2013-2014
These notes are based on my reading of the first four volumes of the journal The Library Quarterly. I started them on July 19, 2013 and finished on January 16, 2014. I’ll continue to revise these notes and edit out DokuWiki specific aspects.
Note on this abstract:
This is an abstract I submitted to ALISE for the 2014 conference. I won’t know if it will be accepted for a couple more months (It was accepted), and since it’s not a double peer blind review process, I see no problem posting it now.
I’m posting this abstract for a specific reason. This site will function as a place for my field notes on the project. Since I’m about to add my first set of notes, it seems important to explain the reason for those notes, before I begin posting them, in case the process might be useful to someone.
Update: After the following abstract was reviewed and before final submission to the conference, I made some revisions to the following text. See my GitHub repository for the previous version.
Scholarly journals play important roles in the dissemination of information and knowledge. However, beginning with the early days of science, journals have had other forms of influence (Price, 1986; Hunter, 2010). In particular, journals have contributed to the “building of scientific communities” (Functions of Scientific Journals section, para 3, Schaffner, 1994), and this has been true for the field we now call library and information science (LIS).
In the LIS example, the journal has played an important role in identity formation since the founding of the Library Journal in 1876. Approximately 55 years later, the founding of several scholarly and technical journals, including The Library Quarterly (1931), the Journal of Documentary Reproduction (1938), which would later and in a roundabout way evolve into JASIS&T (Farkas-Conn, 1990), and College and Research Libraries (1939), created additional outlets for the “publication of professional problems” (Hamlin, p. 60, 1981). For Hamlin, the addition of these journals signified a decade of wonders for librarians. In general, though, they helped usher in modern librarianship, evolve areas such as information science from documentation, and provide a cultural record of the efforts made by the people involved – something to refer to and to identify with as members of a community.
This study employs an autoethnographic reading of the first four volumes of the The Library Quarterly (LQ). This includes a reading of 16 issues and 120 articles published in the 1931 through 1934 volumes. In this study, the autoethnographic approach involves describing what it means to be a researcher and an educator in a field where scholarly journals played an important role in shaping the identity of the field. The goal is twofold: to develop a richer understanding of what journals mean for our professional identity, and to develop a framework that will enable future research of how other disciplines were shaped by journals.
Autoethnography is the chosen research design because the act of examining a LIS journal, in its role as an identity shaper, is the self-conscious and reflexive act of a participant observer (Ellis, Adams, & Bochner, 2011) – that is, a member of the community who is studying the community and its history. Two versions of autoethnographic research have been developed: evocative autoethnography and analytic autoethnography. Evocative autoethnography emphasizes “evocation as a goal, for one, and writing narratively, for another” (Ellis & Bochner, p. 432, 2006). Analytical autoethnography, like its evocative counterpart, “seeks narrative fidelity [… and] is grounded in self-experience but reaches beyond it as well” (Anderson, p. 386, 2006). Since one purpose of this study is to understand, broadly, how journals have contributed to disciplinary identity, analytical autoethnography is the chosen research design.
Autoethnographic research in LIS is rare (e.g., Michels, 2012) and autoethnographic readings of texts may be more common but are rare also. Kaufmann’s (2005) “autotheoretical [sic] reading of Foucault” (p. 577) provides a reference point for this study. In that study, Kaufmann interrupts her
theoretical interpretations of Foucault with autoethnographic pieces, textual vignettes of my life gathered through journal entries and books read [… which] function as illustrations and / or counterpoints to my summary of Foucault’s theories (p. 577).
Inspired by Kaufmann (2005), this study functions as an autohistorical, rather than an autotheoretical, reading of LQ. By this I mean I will include historical interpretations, grounded in readings of our field’s literature, of the first 120 articles in LQ with textual reflections of my experiences as a new researcher and educator within LIS. Since data will be collected in this way, my field notes will be public and accessible at https://cseanburns.net/wiki/lq/background.
The motivation for this study originates from recent scholarly communication trends and what these trends mean for the sciences, broadly defined. Specifically, despite the important role journals have had in creating communities and shaping identities, problems associated with the serials crisis and developments in emerging technologies have resulted in some researchers calling for an end to the genre. The arguments include a move to the article as a complete product in itself and to a market-based, decentralized infrastructure (Priem & Hemminger, 2012) where identification, publication, storage, assessment, marketing, search, and preparation are taken over by entities other than the journal (Priem, 2013).
In some cases, re-envisioned publishing models are challenging the traditional journal genre, too. PeerJ, for example, is a recent open access platform that charges authors a small, one time fee. The relevant requirement is that all authors assume peer review duties at least once per year (Van Noorden, 2012). Furthermore, the platform publishes on a continuous basis and is not dependent on publishing actual serials. That is, articles are published soon after and subsequent to peer review and acceptance.
Whether the rhetoric exhibited among the proponents of these trends is convincing, the arguments valid, or the outcomes overwhelmingly desired by the people involved in research activities, it is true that many researchers are becoming more interested in adopting new dissemination technologies (Tatum & Jankowski, 2013) or are required to communicate their data, their products, and their reports in more comprehensive ways (Piwowar, 2013).
Though the journal’s end time is not likely near, these interests and requirements are already having a disruptive influence on the scholarly communication system (Cope & Kalantzis, 2009), which will have an increasingly dynamic future. Also, while adoption of radical new methods of communication may be more appropriate for some forms of science, the state of affairs does beg for reflection on what the journal has done for community. In the process, it will be important to know, if anything, is lost for the culture of science if the journal is eventually dismissed.
Note: I removed the next few passages in the final submission of the conference abstract. But the idea expressed below remains an important part of the project:
Another aspect to consider is that an extreme focus on the article’s importance, at the cost of the journal’s, suggests implications with regards to the continued division of the reading unit. Tatum and Jankowski (2013) note that some open access publishers provide formats of articles that direct
reader attention to specific components of an article rather than an all encompassing presentation or argument […. and] away from the traditional linear structure of the scholarly journal article to an almost postmodern conception of the article emphasizing visual, multiple modes of presentation and online dynamic updating (p. 203).
What will be interesting to know and discuss is not only how such presentation and emphasis impacts community identity, but also how our interaction with the literature is constrained by a predominately query, subject, aboutness, and relevance based framework rather than one that is culturally based — information as increasingly atomized thing (datum) instead of information as a cultural product with a historical narrative.
Some literature on the history of library science and The Library Quarterly.
This entry is about:
Norman, Steve. (1988). "The Library Quarterly" in the 1930s: A Journal of Discussion's Early Years." The Library Quarterly, 58(4), 327-351. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4308292
Note: I'm taking a momentary break from my reading of *LQ* to review an article on the same subject matter. Specifically, this entry is about Steve Norman's historical article on the early years of *The Library Quarterly*. Reference above.
Wiegand's comment on this article:
Steve Norman analyzes the conflicts leading to the establishment of the *Library Quarterly* at the University of Chicago's Graduate Library School in 1931 and demonstrates the library community's resistance to GLS's emphasis on research and scholarship. His work is an outstanding piece of scholarship based on careful research into primary (and unpublished) sources and shows the confusion early LQ editors about determining publication criteria and the journal's early direction and agenda (p. 563).
Wiegand, Wayne A. (1990). The literature of American library history. Libraries & Culture, 25(4), 543-574. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/25542291
Note: Wiegand is right. From the start, this is a fascinating piece. Norman begins by describing the state of affairs at the time before the LQ began publication. Key highlights:
The Graduate Library School at the University of Chicago (GLS) was to encounter bitter hostility to this view that library education should conform to a research university's model of graduate education. William M. Randall, who was to become LQ's first editor, wrote later that "the attitude of (almost) the entire profession [was that they] could see no possible need for the type of research organization that Chicago was trying to establish" [1, p. 73]. LQ began publication in this context.
The quoted source is:
Richardson, John, Jr. The Spirit of Inquiry: The Graduate Library School at Chicago, 1921-51. Chicago: American Library Association. 1982.
Note: At one of the early GLS faculty meetings, shortly after the idea of a "journal of discussion" was proposed, the faculty decided to let "ALA to have an advisory board connected with a GLS journal. If, however, the school financed the journal, the school would have editorial control" (p. 330). It's interesting to think of this as the beginnings of an early schism. Although that may be way too powerful a term to describe this development.
Note: Much of the early discussion about establishing a journal centered on the journal functioning as an "organ" of GLS. It would, that is, primarily be a medium of publication for the output of research of GLS faculty and students. Although LQ did not become an organ for GLS only publications, this early intent does represent the small research culture that existed in librarianship at the time.
Note: GLS faculty were very concerned about who would have control of the journal. They wanted it to be under their control and not ALA's.
Note: Richard Bowker, then editor of the *Library Journal*:
mentioned his hope that the new journal would not compete with other publications [....] That Bowker had objected to possible competition is likely considering his review of LQ's first issue (p. 335).
Norman quotes a bit from that review, which was poor and reflects my own thoughts, expressed in previous posts, on the lack of research articles in the first issue of LQ.
Note: Norman's comment on C. C. Williamson's article in the first issue of *LQ* reflects what I had thought about the intent of the journal (I seem to be on the right track). Norman writes:
The decision by the GLS faculty to run Williamson's article as the first in *LQ* implies that the journal was conceived, at least to some degree, as a means of infusing scientific method into studies of library issues (p. 336).
My first thoughts about this issue were that, it just takes time to establish something like this---especially something like a serious research journal---in a field that did not previously have a research culture. Norman writes that the second issue was more positively received, since it had more research articles, and that:
In any event, the six months between *LQ*'s establishment and its first issue had not allowed much time for measuring up to five years' worth of expectations (p. 337).
Note: Just before the conclusion section of the article, Norman provides a descriptive breakdown or "distribution of types of articles" (p. 348) published in the first five years of LQ. This is helpful. Here's the breakdown:
Other nonresearch articles constituted the remainder (p. 348).
Reflection: Norman's history of the first years of LQ is more comprehensive in scope than my autoethnographic reading of the first four issues of *LQ*. First, mine is not a history, and as such, benefits from Norman's article greatly. Second, my focus is only on the main articles published in these first four volumes, and does not cover other types of articles, such as book reviews, and which Norman does discuss. By way of that, the Sears/Thompson book review controversy described by Norman from page 339 and on is quite fascinating, in that it represents an early divide between the research community and the practitioner community, by way of a misunderstanding of their respective purposes and needs (and some hubris on the part of certain portions of the research community, perhaps).
Reflection: Aside from the interesting narrative Norman provides in this article, the main implication, for me, is the simple existence of such a narrative and what this means for those who, perhaps too rashly, argue for moving beyond the journal simply because web and Internet related technologies allow or afford moving beyond the journal. That said, there may be merit in moving beyond the journal. That will be for others to decide, and for various disciplines or fields of research to determine for themselves. However, although such a move may mean a loss or a gain for those research cultures, the role that journals have played in developing a field or a professional identity should be part of the discussion. In other words, history should be part of the discussion.
Note: This is an information seeking note. My abstract has an obvious omission: no literature review of any articles on the LQ. At the time I wrote that abstract, I was more interested in reviewing the literature on autoethnography. Also, the motivation, as described in that abstract, led me toward a different set of literature to review---literature on current scholarly communication problems and issues. I stumbled upon Norman's history of the early years of *LQ* because I pulled up the Wikipedia article on the journal for a reason I can no longer remember. According to Wikipedia's revision history of its article on LQ, the reference to Norman's article was added on February 10, 2011 by User *Wskent*.
After I found Norman's article, I did a keyword search for it, using the names of the author and title, on Google Scholar in order to quickly see if any one had cited Norman's article. That's how I found Wiegand's article (reference above), which briefly describes Norman's piece. (I quote that description above.)
Reading notes for the first volume and first issue of The Library Quarterly.
To return to the list of notes on this volume: volume-1
* [[lq:Author-Williamson]]
* [[lq:Affil-Columbia University]]
This entry is about:
Williamson, C. C. (1931). The place of research in library science. The Library Quarterly, 1(1), 1-17. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40039624
Note: The first article published in The Library Quarterly is titled "The Place of Research in Library Service."
It was written by C. C. Williamson, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: School of Library Service, Columbia University
Note: The author's name is listed at the end of the article and not at the beginning.
Note: The article is written in first person. This may be due to the conventions at the time, but according to the first footnote, the article is based on a speech that was delivered in 1930. Use of the first person could be due to that.
