal funding in the last half a decade. Both organizations are critical components to our city's quality of life who've often made do with lip service and diminished dollars. We should consider providing them additional resources that would benefit all of us."
I do encourage you to read the entire piece, which I have attached to this letter. My purpose in bringing his comments to your attention is not to denigrate the effort to provide Norwich with adequate recreational facilities, which are clearly needed. Rather, I want to point out that the library provides many of the functions cited as attributes of the proposed new facility. I want to end with a quote from a letter I circulated among library customers prior to Monday's City Council meeting.
"Otis Library is a community center. It provides free meeting space for community organizations, sponsors and promotes a wide variety of programs for all ages, serves as the most active regional site for Literacy Volunteers, and is one of the few forums in the city of Norwich where people of diverse backgrounds gather in a common space. It is not a recreational facility, and there is no question that such a facility would be a community asset. That said, before embarking on another project it seems sensible to ensure the long-term support and stability of an existing, heavily used asset currently providing essential community centered services. That entity is the Otis Library."
Thank you,
Bob Farwell
Good morning Ladies and Gentlemen,
I do not know if you have had an opportunity to read Bill Kenney's response to the Norwich Bulletin article "Norwich mayor says YMCA purchase proposal not ready for public." In his riposte, Mr. Kenney note,
"Sadly, revenue shortfalls in recent years have resulted in the City Council approving budgets that less than fully fund programs provided by, and supported through, the Norwich Public Schools and the Otis Library. I believe the latter has actually seen a double digit decline in the level of municipal funding in the last half a decade. Both organizations are critical components to our city's quality of life who've often made do with lip service and diminished dollars. We should consider providing them additional resources that would benefit all of us."
I do encourage you to read the entire piece, which I have attached to this letter. My purpose in bringing his comments to your attention is not to denigrate the effort to provide Norwich with adequate recreational facilities, which are clearly needed. Rather, I want to point out that the library provides many of the functions cited as attributes of the proposed new facility. I want to end with a quote from a letter I circulated among library customers prior to Monday's City Council meeting.
"Otis Library is a community center. It provides free meeting space for community organizations, sponsors and promotes a wide variety of programs for all ages, serves as the most active regional site for Literacy Volunteers, and is one of the few forums in the city of Norwich where people of diverse backgrounds gather in a common space. It is not a recreational facility, and there is no question that such a facility would be a community asset. That said, before embarking on another project it seems sensible to ensure the long-term support and stability of an existing, heavily used asset currently providing essential community centered services. That entity is the Otis Library."
Thank you,
Bob Farwell
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