Note: A number of literary references are made at the beginning of the article.
Note: The article itself is about showing the value, or convincing young library students the value, of doing research.
Note: He begins with the questions, still asked today, but often asked of him at the time:
"What is the future of library service?" "Will it offer me a satisfactory career? (p. 2).
Note: A point about the profession:
Development it seems to me has been too largely of a quantitative rather than a qualitative character (p. 2).
Note: Another point about the profession, which is relevant today, and about the increase in assistants (or perhaps, paraprofessionals, although that term may be anachronistic):
It is difficult to detect improvement in the professional status of the librarian. The demand for so-called trained assistants has increased notably in volume" (p. 3).
Note: He lists a number of improvements in the next few sentences, but he ends his list with this comment about the not so great improvements for the librarian:
Salaries, and at the same time the prestige, of the more important administrative positions have increased in a significant way, but for the rank and file little progress seems to be made in remuneration and in other evidences of satisfactory professional status (p. 3).
Note: This is in agreement with what Arthur T. Hamlin (1981) wrote about the professional status of academic librarians. Specifically, it took 13 years after Williamson's essay for academic librarians to gain faculty status. Hamlin wrote:
In 1944 the University of Illinois achieved full faculty status and rank for all of its professional staff. It was the first major university to take the step. Others followed with partial or complete recognition in the 1950s and sixties. By the early seventies the majority of universities has swung over to recognition of most, if not all, of the professional staff as members of the faculty, often with faculty ranks and titles (Hamlin, 1981, p. 120).
Note: Williamson believes that the professional status of librarians, their prestige, is not being advanced because they are not doing research. It doesn't seem to matter, to him, whether that research is of a natural science kind, a social science kind, or a humanistic kind, but simply that it is not being done.
Williamson's comment is, in a sense, in agreement with what Hamlin, Shiflett, Carpenter, and Wiegand write. Specifically about the culture of the primacy of knowledge creation over knowledge dissemination. See:
Greenwod Press. url:http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/20218333
Williamson goes on to cite a number of statistics and examples of how and why research is important, and how quickly it is growing in other fields. Then he notes its total absence in the library field:
What about research in the library field? A little sporadic work here and there by individuals that may possibly be classified as research. No organized or co-operative plans, or only the beginnings of such in two or three university library schools. No money appropriated anywhere, so far as I know, specifically for research in library service. Not a single person employed anywhere by a library or a library system to study problems of library service. No research fellowships. No research professorships (p. 5).
Then this comment that pertains to The Library Quarterly. Recall that this article is essentially a reprint or a first printing of an earlier address, which is why it mentions the future of this publication even though it's printed in this publication:
One of the most hopeful indications that this condition may soon be remedied is the fact that the Carnegie Corporation has recently appropriated $25,000 to assist in starting a new library journal to be edited and published at the Graduate Library School of the University of Chicago (p. 5).
Note: It's interesting to think that the term library science precedes the actual science of library related research:
Not infrequently I have been pessimistic enough about this situation [that there is no research in the field] to wonder whether there is any justification for using the term "library science." When the new library school was started at Columbia four years ago we evaded the question by calling it a "school of library service." That there is such a thing as library service no one can doubt, and personally I do not doubt that it ought to be based on a library science, but I wish the scientific character of our professional activities and of our professional literature were more obvious" (pp. 5-6).
Note: Williamson notes that to do library science depends on how science is defined. First, he refers to Frederick Barry's Scientific Habit of Thought. In essence, what is important is a scientific attitude based on rational investigation. Second, He refers to John Dewey and his work The Sources of a Science of Education, which argues that science is about the methods involved and not the subject matter.
Reflection: Some of this discussion is based on the (now obsolete) notion of William James' types of *men*: the tough-minded (the scientific mind) and the tender-minded (the artistic mind). I'm not disregarding Dewey's overall thoughts on scientific knowledge, empirical knowledge, and so forth, just this classification as a truthful psychological classification. Of course, although that classification may be obsolete, it's relevant in the sense that many may often still think of people that way, if only as an unquestioned world-view used to judge and classify the various roles that exist. While I am enjoying this article and think there's a lot of good points here, Williamson adds that librarians may be composed of people of the tender-minded sort. So his acceptance of William James' classification is problematic. If we reject that premise, but pursue the same end game (that of a library science as a research science), then what new premise do we accept?
Note: Interesting discussion of empirical versus scientific on pages 7 and 8.
library science is purely empirical. The average librarians is an empiricist, not a scientist. Most administrative practices and technical procedures are followed because they have been tried somewhere and have been found to work. What psychological or other principles are involved is unknown (p. 8).
How has library science (or library and information science) schools changed this? This has been examined. See, for example:
Note: here Williamson quotes John Dewey in *How We Think*:
Empirical inference follows the grooves and ruts that custom wears, and has no track to follow when the groove disappears....."Skill enables a man to deal with the same circumstances that he has met before, scientific thought enables him to deal with different circumstances that he has never met before.".... (pp. 8 - 9).
Note: Williamson makes an interesting turn on page 9. Let me quote a series of statements:
You may infer from what I have just been saying that librarians lack the scientific attitude, are tender-minded rather than tough-minded, think empirically rather than scientifically. No, that is not my conclusion (p. 9).
Then:
Can it be that there are no problems in library service that call for scientific research? .... No .... (p. 9).
Then:
A second possible reason that there is so little research in the field of library service is that if it is a science at all and not an art, it is only an applied science and that the necessary research is therefore carried on in the underlying sciences---psychology, social science, political science, etc. (pp. 9-10).
He dismisses that idea. And writes that:
To my mind the real reason that there is so little study of the problems of library science is that practically no librarians have been trained in scientific methods (p. 10).
He adds other issues that have prevented a *library science*. Organizations are too small and a
deep-rooted prejudice among library workers against subjecting their activities to scientific scrutiny (p. 10).
Note: that first point, that the organizations may be too small, suggests that automation was one, although I should add not the only, causation of library science. This is in the sense that library automation and computerization connected libraries together -- such that no library would henceforth exist as an island. Think, for example, of Ralph Parker's piece:
Note: This sentiment has been mentioned before, particularly, I believe, in Hamlin and Shiflett's work (mentioned above):
We hear it said now and then by librarians of long experience and high position that there is not sufficient content in the field of library science to justify programs of study leading to the degree of Doctor of Philosophy or even a Master's degree (p. 10).
Note: Important to his argument -- method is primary:
Nothing short of a lifetime is sufficient to learn all that a librarian needs to know! The important thing is training in scientific methods of attacking and solving problems, the cultivation of the scientific spirit and attitude. As soon as this is recognized and acted upon, library science will become a reality. Until that time librarians, no matter how many facts they carry in their heads, will be looked upon as clerks and routinists (p. 11).
Here I think of Abbott:
Note: This counters those, especially among certain higher education administrations in the 20th century (and librarians too), thought of libraries as simply warehouses:
Those who see no field for research in library service or need of advanced training for librarianship simply fail to recognize the fundamental complexity of library science. To most librarians, as to almost all others, it presents an entirely false appearance of simplicity (p. 12).
Note: Williamson then makes a number of great points about how other professions, i.e., psychology, sociology, statistics, etc., cannot do the work of library science. Although library science may draw from these fields, its issues are its own. Those other fields, if they were to study libraries, would, Williamson argues, examine the issues from their perspectives, thus contributing to the problem of Déformation professionnelle, or the "tendency to look at things from the point of view of one's own profession," although he doesn't use that term.
Reflection: I've been thinking a lot lately about the problem of déformation professionnelle with respect to the differences or approaches between library science and information science. Specifically, if a purely information scientist, that is, someone without a background or an invested interest in library science, recommends something for libraries, under what conceptual framework should that be considered and how should that be evaluated? Here I'm thinking of a recent example: when the altmetrics researchers suggest something in their domain is beneficial to librarians and their work, does the point of view of their recommendation include what library science has deemed to be beneficial, or is the point of view solely an information science one, where that view has been divorced from its sibling? Furthermore, how do librarians accept or respond to such recommendations. See:
So, Williamson adds:
The psychologist cannot do the librarian's job; the sociologist cannot do it (p. 13).
Has information science and library science diverged so much, in some cases at least, where we might substitute psychologist or sociologist in Williamson's statement with information scientist? The end point being library science can incorporate information science theory and knowledge, but it is not itself information science?
Note: Williamson then proceeds to discuss several other really interesting issues, all of which, it seems to me, are still quite relevant, discussed, and pursued today. I'll just mention these things generally: the nature and problems with data collection, what type of library science research could be undertaken, the education of librarians where the end goal is not to make researchers but librarians who can research, and the improvement to library teaching as a result of a increased research.
Reflection: This was a fascinating article and surely a great introduction for *The Library Quarterly* in its inaugural issue. I'm going to hold back, for now, on some autoethnographic responses, but I'll get to it later, as I read more of this and later issues. I especially want to get a sense of the character of this first issue in order to see if there is something coherent about it as a whole. This is important to one of the purposes of this research project --- to understand the nature of the journal as a collective thing (a one).
Reflection: The discussion about whether *library science* is a science is interesting, in the sense that it's similar to a discussion that still sometimes happens today, about whether information science is a science. Will we still be having this discussion in another 80 years, in 2090?
* [[lq:Author-Putnam]]
* [[lq:Affil-Library of Congress]]
This entry is about:
Putnam, Herbert. (1931). Consultants at the National Library. The Library Quarterly, 1(1), 18-21. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40039625
Note: The second article published in The Library Quarterly is titled "Consultants at the National Library." It was written by Herbert Putnam, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Library of Congress
At the time of this publication, he was head of the Library of Congress, one of the last librarians to have this role.
Note: Putnam refers to the field as library economy, indicating the original term for the field. As noted, Williamson, in the first LQ article, uses the term library service, and discusses library science as a field and term. The use of so many terms signifies, I think, the number of great changes happening in librarianship at the time.
Note: It is interesting that Putnam refers to reference work as "the more popular" aspect of librarianship. That seemed true up till six or seven years ago. I wonder, though, if it's still true. My sense is that other forms of librarianship are growing in popularity.
Note: The first article in *LQ* is a reprint or first print of a speech given by C. C. Williamson. This second article is mostly an informative piece, with a bit of commentary and discussion, about the use of expert consultants (faculty specializing in certain fields of study) at the Library of Congress. Two articles into my reading of the LQ, I'm aware that neither is a research article. I mention this because the Library Journal had been providing the function of informing and providing a discussion board to the library community about such topics since 1876. In the first two articles of this journal, the LQ has yet to become its own thing -- still mimicking the function the Library Journal has provided since its founding. I wonder how many articles I'll read before I get a sense that the Library Quarterly has begun to truly develop its own identity.
Note: Although Putnam's article is short, it is a loaded topic and touches upon the core of what it means to be a librarian at a research library. At heart, the issue is about the beneficial use of having subject specialists (i.e., faculty, professors, researchers, etc. and not librarians), who are familiar not only with the subjects of their fields but also the research methods used in those fields, work at libraries to aid in collection development and provide advanced library service to the public or the community at hand. The article reflects the state of library education (and the librarian as a professional) at the time, which was before C. C. Williamson's report (The Williamson Report of 1923) and which recommended graduate study, had the ability to truly have an effect on the state of library education (see In the Beginning .... Although it should be mentioned that the Graduate Library School of the University of Chicago had already been founded by this time, and it would have a major impact on the state of library education as graduate study.
Putnam refers to the practice of librarianship as a "technique" (p. 19). It is interesting to compare this piece with the previous one written by Williamson, who is arguing that librarianship can be much more than a technique. Putnam, then, and at least based on this piece, seems to have a growingly challenged (or obsolete?) view of librarianship (for the time?). Odd to write that given his historical influence.
Reflection: From a historical perspective, the subject matter of this article is interesting. However, my main interest with this project is reflected in the note above about the becoming of LQ as a research journal. When will this happen? The next article? The next issue or volume? When will the LQ mature and become the research journal it has been for most of its lifetime? What kind of research will I encounter? Will it be social science (doubtful), historical, ...? My guess is that LQ's becoming will reflect librarianship's (or library science's) own becoming. In fact, this is largely my (so-called) hypothesis.
* [[lq:Author-Keppel]]
* [[lq:Affil-Carnegie Corporation]]
This entry is about:
Keppel, F. P. (1931). The Carnegie Corporation and the Graduate Library School: A Historical Outline. The Library Quarterly, 1(1), 22-25. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40039626
Note: The third article published in The Library Quarterly is titled "The Carnegie Corporation and the Graduate Library School." It was written by F. P. Keppel, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Carnegie Corporation
Note: It dawns on me that I do not know how many library schools started with an endowment, whether by a corporation or an organization such as the Carnegie Corporation.
Note: Interesting quote about the intent to fund a library school at Chicago:
The Corporation recognized that there was already in existence a number of library schools of excellent professional standing, but in their judgment there was no school which could be said to occupy for the librarian's profession a position analogous to that of the Harvard Law School or the John Hopkins Medical School (p. 23).
Note: The article is fairly straightforward and is very much, as its title suggests, an outline. After the above quote, Keppel lists a number of reasons for choosing the University of Chicago as the place to create a new school (I'm not going to list these reasons here, but I may want to come back to them later), he summarizes the negotiations between the University and the Corporation about the funding, and then he summarizes the University's process in establishing the school.
Reflection: As I commented in my previous post, such an article could have easily gone into an issue of the Library Journal, as it's primarily a note. However, when I remind myself that this is the inaugural issue of the LQ, which is published by the University of Chicago, then this short outline takes on new meaning:
When I look at the table of contents of a scholarly journal that launches in more recent times, the articles listed usually (it seems to me) are research articles. The fact that the LQ does not (so far) have any research articles suggests something about the broader state of affairs at the time. Such that, the research culture (as Williamson explains (see above)) just didn't exist for library science at the time (we know that to be pretty much true---as we understand research today, at least).
Given Williamson's article, this first issue by this journal, this brief outline about the creation of the library school at Chicago and the Carnegie Corporation's involvement, the launching of this journal is very much itself an argument about the need for a library science. Said otherwise, this journal's coming into being is very much an act of creating a library science. And it makes sense that the University of Chicago is the source of the first research journal in library science, given the intent behind the quote above (the creation of an esteemed library school, the likes of which should resemble something akin to Harvard Law). Perhaps then, the Carnegie Corporation should not only "take the credit---or accept the responsibility" (p. 23) for all the public libraries it built but for also, in some way, creating the opportunity for a library science to exist. (That "credit" or "responsibility" quote is in the article but I use it, tongue in cheek, out of context.)
Reflection: That I need to remind myself that this is the inaugural issue, as I did above, is something that itself has special import. While my goal with this project is to get a sense of the journal as a thing in and of itself, a thing that has its own identity, that is historically situated, and that has contributed substantially to the identify of the field, I also have to try to read this journal fresh---from the viewpoint of someone who is reading this journal for the first time in 1931, when it was published. If I forget to do that, then I will lose something in the experience or the reading, or I will not notice things that may have been noticed or thought of by readers at the time it was published.
[1]: /blog/2013/07/19/lq-vol-1-issue-1-article-1-autoethnographric-study/
* [[lq:Author-Waples]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Waples, Douglas. (1931). The Graduate Library School at Chicago. The Library Quarterly, 1(1), 26-36. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40039627
Note: The fourth article published in The Library Quarterly is titled "The Graduate Library School at Chicago." It was written by Douglas Waples, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Graduate Library School, University of Chicago
Note: The purpose of the article is to explain the Graduate Library School (GLS) at Chicago. The motivation is based on the relationship between GLS and the LQ. The author writes that since the editing of the journal "will likely fall upon the staff" (p. 26) of the GLS, then an understanding of GLS and its policies should be provided. The first footnote indicates that it was first delivered to the Association of American Library Schools in 1929, which, I should add, is presently known as the Association of Library and Information Science Education.
Note: The article outlines nine policy statements about the School. Notably, the School is meant to push research and not to train future librarians.
Note: Since GLS is primarily interested in producing library science doctorates, the School represents, at the time, a new model of library education. The question is, when did Schools begin to merge this model with models related to library education, such that they produce both doctorates headed for research and instruction and Masters headed for librarianship?
Note: As C. C. Williamson (see Issue 1, Article 1) does, Waples refers, in a section titled "What is a Library Science?", to John Dewey's The Sources of a Science of Education.
Of this piece, Waples write:
No writing has appeared to date which in short space so helpfully presents a philosophy of research in the social studies (p. 30).
An interesting quote about this:
I take it no one has to argue any longer the fact that librarianship *is* primarily a social enterprise; that only in so far as we know what human needs are responsive to reading can we furnish the best reading in the best way; that to this major problem the difficulties met in administering library routine as at present organized are altogether subordinate; and that what the librarian can ultimately contribute to the advance of scholarship and hence to the welfare of society depends entirely upon his ability to select from all fields of knowledge whatever helps to reveal and satisfy the needs that reading can meet (p. 30).
Note: Related to "all fields of knowledge," Waples writes that:
We are just beginning at Chicago to find out what elements of other University departments and disciplines pertain to library problems. The extent of such application is obviously great, far greater than we can ever hope to evaluate precisely. But various other fields of study have already been identified as capable of yielding laws, facts, and methods of investigation from which a genuine science of librarianship may evolve (pp. 33-34).
The fields include:
Note: The final section of the article functions as an appendix (although not labeled as such) and outlines the topics that were being investigated at GLS during its first two years (1928--1930). In large part, and aside from the wording of the descriptions, many of the topics under investigation read as if they could be present day topics under investigation.
Reflection: I don't have much to say about this piece, within the context of my current project, but I have a hunch that I will need to refer to it again later. At this point, the article's presence in LQ signifies the general introductory nature of this first issue. Given the message about research at GLS, I still find it interesting that the first issue was not populated with research articles, and I keep thinking that that is important. Since the list of topics under investigation, at GLS, is about two pages long, it seems that it could have been populated so. Perhaps, and as I commented in my last post (Issue 1, Article 3), since *LQ* is the first research journal for the field, the introductory nature of this issue is more important than simply thrusting out research articles. That says to me something about the historical importance of this journal (and others) and its role in forming the identity of our field of study. Again, I refer to my abstract for what I mean by that.
Note: As I was reviewing my notes, and re-read the line that follows, something occurred to me:
the librarian can ultimately contribute to the advance of scholarship and hence to the welfare of society
If this piece had been written today, I'm fairly sure that the word "libraries" would have been used instead of the word "librarian." So the above line, and others like it, if written today, I imagine, would have read like so:
*libraries* can ultimately contribute to the advance of scholarship and hence to the welfare of society
Plutchak has written on this tendency to substitute (see reference below) librarians for libraries. I have a conference presentation on this too (see reference below).
2012. Abstract:http://www.alise.org/assets/documents/juried%20papers%20abstract.pdf
So, I will incorporate this into our ethics research project. The question to incorporate is: when did the field begin assigning agency, responsibility, praise, action, and so forth to libraries instead of to librarians. Of course, one article does not make a trend, but I'm curious if there is something to this. (How I'd incorporate that into an ethics research project means changing the ethics research project a bit. Which is fine because that project is a bit stalled and needs something.)
* [[lq:Author-Reece]]
* [[lq:Affil-Columbia University]]
This entry is about:
Reece, Ernest J. (1931). "The Service Loads of Library-School Faculties." The Library Quarterly, 1(1), 37-56. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40039628
Note: The fifth article published in The Library Quarterly is titled "The Service Loads of Library-School Faculties." It was written by Ernest J. Reese, who was writing on behalf of the Committee on Teaching Loads in Library Schools, a committee of the Association of American Library Schools (now ALISE), and who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: School of Library Service, Columbia University
The article, according to the first footnote, is based on an earlier report given to the Association.
Note: I'm not sure, yet, if I'll have much to say about this piece. It's a report about the hours instructors spend on various duties related to teaching and instruction as well as various other non-course duties or activities. It's an interesting piece, for historical reasons and, also, because in many ways it seems not much has changed. I suppose it was an important piece at the time, given the relative newness of library schools and a need to understand the norms.
Note: One interesting, superficial bit is the way distributions are conveyed in the time before computers. The distributions are displayed in tables, with the mean of the numbers in the top row, per the count of the numbers in the second row. It's a fairly informative method of conveying the details. Both overall means and medians are provided, which is nice. Medians are too often left out of statistical reporting today.
Note: It seems, according to Table V in the article, that most instructors spent about a half hour revising student work in one of the courses. Good to know!
Note: The courses covered include:
Note: The second section covers data on non-course activities. As listed on pages 46-47 include:
Note: Per Table XIV on page 47, the "time per week spent in non-course activities": *n* = 47, *m* = 10.24, and *mdn* = 9.37 (p. 47).
Note: Interesting quote about how the data can be used to assess instructors' working loads. Key words or ideas that stick out to me include: health, work environment (physical conditions), scholarly and professional demands, wise decisions.
Also, the health of individuals, the physical conditions under which they must work, the demands pressing upon them because of their professional records, all may influence vitally the effort to reach wise decisions in particular cases. A teacher's service program is obviously not a think to which time-clock methods can be applied (p. 48).
And this quote, as far as applying the data to specific individuals:
The case may be taken of an instructor believed to occupy a middle rather than an extreme position as to speed and experience, who is in good though not robust health, who works steadily but without tension or excess, who has taught a variety of subjects, and to suit whose abilities some reallocation of existing assignments can be considered (p. 48).
Note: The next part is very interesting, as the author suggests the number of hours, based on the medians reported in the earlier part of the paper and other numbers including class size, that could be devoted to each course per week (esp. for new instructors who haven't built up experience or materials to draw from). They include, for one section courses (although numbers are often given for courses taught in two sections):
There are a number of caveats and exceptions in the above numbers. Reece, for example, offers numbers based on deductions for time spent by assistants and for other reasons.
Note: The article ends with two appendices, though they are not labeled as such. The first is a copy of the letter sent to faculty requesting their participation in the study. The second is the handout given to faculty and that was used to collect the data.
Note: While I wrote above that not much has changed---one key difference between then and now is that this article reflects a point in time when instructors in library schools were not overwhelmingly PhDs, and so this report does not take into consideration the amount of time needed to do research.
Reflection: Although it's a report and not a scientific study, this is the first data driven article in the *LQ*. I am not, as of yet, being very autoethnographic in my field notes, and I'll have to say something about that in a future post. I'm taking this time as a period of figuring things out.
* [[lq:Author-Reeves]]
* [[lq:Author-Russell]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Reeves, Floyd W., & Russell, John Dale. (1931). The Relation of the College Library to Recent Movements in Higher Education. The Library Quarterly, 1(1), 57-66. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40039629
Note: The sixth article published in The Library Quarterly is titled "The Relation of the College Library to Recent Movements in Higher Education." It was co-authored by Floyd W. Reeves and John Dale Russell, who were affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago
Note: Another source confirming Shiflett and Hamlin.
It is only in comparatively recent decades that the maintenance of a library has been recognized as a necessary function of a college (p. 57).
The rest of the paragraph provides a nice description.
And it was a problem even up to the time of writing, or near to it:
Although the stronger and better-administered colleges began early to develop systematic plans for increasing the effectiveness of their libraries, the condition which has been described persisted in most of the weaker institutions until well into the twentieth century (p. 57).
Note: The next paragraph details some of the reasons why colleges began building up their libraries: standardizing associations and state departments of education, namely.
Note: The next paragraph details why they didn't build up their libraries before. Namely:
The principal reason for this lack of interest in the library is probably attributable to the "lesson-hearing" and textbook type of instruction which as prevailed in colleges. Under such instructional methods little use is made of the library. The instructor merely assigns "so many pages in the text for next time," and when the class meets again the hour is devoted to hearing a recitation on the assigned materials in the text" (p. 58).
Regarding the above quote, frame this problem today with respect to undergraduates' use of the library (and their use of textbooks), graduates' use of the library (and their use of textbooks). The correlation is probably strong and negative, even today.
Note: As with the above quote, not much sometimes changes:
In fact, under the "textbook" plan of instruction, a library assignment is looked upon by students as something of a bore, as just another chore to be performed for an overconscientious instructor (p. 59).
Note: The authors suggest that changes in higher education trends will impact library development in certain ways. First:
The first educational movement which affects the library is the rapid increase which has occurred in the amount of course work carried in the field of the social sciences (p. 59).
The authors go on to say that a decline or a leveling of courses in foreign languages and mathematics, both of which tend to not need the use of the library, and an increase in social studies courses, which require more library reading, as well as student bodies, will involve more use of the library.
Also, social studies / social sciences are fields where,
new material is being produced at a comparatively rapid rate (p. 60).
Note: Second:
A second educational movement affecting library conditions in the college is the introduction of general survey courses (p. 60).
Although since survey courses are now well established, this is probably not true today:
It is the observation of the writers that these survey courses do not function satisfactorily where given by the textbook method (p. 61).
Although, I mean "probably not true today" in certain way. It may be true that textbooks do not do well for survey courses, but anthologies, functioning in the same way as textbooks, might. And the use of anthologies might deter library use now. So, I'm just generalizing from textbooks to anything that students have to buy that diminishes their need to use the library.
Note: Third:
A third educational movement which will have an effect upon the library is the change in the methods of science teaching (p. 61).
Basically the authors argue that science teaching is becoming less dependent on laboratory work, at least in the early years of higher education, and more dependent on lectures and outside reading.
Note: Fourth:
Within the last few years a large number of the better colleges of the country have introduced independent work courses, sometimes referred to as "honors" work (p. 62).
Of note about this: this trend would not only require more library material but it would also require, the authors note, a need for reference librarians who can help the independent students find relevant work related to their independent studies.
Note: Fifth:
Some colleges and universities are experimenting with the introduction of a course of general reading. Such a course cuts straight across departmental lines, in an attempt to give students a broad and general view of the classic expressions of human thought in all fields (p. 62).
The authors note, that in response to this trend, not only is more material needed in the library, but the library has responded by setting up reading or seminar rooms. This was another important point in [Shiflett][1] and [Hamlin][2].
Note: Sixth:
Another educational movement affecting the library is the breaking-down of the hard-and-fast barriers which have separated the various fields of study into departments, and the provision for a much greater degree of correlation of subject matter in related fields (p. 63).
This trend died a long time ago. Instead of majors and minors, some colleges were using fields of concentration, usually four to eight of them. Nice idea.
Note: Seventh:
Another educational movement which will affect the college library is the development of graduate study (p. 63).
Note: The authors then list the kinds of demands these seven movements will have on the college library.
An attempt to extend the book collection rapidly usually overtaxes the ability of faculty members to select books (p. 65).
Also in agreement with Shiflett, Hamlin, and others. Academic librarians didn't begin collection development, in the whole, until the 1940s.
Back to our list:
An important final quote, and perhaps one of the original uses of the library as center of the academy theme:
The college library of the future, if it is to serve adequately the needs of the institution, must become the center of academic activities (p. 66).
Reflection: This is an important historical piece. I'll come back to it.
* [[lq:Author-Drinkwater]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Drinkwater, Geneva. (1931). Three Hundred Days in Roman Libraries. The Library Quarterly, 1(1), 67-71. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40039630
Note: The seventh article published in The Library Quarterly is titled "Three Hundred Days in Roman Libraries." It was authored by Geneva Drinkwater, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago
Note: This is a very delightful account about, as the title suggests, a trip to Roman libraries. It begins with a trip to the "Santa Scolastica in Subiaco," a monastery where St. Benedict lived, and ends at the Vatican library. Although very brief, the piece is a wonderful description of Geneva Drinkwater's experience oversees. There are few descriptions of the libraries, but that's not the focus.
Perhaps because I was intrigued by the name, I did a quick web search for Geneva Drinkwater and have discovered that this is the kind of person who makes good history (read her bio below). Actually, it's a nice reminder that behind every paper I read, there's a person. That may seem obvious, but it's easy to read papers without thinking about the author. That's, actually, part of the point with scientific authorship. I'd have to look it up, but I think that point was made by either Robert K. Merton or Derek J. de Solla Price.
Here are a couple of brief biographies and the second link contains a link to an oral history that she is reading:
I was quite happy to discover that Drinkwater and I both went to school at the same place (University of Missouri) and worked at the same place (Stephens College).
Note: Study update: I'm altering the name of the title of these posts from Autoethnographic Study to Reading Study. The reason is that these readings will be useful for other purposes.
* [[lq:Author-Shaw]]
* [[lq:Affil-Swarthmore College]]
This entry is about:
Shaw, Charles B. (1931). The Compilation of "A List of Books for College Libraries." The Library Quarterly, 1(1), 72-78. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40039631
Note: The eighth article published in The Library Quarterly is titled "The Compilation of 'A List of Books for College Libraries.'" It was written by Charles B. Shaw, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Swarthmore College
Note: The article begins by noting that the Carnegie Corporation (CC) has taken an interest in academic libraries. Because of this, librarians are seeking grants from (CC). This may be the first instance (at a non-trivial scale, at least) of academic libraries seeking outside funding in the form of grants.
Note: This article is turning out to be a humorous account involving the agreements and disagreements among faculty about the best works (or the works that a college library should hold) for a college library. It would make a good collection management class reading. And the process of dividing up the books by three zones is interestingly similar to Bradford's Law, which was published about three after this article.
* [[lq:Author-Randall]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Randall, William M. (1931). What Can the Foreigner Find to Read in the Public Library? The Library Quarterly, 1(1), 79-88. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40039632
Note: The ninth and last article published in the first issue of The Library Quarterly is titled "What Can the Foreigner Find to Read in the Public Library?" It was written by William M. Randall, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Graduate Library School, University of Chicago
Note: This is a nice read. Here's a point by the author that reflects the sentiment of the piece:
There is no consistent relationship between the number of books per capita and the circulation per book.... Two possibilites, therefore, present themselves. Either some nationalities read more than others, or the books in certain libraries are better chosen than those in others. The latter seems more probable (p. 87).
Note: This article makes me want to time travel back to 1931 and get a faculty job at the Graduate Library School. Lots of humor in the writing.
Note: In seriousness, this is a really wonderful article. I would have expected it to be less enlightened about foreign language material, but it's probably much more enlightened than many present day policies are. It ends with some good questions---both about the purpose of the public library and about how to carry out additional research. It's another possible reading item for a collection management class (at least suggested reading item).
Reading notes for the first volume and second issue of The Library Quarterly.
To return to the list of notes in this volume: volume-1
* [[lq:Author-Joeckel]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Michigan]]
This entry is about:
Joeckel, Carleton B. (1931). The Public Library under the City-Manager Form of Government. The Library Quarterly, 1(2), 121-151. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40038534
Note: The first article of the second issue of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Public Library under the City-Manager Form of Government" It was written by Carleton B. Joeckel, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Michigan
Note: The second part of this article was published in Vol. 1, Issue 3 and my post on it is here:
[Joeckel1931b](/blog/2013/09/27/lq-vol-1-issue-3-article-6-reading-study/)
Note: A powerful introduction set within the context of why libraries do not receive much attention, much financial support from their municipal governments, and little pay for their librarians:
Moreover, notwithstanding the best publicity efforts of modern librarians, the library has never been a spectacular feature of government. The basis of its success consists of thousands of individual units of service to its many users. It cannot point with pride to single outstanding achievements, such as the construction of a new street or a new bridge, the capture of a notorious criminal, or the extinguishing of a dangerous fire (pp. 121--122).
Note: Two lines of public library development:
Then the notion of the board of library trustees is introduced. Such that:
So firmly has the board idea intrenched [sic] itself in library administration that librarians themselves have come to regard it almost as a sacred and inalienable right, variation from which is unthinkable and not to be tolerated. Scant space is given in writings by librarians to other forms of library government; and the librarian has come, pretty generally, to accept the *sui generis* idea of the library's place in municipal affairs. The librarian still feels that the library's place *is* different and distinct from all other parts of the municipal government and, as such, is entitled to special and separate consideration at all times. He often fails to realize that the board plan was but one phase of the development of municipal administration and that library organization took shape as it did largely because of the existing fashion prevalent at the moment in municipal government rather than from any special design (pp. 123--124).
Note: This is likely the first research article to appear in this journal, as we would understand that concept / construct today. That said, it differs from the form presented today, even though only superficially. That is, there are no literal Introduction, Literature Review, Findings, Discussion, etc. sections marked off, but the article naturally follows that kind of organization, even though its sectioned off differently. Personally, I like it.
Note: Joeckel finds five types of public library management with each type containing finer grain categories (quoted in bits):
1. School library districts 2. Municipal public libraries with independent library boards 3. "Corporation" libraries with self-perpetuating boards 4. Libraries managed by non-governmental associations 5. Municipal public libraries under the control of city manager (pp. 128--129).
Note: After laying out his classification of the legal organization of these public libraries, Joeckel proceeds to describe each type and provide examples from the various cities he examined.
Note: The final two appendices are extremely helpful. The first appendix lays out his findings in tabular form. The second in charts and diagrams.
Note: The article ends with a note that a second part will be issued in July.
Note: This article would benefit a variety of courses in a LIS program:
I've heard a few people raise the idea that there should be more integration between LIS programs (especially lines in the LIS programs that focus on public libraries) and political science programs. This article is evidence that such a relationship would be fruitful.
Note: There's a nice Wikipedia article on Carleton B. Joeckel, and archive.org|archive.org has a copy of his The Government of the American Public Library.
Note: While Joeckel's book has been cited numerous times (and there is, by the way, some interesting references to that book in Jesse H. Shera's important work, Foundations of the Public Library, this article has only been cited three times (via Google Scholar), and one of those citations is from Joeckel's 2nd part of this article.
* [[lq:Author-Lewerenz]]
* [[lq:Affil-Los Angeles City Schools]]
This entry is about:
Lewerenz, Alfred S. (1931). Children and the Public Library. The Library Quarterly, 1(2), 152-174. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40038535
Note: The second article of the second issue of The Library Quarterly is titled "Children and the Public Library." It was written by Alfred S. Lewerenz, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Los Angeles City Schools
Note: This article takes a look at children's use of public libraries in Los Angeles. One of the first observations: the study is not based on a random selection of students, although the selection of students does attempt to be methodological and *scientific*. As a result, methodological bias is indicated or could be suspected.
Second, while many of the previous articles I have read in this study, with minor editing, read like they could have been written more recently, this article strikes me as something you would actually find in the 1930s -- esp. because of its focus on IQ.
That being said, it is interesting to read such an early study that looks at whether there is anything distinctive about the kinds of people who would visit the library. That is, the fundamental questions here are: who are the people who visit the library, are they different from the general population, and if so, how?
That also being said, there is some confusion in the article, at least in my of reading it. That is, this is a study of children who are sent to public libraries by their schools. Yet the article suggests that there is something different about these children a priori instead of as a result of the schools sending them to the public library. I am not clear on what the author is saying here.
Note: There are a whole host of issues with the following statement, and it is almost comical in a bad sci-fi movie kind of way. But perhaps there is something positive in the idea that they were aware in the 1930s that the location of the public library was important; or, perhaps the idea that the placement of the public library in a city is important comes from ideas about the distribution of populations of "subnormal mentality" in a city:
the public library may not have branches which serve sections of the city inhabited by a population of subnormal mentality (p. 157).
* [[lq:Author-Starke]]
* [[lq:Affil-No Affil]]
This entry is about:
Starke, A. H. (1931). Children's Reading. The Library Quarterly, 1(2), 175-188. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40038536
Note: The third article of the second issue of The Library Quarterly is titled "Children's Reading." It was written by A. H. Starke, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Chicago, IL (No affiliation)
Note: This is another article on children and public libraries. It's written in response to an early committee / study designed to answer questions about children and reading.
Here's an interesting set of questions about the lack of information about the topic:
One asks in vain what part of the 47 percent of our people without public library service are children; how many of the two and a quarter million books circulated annually from our public libraries are juvenile books or books withdrawn for juvenile reading; how many of the 15,000 and more trained or experienced librarians in the United States are trained for, or are doing work with, children; what amount of the thirty-five and a third million dollars spend on public library work each year is spent on children's books, or the maintenance of children's rooms, or for salary of children's librarians (p. 177)?
Note: This article is turning out to be a really excellent rant against the lack of information (and lack of books) about what children get at libraries and elsewhere.
Note: This rant is so good, I'm beginning to find it humorous:
On the other hand, it seemed a little ridiculous that any scientific study, involving the expenditure of much time and often large sums of money, should present only the conclusion that "students of the school studied and read a great variety of magazines" or that "fiction seems to have a greater grip on the reading interests of boys and girls than reading matter of an informational sort"--conclusions any worker with children knows almost a priori to be true (p. 182).
Note: Even on topics of diversity, this author is remarkably awesome and scathing of his contemporaries:
But after considerable investigation only four studies of the reading interests and ability of negro children were discovered, and none of the reading habits and interests of children of other races; nor, in the many studies of children's reading, had the factor of face received much attention in the statements made concerning the home environment and the social background of the children studied. The aim of most investigators had been, apparently, to study "an even stratum of American middle-class life," "100 percent American" (and presumably Nordic) boys and girls, as if such undiluted groups anywhere exist [in the US] (pp. 183-184).
Note: Starke is not holding back on librarians now:
As on many topics, of course, librarians could give no help at all (p. 185).
Ouch.
Note: Nice article. I don't study children's librarianship, but it would be interesting to read and compare a contemporary *state of the affairs* article on the topic.
* [[lq:Author-Waples]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Waples, Douglas. (1931). What Subjects Appeal to the General Reader? *The Library Quarterly, 1*(2), 189-203. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40038537
Note: The fourth article of the second issue of The Library Quarterly is titled "What Subjects Appeal to the General Reader?." It was written by Douglas Waples, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Graduate Library School, University of Chicago
Note: Waples begins with a nice starting question, one that he acknowledges would be nice to answer yet difficult to do so:
why is it that some people read and others do not (P. 189).
Note: It will be important to highlight how the topics in many of these early *LQ* articles are still the topics we are working on today. I'll need to classify these in my paper on this.
Note: This is really a fantastic article on reading, or, on "what people would like to read about" (p. 191).
Note: I think one key insight about this paper, regardless (or because) of the findings it reports, is that understanding reading will require understanding both books and people. Neither can be investigated separately if any hope of understanding what it means to read is desired.
Note: Damaging:
Another example will serve to show how the procedure may be used to find the subjects of most interest to a given community. A public librarian, of long experience in small and medium-sized communities, selected 23 of the 117 topics appearing on the check-list when asked to select topics on which most books needed to be purchased to meet the public library demand. Sixteen groups were then chosen as best representing a typical American community. The 23 topics considered by the librarian to be most in demand were then compared with the topics in which most interest was expressed by the sixteen groups. Only 3 topics appeared in both lists! Twenty of the 23 library topics were relatively uninteresting to half of the sixteen groups and 12 other topics, not selected by the librarian, were found to be just as interesting as the 3 most interesting topics he had selected (p. 198).
Read more of Waples' work on reading.
Note: Historically, an interesting tidbit:
About thirty public libraries and many college libraries make some provision for helping readers to find books of most interest and value. In public libraries such help is given by an assistant called "reader's adviser" (pp. 200-201).
* [[lq:Author-Butler]]
* [[lq:Affil-The Newberry Library]]
This entry is about:
Butler, Pierce. (1931). The Dentition of "Equus Donatus." The Library Quarterly, 1(2), 204-211. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40038538
Note: The fifth and last article of the second issue of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Dentition of 'Equus Donatus.'" It was written by Pierce Butler, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: The Newberry Library
Note: This is an interesting essay by one of the founders of the term *library science,* specifically in his role as a librarian at The Newberry Library, one of the great American research libraries.
Note: The essay begins by noting the importance gifts have been to libraries in America's history. Then it proceeds to make a case that an understanding of philanthropy and libraries is necessary for a theory of librarianship to develop (probably still true today).
Note: Butler then offers a critique that focuses on the purpose of collecting rare books when compared to the social mission of the library and the library's commitment to its community. This seems to be the real value of the essay, although the specifics are important for other reasons too. It's a nice use of a heuristic: the library has a mission, and if something violates that mission, even if that something seems to align with it, then what violates must be examined and possibly set aside, no matter how seemingly worthy it is.
Note: Regarding the previous note about the relationship between libraries and philanthropy, and the impact this has on a theory of librarianship, I add this note from Irene S. Farkas-Conn's work From Documentation to Information Science:
After World War II, the government took over the role played earlier by the philanthropic foundations (p. 201).
This, then, should be incorporated into the broader theory of LIS.
Reading notes for the first volume and third issue of The Library Quarterly.
To return to the list of notes in this volume: volume-1
* [[lq:Author-Bishop]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Michigan Library]]
This entry is about:
Bishop, William Warner. (1931). University Libraries: Some Reflections on the Dedication of the Sterling Memorial Library of Yale University. The Library Quarterly, 1(3), 243-254. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40039656
Note: The first article of the third issue of The Library Quarterly is titled "University Libraries: Some Reflections on the Dedication of the Sterling Memorial Library of Yale University."
It was written by William Warner Bishop, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Michigan Library
Note: Interesting note about undergraduate work, from a historical perspective:
The age of the textbook has not passed; witness the steady stream issuing from the presses of the country. But the age of a single textbook to a course has gone. Books to be used in even undergraduate instruction are legion, and materials for research are being published in a volume unsensed by anyone who fails to keep close watch on the yearly output of the world's printing presses (p. 246).
After this study is completed, I'll have to read issues of LQ after WWII, just to see how the sentiment and the orientation has changed.
Note: On the university:
This past century has seen also the rise of the academy from its early eighteenth-century state of amiable curiosity to the position of a powerful agency for promoting research and publishing its results (p. 247).
Note: Another, on scholarly publishing, written in 1931:
The Surgeon-General's Library in Washington now receives 1,887 medical journals from all over the world. Journals and yet more journals! No branch of science is so limited, no industry so small, no specialty so narrow as to have *no* periodical devoted to its progress. The past fifty years have seen the rise of the specialized periodical. Most university professors would part with all the monographs on their subjects rather than give up their files of journals. It is a day of serial publication, and serials are both bulky and costly--yet we must have them (pp. 247-248).
Note: Remarkable passage on page 249 that questions whether, given all this publishing output, libraries are justified, given their costs.
Note: On what is essentially a proposal for off-site facilities for book storage and whether it would be a good idea to have them:
Perhaps, if communication is speeded tenfold so that readers or books may be hurled through the air from New Haven to Washington or New York in a few minutes, or if by television or some further wonder a book in a central storehouse may be shown instantly page by page in a receiving room in a library thousands of miles away, we shall come to the central storage idea (p. 250).
Note: Is this still true? If so, then how. If not, then what's next?
Starving the library hurts--not the librarian--but the scholar (p. 251)?
Note: Nice few passages about librarian education and librarianship beginning on page 252.
In fact, library automation helped solve this problem--liberate librarians from that drudgery:
The pressure of work, of size, of numbers, in our university libraries has kept their employees so burdened with routine duties that in general those who have the ability have had no time or strength for productive work or for advancing knowledge (p. 253).
Note: This article is an amazing piece.
* [[lq:Author-Prostov]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Prostov, Eugene Victor. (1931). Origins of Russian Printing. The Library Quarterly, 1(3), 255-277. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40039657
Note: The second article of the third issue of The Library Quarterly is titled "Origins of Russian Printing."
It was written by Eugene Victor Prostov, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Graduate Library School, University of Chicago
Note: Based on the topic of this article and the affiliation with GLS, I think it's safe to say that GLS's first set of faculty included a scholar of book history. I find that to be interesting.
Note: Even when book making was automated (via printing), it was still hands-on work:
Skorina cut his own type, ... (p. 258).
Note: This is simply a fascinating story. It's also a reminder that early printing was fueled by religious and political motivations. Information as power, as commodity, etc.
Note: I'm not really targeting the point of this article with these notes -- just finding a number of interesting tidbits:
and a much later historian of the books and libraries of Russia, Bakhtiarov, mentions, in connection with his description of the book-losses sustained by the Russians in the course of the French invasion of 1812, that leather-bound books from Bause's collection were used by the French soldiers to cover the muddy street in front of the house so that carriages could enter the yard (p. 265).
You can't do that with information! Only with books. Wait, what?
Note: I'd have to read this again to get a better gist of the story -- to keep track of all the characters involved.
* [[lq:Author-Borden]]
* [[lq:Affil-Dartmouth College]]
This entry is about:
Borden, Arnold K. (1931). The Sociological Beginnings of the Library Movement. The Library Quarterly, 1(3), 278-282. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40039658
Note: The third article of the third issue of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Sociological Beginnings of the Library Movement."
It was written by Arnold K. Borden, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Dartmouth College
Note: This is the kind of article I'm really interested in reading. First off, though, is a citation to a book that I have read about and have seen references to in past studies and in this one. It happens to be available from archive.org. It is:
William S. Learned. (1924). The American Public Library and the Diffusion of Knowledge. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company.
Borden has this to say about the Learned book:
From a strictly contemporary point of view the sociological study by W. S. Learned is illuminating but does not aim to be retrospective (p. 278).
Note: Borden begins by noting the failure, up to that time, of librarians or others in studying the beginnings of public libraries. He writes:
Although next to the public-school system and the press the library exercises the greatest educative influence in the state, it rarely appears to be given much weight in the deliberation of sociologists and political scientists (p. 278).
I believe Andrew Abbott has made that same criticism in regards to his own field's lack of attention on libraries.
Also, I believe the development of library science was partially a response to the lack of inquiry that existed in this area. Under this view, library science is interpreted as a kind of political science or sociology of libraries.
Note: This is true and a very important point:
In 1850 there were about 100 libraries of 5,000 or more volumes or more aggregating something like 1,000,000 volumes. In 1890 there were 4,000 libraries containing 27,000,000 volumes. In this period the first library convention was held (1853), and the American Library Association, the State School at Albany, and the Library Journal were founded. Surely the causes for this phenomenal growth must lie sufficiently deep to call for more than superficial investigation (pp. 278-279).
I wonder if library science, as a field, can support a sort of library history as well as a cliometric-style library history in the form of specific departments dedicated to this area of inquiry.
Regarding the 1853 conference, this is an important book (I read about a year ago):
Utley, George Burwell. The librarians' conference of 1853, a chapter in American library history. Chicago: American Library Association, 1951. url:http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1370309
The cliometric link above refers to (I've read parts of this):
McMullen, Haynes. (2000). American Libraries before 1876. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press, 2000.
Note: An explanation has been sought. While I have an understanding of what has been researched in this area, I'll just note that this is one of the most highly cited articles in my study so far.
But when one has reviewed all the accomplishments of government and individuals, the reasons behind the rapid library expansion in the latter half of the nineteenth century remain unexplained (p . 280).
Reflection: When I begin analyzing my data for this study (using these field note entries), I should make note of which articles I've commented on the most and classify those articles by whatever type emerges. I think this will say something about what I am trying to discover in this study. (Wow, a lot of reflexivity!)
Note: Important note about the relationship between public schools and public libraries, and the view of public libraries as an extension of public schools:
In the first place the library movement was intimately associated with the establishment of free public schools. Logically, it would seem that the public school was a necessary prelude to the library, that a body of people capable of reading must be created before the library could perform a significant function in the community (p. 280).
Imagine closely reading these LQ issues at the times they were published and received by the readers. This article, followed by the article on *The Public Library under the City-Manager Form of Government*, pair well. That is, together they lead to a broader understanding of, for example, why some early public libraries were attached to school districts rather than to city governments. I commented on that article here.
Note: Here the library is seen not necessary as a mechanism to advance democracy by the government but as a mechanism to advance democracy by an already democratic people. The view, seems to be, that creating public libraries can be understood as a type of survival and growth mechanism. (I'm aware that my use of the term mechanism may not be the most appropriate.):
Another antecedent condition favoring the growth of public libraries was the increased voting strength of the people (p. 281).
Note: Leisure and libraries. Here we have the problem that there are now many ways to go about leisure. Thus the public library, today, is in competition with other leisurely providing entities:
Attendant upon the increase of wealth resulting from the establishment of the factory system and the exploitation of the natural resources of the country was the increase of leisure demanded by labor (p. 281).
Note: This is a great line:
Students of library history, therefore, must not look upon the library as an isolated phenomenon or as something which has been struck off the brains of individuals in moments of philanthropic zeal (p. 282).
He ends the article with:
From the point of view of history as well as from that of contemporary conditions the library needs to be studied in the light of sociology, economics, and other branches of human knowledge (p. 282).
Reflection: I really enjoyed this article. It provides questions that still need answers today.
Reflection: Competition is still key, I think, for understanding libraries today:
* [[lq:Author-Howe]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Howe, Harriet E. (1931). The Library School Curriculum. The Library Quarterly, 1(3), 283-290. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40039659
Note: The fourth article of the third issue of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Library School Curriculum."
It was written by Harriet E. Howe, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Graduate Library School, University of Chicago
Note: Wow, this is a great opening line:
In discussing education for librarianship, the assumption is made that librarianship is a profession (p. 283).
And the following passage explains why library school is not (and should not be) a technical school:
There are data now available that serve to distinguish clerical duties from professional duties in the cataloging department. By means of such data it becomes possible to omit from the library-school course all purely clerical operations as such. However, it is still desirable to retain such emphasis on clerical duties as will enable the professional cataloguer to supervise the clerical work intelligently (p. 283).
The question is, then, how much of a separation of clerical duties from professional duties has there been since this was published in 1931, over 80 years ago? Out of interest of defining the profession as a profession, this would be nice to map.
Note: On the need to be adaptable:
A second principle governing the curriculum requires that the best current practice be taught with sufficient allowance for future improvements and expansions (p. 283).
Note: This is great:
Librarianship is rapidly shifting its attention from the mechanics of administration to the needs of the reader (p. 284).
And I think this explains quite a bit about library reference courses, as they are taught today:
In all the library schools there are courses called "reference," or "reference and bibliography." Usually these courses are devoted to the study of reference books--not, as one teacher wishes that they might be, to reference work. "We use no reference book as a final source for information for the reader. We use any source, whether it is a circulation or a reference book, a library catalogue, correspondence, or the picture file. Another teacher has advocated the teaching of the courses now called "book selection" and "reference" as one course, discussing books by subject from the standpoint of their potential readers" (pp. 284-285).
Reflection: The next couple paragraphs address questions and issues related to courses teaching in a way that will allow students to generalize to their specific interests. This is an important development in the thinking about librarianship, and based on my readings so far, it is easy to see the effect that this type of position, many of which seem to be held by faculty at the Graduate Library School at the time, had on the development of library science and library science education.
Reflection: The use of the term *book* in this article strikes me in a certain way. There does not seem to be an attachment to the object other than for its ability to disseminate information, which is a term the author explicitly uses (see previous quote). If this same author were writing today, I think she could be writing about other formats and media as easily as she writes about the book. It's here, I think, that I see some of the first moves toward the abstraction of content away from the object that holds or contains that content. If I'm reading this correctly, this article is an extremely forward-thinking piece.
Note: Already, the focus on the user:
Can cataloging, for example, be taught from the standpoint of the user of the catalogue, not from the standpoint of the maker of the catalogue (p. 286)?
The rest of the paragraph is genius. Consider the following, in which the stress on the defense of the decision-making of cataloguers highlights the importance of such decisions--this is essentially about the application of a rational framework, a science, to the work:
As a further illustration, could the prospective administrator study cataloguing with the problem of administration in mind, asking the cataloguers to defend the cataloguing decisions that they are making ... (p. 286)?
Note: Just an historical note about the trends in "library architecture" (a term the author uses to describe a type of social architecture regarding the division of the library) and about the topic of subject specialists:
If, as present trends indicate, the future library is to be subdivided by subject rather than by department, is it not the task of the library school to prepare librarians who can become specialists in the subjects (p. 287)?
Note: How does this change the meaning, when substituting information for book:
Original:
The readers want book aid from those who know books (p. 287).
Revised:
The readers want *information* aid from those who know information (p. 287).
Reflection: It is important for this author that librarians have subject knowledge related to an area where they assist readers. Secondary graduate degrees are not mentioned (so far) but undergraduate education is, and thus the quality of undergraduate education will have a substantial impact on the quality of librarianship. Our field, therefore, should be very concerned with the quality of higher education in general, above and beyond the normal amount of attention that might be directed toward it.
The author seems to make this point in the next paragraph:
The library school attached to a university or college [not all were at the time] has an opportunity to direct students in the same institution before they enter the professional school and can accomplish something by correspondence with those prospective students in other institutions (pp. 287-288).
Reflection: My one problem with this attention to subject specialization rests on my argument that the methods used by librarians (or information professionals in general) should be generalized enough that subject knowledge is necessary in mostly a trivial way. Such generalized skills of the librarian should help that librarian switch to different subject matters if necessary. That kind of flexibility seems to me to be a necessary condition of being a professional--for librarians at least, whose subject matter is largely the methods they need. For example, the signals that highlight the quality of an article or book in philosophy should be comparable to the signals that highlight the quality of an article or book in biology. Understanding those signals, and how to use and manipulate them to retrieve good information, seems to me to be the important matter.
Note: Interesting this list on the requirements of the librarian:
Common sense, tact, courtesy, poise, administrative ability, speed, accuracy, reliability, initiative, are all essential; but the greatest of all is good judgment in relating books to readers (p. 289).
* [[lq:Author-Waples]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Waples, Douglas. (1931). Reading Studies Contributory to Social Sciences. The Library Quarterly, 1(3), 291-300. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40039660
Note: The fifth article of the third issue of The Library Quarterly is titled "Reading Studies Contributory to Social Sciences."
It was written by Douglas Waples, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Graduate Library School, University of Chicago
Note: Just based on the title, I'm beginning to see an agenda here. I've long known that the Graduate Library School sought to make a social science of library studies (thus, library science). This seems fairly evident in the articles the GLS faculty are publishing in this first volume of LQ.
Reflection: In many ways, reading these early issues sometimes doesn't feel like I'm reading articles that were published more than 80 years ago. For example, this article is about the interdisciplinary nature of library science as well as cooperative research. I've been reading about this topic recently and the arguments are much the same.
Should I be expecting change? Should things be very different than they were 80 years ago?
Part of the answer lies in the fact that these articles were written in a time that I believe introduces the age that library science functions today, in a paradigmatic kind of way. So that, we're simply still operating under the same assumptions and frameworks and with many of the same problems as they were in 1931. Despite all the change, it really hasn't changed all that much.
Also, and in this particular paper, what I'm reading about is reflective of what Robert K. Merton writes about. That is, problems of cooperative research are very much problems with the entire ethos of science, which hasn't changed either.
Note: The next part of the paper illustrates examples that involve what could be useful to both sociology and library science, and the specific examples concern the public and reading. A good amount of research has been done in this area, in subsequent years, but the questions Waples raises are still relevant.
Note: Example of cooperative research Waples proposes:
Since no reliable evidence on the status of reading within any given adult publication has yet been produced, we have here a field of investigation in which the student of reading and the sociologist should co-operate to mutual advantage (p. 296).
Note: Waples mentions pre-testing and post-testing in research (he doesn't use those terms though). I just find that interesting, since it makes me aware that I don't know how long (social) scientists have pre and post-tested:
The Thurstone scales for the measurement of attitudes toward various current issues might be readily applied before and after the reading of a given book or article to secure such evidence (p. 297).
Note: Waples ends the article with an outline of the four types of reading studies that he just illustrated and discussed in the article. The outline includes the research problems that need to be addressed and a brief description of how to measure those problems, where appropriate. It's a nice list.
* [[lq:Author-Joeckel]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Michigan]]
This entry is about:
Joeckel, Carleton B. (1931). The Public Library under the City-Manager Form of Government (Continued). The Library Quarterly, 1(3), 301-337. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40039661
Note: The sixth article of the third issue of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Public Library under the City-Manager Form of Government (Continued)."
It was written by Carleton B. Joeckel, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Michigan
Note: The first part of this article was published in the second issue of this volume. My notes on that article are here:
https://cseanburns.net/wiki/lq/volume-1-issue-2#article-1
Note: Joeckel begins to write more in depth about the various sorts of public library governance. The article has the following sections:
Note About corporate (public) libraries. Legally, they are corporations. In practice, they are not much different than libraries governed by city councils:
The important point, of course, is that the governing boards of these libraries are created by special state statutes and that their members appoint their own successors. They are thus completely independent, legally, of the municipal government and are responsible only to themselves for their own acts. However, this separateness is somewhat fictitious, since the city council has the power of the purse and can alter its appropriations to the library as it sees fit (p. 301).
Note: About libraries controlled by associations and clubs. This form of management had been common. The two libraries under investigation here are the Portsmouth Public Library, which
is controlled by the Ladies' Library Association of that city, which elects a board of twelve members to manage the library. Even here, however, there is a certain amount of supervision by the director of public welfare, who is a city official; and the annual report of the library is forwarded to the city manager and city council (p. 303).
And the Flagler Memorial Library of Miami in Miami, Florida. This is an interesting set up:
The Flagler Memorial Library of Miami seems almost to defy classification. It has been placed in this group, because it is actually managed by the Miami Woman's Club through its library committee. This unusual arrangement is due to the fact that Henry Flagler originally donated to the Woman's Club a piece of ground, stipulating that the club should maintain a free reading-room. For over twenty-five years the library thus established served as the only public library of Miami, a membership fee of $1.00 a year being charged. It has received financial support from the city only since 1924, at which time it assumed the functions of a free public library. Curiously enough, the present annual appropriation of $30,000 is paid from the publicity fund of the city (p. 303).
Note: About public libraries controlled by the city manager:
Interesting tidbit about "newest type of municipal executive":
We now turn to a group of cities in which this tradition of independence has been broken down, in which the newest type of municipal executive, the city manager, has been definitely given authority over the destinies of the public library (p. 304).
Note: Joeckel divides this group into two subgroups:
Note: There's a lot of detail in the following pages, and it's not important for me (for this project) to note it all, but the details reveal a fascinating history of early 20th century public libraries.
However, one of the important points to be made is that libraries (at this time) that did not have boards but that operated under a city-manager seemed sometimes to be highly dependent on the city-manager's level of attention on the library. That is, this form of governance seems to result in an unpredictable situation for the library as it not only depends on whether the city manager cares but also on whether the city manager is involved. Ah, so Joeckel says as much here:
The whole matter may well be summed up by saying the success of the library under the direct supervision of the manager depends very largely on the attitude of the individual manager toward the library. Librarians working under managers are practically a unit on this point, regardless of whether their personal experience has been favorable or unfavorable. If the manager believes thoroughly in the importance of libraries, he usually has it in his power to see that the library in his city receives adequate support and is efficiently administered. If he is indifferent, or worse, there is little hope for progress in library service (p. 313).
Note: This could be used to explain or as an example of why a profession is important for the administration of libraries: Joeckel notes that many of the problems with the city manager set up is that many of the city managers (at least at the time) were engineers, who, the author argues, may be more interested in their own projects than they are in libraries. See top of p. 314.
Note: Interesting note, hypothetical back and forth, between what a city manager would want and what a librarian would want in the form of oversight. See pp. 319-320.
Note: This is good. He lists the "principal arguments in favor of separate library organization" beginning on page 321. They are:
Note: Joeckel then provides the arguments that have favored a city manager administration. I won't list them, but they're interesting.
However, there are some important remarks on taxation -- including whether there should be a separate library tax or whether funds for libraries should come out of a single tax.
Note: I really enjoy reading Carleton Joeckel. This is a nice final line:
The age of experiment is not over in American municipal government, and we are certainly not yet ready to abandon completely the idea of the independence of the public library (p. 329).
Reading notes for the first volume and fourth issue of The Library Quarterly.
To return to the list of notes in this volume: volume-1
* [[lq:Author-Carnovsky]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Carnovsky, Leon. (1931). Suggestions regarding an Evaluation of Methods in Current Adult-Education Practices. The Library Quarterly, 1(4), 377-393. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40039683
Note: The first article of the fourth issue of The Library Quarterly is titled "Suggestions regarding an Evaluation of Methods in Current Adult-Education Practices."
It was written by Leon Carvovsky, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Graduate Library School, University of Chicago
Note: Seems there will be some criticism of adult education, at least as it was represented as a movement at the time. Also mentions, off the bat, education psychology.
Note: I've read about the use of forums in American history before and have a general idea where the article I read is located, but this bit connecting adult education and forums is interesting and new to me, when presented in this way:
One of the best-known forms of adult education in America is the forum. The forum goes back a considerable distance in American history, and it has achieved some prominence in recent times through being linked up with the adult-education movement. Indeed, owing to this connection, it is probable that the public forum is more extensive today in American than it has ever been in the past. The main features of the forum are three. There is an address, usually by a fluent-speaker, often one who has achieved some distinction in his field, sometimes one who has become popular through his facility of expression rather than his scholarship. Sometimes a debate between two prominent persons is substituted for the address. Following the address the meeting is open to the audience, and questions relating to the topic of the evening are asked of the speaker. Sometimes these are written, more often oral (p. 378).
Note: Carnovsky has the following bit on learning, and I think given the relationship between public libraries and learning, the following list should be considered in any in-depth discussion of that relationship. He writes:
It remains now to ask what evidence is at hand for an evaluation of the aims and method of the forum as described. One type of such evidence consists in the principles that are known to operate in the learning process. It is both possible and convenient to consider these principles as representing at least eight types of learning, which are of course by no means discrete: 1. Acquisition of acts of skill 2. Developing adequate perceptions and habits of observation 3. Acquiring associations and memorizing 4. Acquiring ideas or knowledge 5. Gaining understanding and problem-solving 6. Developing appreciations 7. Developing attitudes 8. Developing character (p. 379).
He then relates forums to item 4 on the list, at least that is what they predominantly seem to be about. Then he uses "psychological evidence" to support this claim. Interesting.
Note: There may be an exception or two, but I don't think I'll report more details about this article any further in this post. But, a few things to note:
Note: On the "university extension movement" and distance education over 80 years ago:
In general, the purpose of university extension is to take, in so far as possible, the university to the student who is unable to attend in person (p. 387).
Note: Description of correspondence instruction:
The method of instruction is correspondence. In general, the procedure is as follows: definitely organized lesson sheets are sent to the student at certain intervals. Assignments consist of required reading and suggested readings, and exercises which are mailed back to the university for correction or criticism, after which they are returned to the student. There is, of course, no personal supervision in the sense of a face-to-face relationship, but it would be a mistake to assume that personal direction is lacking. On the contrary such direction is very much a part of the system (p. 388).
I wonder if that's the first instance of the phrase face-to-face--especially in nearly the same context we use it today.
Note: Carnovsky finally describes how libraries and librarians have been involved in adult education. This was largely through reader advisory, or the personalized reading list for the patron. There is some criticism of this as a way of instruction. Here Carnovsky quotes a "Professor L. J. Richardson, director of the University of California Extension Division," who concludes after providing a list of reasons why readers advisory is not a good instructional program:
It is evidence that a course of reading, however carefully planned, cannot meet all the needs involved in adult education (p. 392).
Note: One last note about the article and especially its method. Carnovsky's method is to describe the thing under question, or the *data* as he terms it, and then tie the description to a psychological statement or principle about learning. This makes his *preface* intelligible (that is, I didn't understand what he was doing when I first read it):
NOTE ON SOURCES:--Data concerning practices in adult education are found in the "Studies in adult education," sponsored by the Carnegie Corporation, as indicated in the footnotes. The psychological principles employed were taken from the unpublished "Official record of the Commonwealth Teacher Training Study," by Charters and Waples. The principles were selected from over one hundred texts in educational psychology by \[...\], as supported by experimental evidence (p. 377).
From the perspective of an up and coming social scientist who works at the Graduate Library School, i.e., Carnovsky, this method is a really interesting tactic.
* [[lq:Author-Akers]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of North Carolina]]
This entry is about:
Akers, Susan Grey. (1931). To What Extent Do the Students of the Liberal-Arts Colleges Use the Bibliographic Items Given on the Catalogue Card? The Library Quarterly, 1(4), 394-408. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40039684
Note: The second article of the fourth issue of The Library Quarterly is titled "To What Extend Do the Students of the Liberal-Arts Colleges Use the Bibliographic Items Given on the Catalogue Card?"
It was written by Susan Grey Akers, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of North Carolina
Note: It's long been about service and users:
The implication of the foregoing quotation is that in order to make a good catalogue it is necessary to know the needs of the users of that catalogue [...] (p. 394).
The "foregoing quotation" is from the following source (quoted from the first endnote on page 394 of this article):
W. M. Randall, "The Uses of library catalogs," *Catalogers' and classifiers' yearbook, II (1930), 26-27.
Since the above comment and quote are so interesting, given the time, I just did a quick search for W. M. Randall's article and I came across a piece I remember reading quite a while ago:
Connaway, Lynn S., Johnson, Debra W., & Searing, Susan E. (1997). Online Catalogs from the Users' Perspective: The Use of Focus Group Interviews. College & Research Libraries, 58(5), 403-420.
In the Connaway, Johnson, and Searing article, they write:
The origin of catalog use studies is credited to a 1930 paper written by William M. Randall. Randall contended that catalogs cannot be improved by studying catalog rules or the catalogs themselves but, rather, by studying catalog users needs, backgrounds, and mental capabilities (p. 404).
Note: This is a really interesting piece. The author is describing the use of pilot studies, collecting data by interviewing students or asking the students to maintain diaries. The decided way to collect data involved students completing checklists about their interaction with the catalog.
Two hundred and fifty-seven students completed checklists.
Note: Akers suggests that her study should be generalizable to all liberal arts college students. How she tests this is really interesting:
The reliability of these students as a sample of the students in liberal-arts colleges was tested by correlating the votes of one-half the students from each college with the votes of the other half of the students from each college in order to see if the group was homogeneous (p. 397).
Note: The research involved asking students what part of the card they used. Akers then ranked the results. One finding, for example, is that students ranked the Date of book information as the most important information on the card, and the Series notes for all series information as the least important (see Table II, p. 399).
Note: Akers now reports student comments. I like this one:
2. I should like to see a card system arranged so that an average individual not having been in the library before could find a book .... without having to bother the librarian for the required information. As for the cards, I do not believe that the thousand-and-one abbreviations used can be understood by anyone but a librarian. Why not simplify the entire system? It can be done \[emphasis added\] (p. 405).
Emphasis added because it just shows that students have never wanted to go to the librarian. This is a universal law!
Reflection: UNIVERSAL LAW OF LIBRARIES I: Students dislike requesting assistance from librarians.
Note: More wish list for the card catalog:
11. I should like to suggest that in the case of books of reference the position of the author be stated so that one might infer what authority the book carries if one is not acquainted with the author (p. 406).
Note: All librarians will nod their heads at this request:
34. Color of the book (p. 407).
Reflection: A really interesting piece--background, methods, data collection, findings, conclusion (not described here). The article involved a very short literature review because there was only one article on the topic before this one (the Randall piece, see above).
* [[lq:Author-Scribner]]
* [[lq:Affil-Washington DC]]
Scribner, B. W. (1931). Report of Bureau of Standards Research on Preservation of Records. The Library Quarterly, 1(4), 409-420. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40039685
Note: The third article of the fourth issue of The Library Quarterly is titled "Report of Bureau of Standards Research on Preservation of Records."
It was written by B. W. Scribner, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Washington, D.C.
Note: The article begins by describing the concern about preserving records due to paper quality, which became a concern around the early to later part of the 19th century.
Note: What's interesting, as a side note, is that the author's description of the problem is insightful and almost mathematical. Or maybe it's just my reading of it. Anyhow, the author's description can be stated more generally. Caveat: this is not what the author writes or claims; rather, it's the generalization of it, and it's not something I claim to be true--just thought-framing.
Reflection: There's not much more I want to write about this article. I think it will stick with me and I can see myself drawing from it for some future project. Otherwise, it's an interesting piece that reports findings on research that causes paper to deteriorate--at a time when this was very new information / findings. For example:
It's also interesting because it highlights how the research in this area (paper quality and its standardization) marks some of the earliest, modern discussions on *information storage.*
* [[lq:Author-Randall]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Randall, William M. (1931). The College-Library Book Budget. The Library Quarterly, 1(4), 421-435. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40039686
Note: The fourth article of the fourth issue of The Library Quarterly is titled "The College-Library Book Budget."
It was written by William M. Randall, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Graduate Library School, University of Chicago
Note: An opening attack on how book budgets are applied at college libraries. A really good attack. For example, on spending money based on student population per department:
It appears obvious, for example, that the number of students enrolled in courses in economics in College A can have no possible effect upon the number of authoritative and necessary books published during a year in the subject (p. 421).
The second argument is an argument against lapsing or use it or lose it budgets.
Note: Randall claims that knowing two pieces of information would help solve the book budgeting problem:
Reflection: I think this is the first truly obsolete article I've read in these first issues of LQ. Randall's previous article is relevant in many ways, but this one may be so only for historical purposes.
I should add that I do not meant to minimize the importance of this article. In fact, I think this article's lack of currency suggests that this is an area (collection management) that library science has truly advanced.
I'm enjoying this article so much. This is great (simpler times):
But, since the list has 149 titles in economics during one interval, and 275 titles in English during the corresponding interval, it seems reasonable to suppose that the college library will need to buy, on the average, about twice as many titles in English as in economics during a given period (exactly 275/149) (p. 425).
Note: Essentially, what Randall is suggesting is a collection development algorithm based on normalizing around the number of books published in the field of *English*. It's original and ingenious and fun to read. The method he proposes is also very thorough and well thought out, even if outdated.
For example, it's coming out in the article that one of the benefits of his method is that it highlights discrepancies in funding and collections. Thus, his method could have been used to highlight what is a fair distribution of books per academic department.
Note: And here's the kicker. This is what the LQ is all about--a *Library Science*, at least in these early years:
This article is intended not as a final word on any of the questions of which it treats. It is intended rather as an introduction and a sample of the sort of work which may be done upon the problems of the college library--and upon all library problems in general--by the use of methods which have been tested in other disciplines; and by the utilization of available data which can be proved reliable. It would appear that the proper procedure for the library profession at this time is not to seek in every case practical and immediate application of knowledge to everyday problems, so much as to investigate hypotheses, and to test the assumption upon which the profession works (p. 435).
* [[lq:Author-Christensen]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Christensen, Claude H. (1931). Classification and Cataloguing in the Scandinavian Countries. The Library Quarterly, 1(4), 436-464. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40039687
Note: The fifth article of the fourth issue of The Library Quarterly is titled "Classification and Cataloguing in the Scandinavian Countries"
It was written by Claude H. Christensen, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Graduate Library School, University of Chicago
Note: Begins with praise of the order in Scandinavian libraries and proceeds to discuss their history.
Note: There is one theme that I seem to find across many different types of library histories. The problems that have plagued libraries, especially around the middle to later part of the 19th century, is this: library methods could not scale with increased communication. In order to meet that challenges, they discarded, revised, and invented new methods to scale up. In this article's context:
The works of Francke, Ebert, Schrettinger, and others excited a renewed interest in library methods, which were proving quite inadequate for the proper handling of the growing collections (p. 440).
Reflection: I enjoy reading articles about the development of classification systems, and this article is partly about that. Articles like these remind me how historically situated and culturally defined classification systems are.
Note: We may not have *rulers* anymore, but we still have this problem and this outcome:
During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries the fortunes of the library depended largely upon the attitude of the rulers, and at times there was little or no progress (p. 451).
* [[lq:Author-Ketring]]
* [[lq:Affil-Duke University Library]]
This entry is about:
Ketring, Ruth A. (1931). Johann Neumeister: An Assistant to Johann Gutenberg? The Library Quarterly, 1(4), 465-475. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/40039688
Note: The sixth and last article of the fourth issue, and last article of the first volume, of *The Library Quarterly* is titled "Johann Neumeister: An Assistant to Johann Gutenberg?"
It was written by Ruth A. Ketring, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Duke University Library
Note: A historical piece on printing and bibliography.
Reflection: Nothing much to say about the specifics of this article. In the last few years I've picked up a couple books on old-school bibliography work (the work of *bibliographers*) in the last few years. It's fascinating, detailed, part-historical work and represents, I think, one of the most important skills in the history of librarianship.
Reading notes for the second volume and first issue of The Library Quarterly.
To return to the list of notes on this volume: volume-2
* [[lq:Author-Wilson]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of North Carolina]]
This entry is about:
Wilson, Louis R. (1932). Aspects of Education for Librarianship in America. The Library Quarterly, 2(1), 1-10. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301858
Note: The first article of the first issue of the second volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Aspects of Education for Librarianship in America."
It was written by Louis R. Wilson, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of North Carolina
Note: Wilson's overall goal with this article is to describe the state of affairs at the time. To set it up, he provides a little history.
As the title suggests, the article is primarily about librarian education, library schools, library faculty, library curricula, future directions, and so forth.
Note: On library research and on the purpose of library research.
Investigation in the library field will probably never be as exact as that in the sciences. It may have to partake of the nature of investigation in the social sciences and education. But it is essential if librarians are to understand the point of view of workers in other disciplines in the field, and if they are to increase the effectiveness of the library as an educational and social instrument (p. 8).
Note: Not really relevant to anything I'm doing, but I believe this is the first mention of the Depression in this study:
Just now, owing to the depression, difficulty is being experienced by some of the schools in placing their graduates (p. 9).
Note: Still applicable today and, with a few word substitutions, still current:
Similarly, librarians must be trained who will be effective in making books available to rural populations, who undrstand the book needs of patients in hospitals, who can elicit interest in books and support of libraries through the radio, and who are skilled in co-ordinating and guiding the various agencies which are engaged in general adult education activities (pp. 9-10).
* [[lq:Author-Sullivan]]
* [[lq:Affil-State Normal School]]
This entry is about:
Sullivan, Donna E. (1932). Library Planning in Teacher-Training Institutions. The Library Quarterly, 2(1), 11-41. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301859
Note: The second article of the first issue of the second volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Library Planning in Teacher-Training Institutions."
It was written by Donna E. Sullivan, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: State Normal School
Note: An analysis of the various kinds of libraries in service to teachers colleges.
Note: Sullivan begins by highlighting the contributions that normal schools have made to teaching but notes that the model has become outdated and there is currently a transition to the teachers college. In essence, the transition is comparable to one from a vocational school to a four year degree.
Note: With the rise in teacher colleges at the time, Sullivan makes the argument that they will need good libraries to serve their students. It's an argument for a library that fits the needs of a particular college rather than an entire university.
Note: Very interesting turn. The title of the article Library Planning refers to actual space planning and the arguments Sullivan provides are directed toward the good use of a library, current and future. She incorporates blueprints to make her point about certain arrangements. She even highlights "working arrangements" (p. 15). So her concern is not just about library users (including students and faculty) but also about library workers.
Note: Longstanding tradition to have a library of children's literature for teacher colleges:
Of the three rooms, the one at the front of the building is devoted to a model children's library and is a non-circulating collection of books used in the course in children's literature taken by the students in the kindergarten-primary course. The middle room is known as the "children's room," and here the children's librarian has her desk ... (p. 19).
Note: I haven't read Matthew Griffis' dissertation "Space, Power and the Public Library: A Multicase Examination of the Public Library as Organization Space", but I've heard him present a couple times (excellent presenter and very interesting topic) about the use of space in public libraries (within the context of Michel Foucault and the panopticon). I wonder how he'd comment on this passage, which suggests that the intent is to place the library's desk in a location that helps library users rather than librarians.
On the second floor the outstanding features are the librarian's desk in the main delivery lobby, always visible and available; (p. 19).
(Just brought this up with a colleague who walked by my office and we had a great conversation about it.)
Note: I'm seeing a similar effect here at UK with the construction of the new dormitories near the main library:
With the allotment of these rooms to other departments more use of the library developed. The students no longer consider the walk from classrooms to library a task, and the end of each class hour sees great numbers of them going to and from between the buildings (p. 29).
Note: There's a line at the top of page 35 that makes me wonder whether the design of academic libraries in cities may have been influenced by the needs of students commuting to the city from suburbia -- who would have needed a place to read and study while they were on campus.
Note: The argument for the library's central position / location on a campus is essentially an argument about equal access to information, except from geographic perspective:
In planning a building for the library of a teachers college, a number of important points immediately come to mind. A central location is desirable, that all students from the various other buildings and departments may reach the library in approximately the same time and share equally in having "first choice" of the books in demand.
Note: The reserve room makes its appearance into the library:
With the present methods of instruction, where individual textbooks have been retired into the background and students are referred to a number of books for each course, need for housing these books constantly in demand in one place has become a necessity, and the reserve-book room has appeared upon the scene to fill this need (p. 36).
Note: The expected (at that time) life expectancy of a library building (at least at a teachers college):
In planning a library building a careful estimate of the maximum possible growth of the student numbers and library books should be used as a basis on which to compute the needs for the next few decades. To plan for a few years is not sufficient; new libraries do not drop down into outstretched hands whenever the olds ones become crowded, and a new building must serve for thirty, forty, or fifty years (p. 39).
Note: I still occasionally hear about problems when one doesn't listen to the other.
Hearty co-operation between the architect and the librarian is a state to be encouraged, and a most satisfactory library can be the result of united effort on the part of these two, with, of course, certain concessions on the part of both (pp. 40-41).
Reflection: This is an insightful article. According to Google Scholar, it's only been cited twice. That's a shame.
* [[lq:Author-Waples]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Waples, Douglas. (1932). The Relation of Subject Interests to Actual Reading. The Library Quarterly, 2(1), 42-70. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301860
Note: The third article of the first issue of the second volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Relation of Subject Interests to Actual Reading."
It was written by Douglas Waples, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago
Note: There are only three articles in this issue, but the articles are quite lengthy. The remaining issues for this volume have about five or six articles each.
Note: This is the fourth article by Douglas Waples. He had articles published in the first three issues of the first volume and now the first issue of the second volume.
Note: Waples, if I recall from past readings of his work, continues to push the idea that other disciplines (e.g., education, political science, etc.) will find library science research relevant and fruitful for their own work. He does so explicitly but also by stating that LS research is not just "technical":
If it be assumed that the reading desired by a group is both authentic and important, the investigation may also be significant for educators, political scientists, and students of social welfare. Hence the work herein reported should not be regarded as of merely technical interest (p. 42).
Note: Nice outline of the "conditions affecting satisfaction in reading" (p. 44). He uses the propositions in this outline to ask the following research question (so to speak):
How may one proceed to increase the satisfactions obtainable from reading (p. 45)?
And his method is very analytical, well-described, and even pedagogical (which might be purposeful):
The answer we propose has three parts. First, we can separate the conditions that can *not* be directly controlled, such as the reader's desire to read on particular subjects, from the conditions that *can* be controlled to some extend, such as the appeal of the reading matter itself and its accessibility (p. 45).
Then:
Second, we can find out for each of several typical groups of readers what sort of reading is defined by the conditions that cannot be controlled (p. 45).
Last:
Third, we can modify certain other conditions to whatever extent is needed in order (*a*) to increase the supply of reading that meets the indicated demand and (b) to make it more accessible (p. 45).
Note: The conditions Waples believes are the most relevant to reading satisfaction:
What is practicable, however, is a possibility rendered plausible by data presented in this report; namely, that three of the conditions mentioned are so much more influential than other conditions in their effects upon the satisfaction obtained from actual reading that the others may be disregarded for practical purposes (p. 46).
Then:
These conditions, for the general reader, are probably subject interest, readability, and accessibility (p. 46).
And why these conditions are also important for research and practicing purposes:
All three may in time be sufficiently controlled to increase very considerably the amount of satisfactory literature available to various populations. That is to say, the material on the preferred subjects can be increased in amount, its methods of treatment can be better adjusted to the given readers, and it can be more widely advertised (p. 46).
And why (and a sort of prediction that he makes):
Such measures would increase the readers' satisfaction, since the correspondence between the subjects of most interest and the subjects most read about becomes close when the actual reading is reduced to material which (1) includes the given subjects, (2) is attractively written, and (3) is easily accessible (p. 46).
Note: The next section is titled PROCEDURE. I'd have to go back and look but I'm fairly confident that this is the first instance of a clearly defined methods section. I do remember that previous LQ articles did have ill-defined sections or parts that described the methods used but not as explicitly as this.
Note: Waples begins by repeating his research question:
With so much by way of perspective, we may attack the central question---What is the relation of actual reading to subject interest? In other words, to what extent is the reading done by a typical group of adults concerned with subjects upon which the group expresses most desire to read [emphasis added] (p. 46)?
Then Waples succinctly describes how he will answer this question:
To answer this question it is necessary, first, to discover what subjects are interesting and uninteresting as such; then, to determine how much material is actually read upon each subject; and, finally, to make the comparison (pp. 46-47).
Then he ends the paragraph with a nod to a FINDINGS section (it begins on page 55). This signifies to me that it is his intent to title his sections so explicitly. This marks an explicit turn in the literature---a marked change in the evolution of library studies as a library science:
The three steps will be discussed in turn to explain the method of procedure. The section on "findings" presents the evidence (p. 47).
It will be interesting to note how long it takes before this literary turn takes off in future articles.
In any case, this is an important step in the literature.
Note: The first thing Waples does in the procedure section is list a number of possible ways to answer his research question, but point by point he points out their deficiencies. He then makes the case that although any one method may be deficient (or impractical), a combination of these methods may result in valid findings. He rejects a couple of the methods, and uses a combination of three others.
Note: The purpose here is not necessarily to comment on any findings, but here's something I think is interesting, mostly because it's still somewhat the case today, although it may play out in various channels:
Of the fiction read by men and women combined, it was possible to identify the authors of 186 titles. Of these, 55 were sensational stories of the news stand variety that would scarcely appear on public-library shelves (p. 63).
Also, Waples lists the 19 non-fiction titles on pages 63--64. Fascinating list. I'd like to know how many of those books were passed back and forth among the readers.
Reflection: Waples' material continues to be interesting reading. I will need to investigate whether this is the first instance of PROCEDURE and FINDINGS sections.
Reading notes for the second volume and second issue of The Library Quarterly.
To return to the list of notes on this volume: volume-2
* [[lq:Author-Esdaile]]
* [[lq:Affil-British Museum]]
This entry is about:
Esdaile, Arundell. (1932). The British Library Association Conference. The Library Quarterly, 2(2), 97-105. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301877
Note: The first article of the second issue of the second volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The British Library Association Conference."
It was written by Arundell Esdaile, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: British Museum
Note: The British Library Association is the precursor to today's Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals.
Note: This is essentially a report of the conference. It begins with a short (and nice) recent history of the libraries in the UK.
Note: Interesting tidbit about library workers related to library quality, or the view thereof:
It is not for nothing that the great advance in serious public esteem of the public library in the last fifteen or twenty years has coincided with the raising of the standard of entry of junior assistants from the age of fourteen or fifteen to that of seventeen or eighteen, i.e., from children leaving elementary schools to those leaving secondary (high) schools with at least university matriculation (p. 100).
Note: Then some comments on the effects of Andrew Carnegie's philanthropy.
Note: Esdaile recounts Louis R. Wilson's presentation of his paper on "Aspects of education for librarianship" (p. 101). C. C. Williamson is also mentioned. The author writes, in reference to what Wilson said:
He thought that the staffing of the great libraries needed scientific thinking out and that members of such staffs should have training in scientific research (p. 102).
Note: The mention of a journal I've never heard of: Library Association Record (p. 102), which according to Ulrichsweb, became Library + Information Update in 2002 after merging with Inform. This of course corresponds to the merging of the Library Association with the Institute of Information Scientists in 2002.
W. W. Bishop is also mentioned, in reference to a pre-conference International Federation of Library Associations (IFLA) meeting.
Note: Wilson, Williamson, and Bishop represent connections as previous, early authors of *LQ*. This could be why Esdaile is familiar with The Library Quarterly (and is publishing in it). In fact, Esdaile attended the IFLA meeting that Wilson and Bishop attended (the latter becoming IFLA's second president). It's currently unknown, to me, how well disseminated LQ was at this time, only half way through its second volume. The conference took place in August 1931 and there is no submission date attached to this piece. Esdaile was elected as an IFLA vice-president along with Marcel Godet, who became IFLA's third president, and Bishop who became the second president. Quick IFLA past president info.
Reflection: I didn't expect to get so much out of this article.
* [[lq:Author-Reece]]
* [[lq:Affil-Columbia University]]
This entry is about:
Reece, Ernest J. (1932). What Library Schools Are Not. The Library Quarterly, 2(2), 106-112. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301878
Note: The second article of the second issue of the second volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "What Library Schools Are Not."
It was written by Ernest J. Reece, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Columbia University
Note: With some history of the library school. It's early purpose, Reece argues:
Some device was needed to turn more people into library work, and that quickly. The one adopted, namely, the library school, became by pre-emption and default the agency not alone for training but in large degree that for recruiting, selecting, measuring, apprenticing, and placing (p. 107).
Then:
Diversity of function, therefore, is a thing by which the library schools of today have come honestly, and which, incidentally, there is no likelihood that they ever can abandon wholly (p. 107).
And the purpose of this paper:
It is fitting to consider, however, to what extent present conditions warrant its persistence. In doing so, the several offices referred to above will be touched in sequence (p. 107).
By offices, Reece means the actions listed above: recruiting, selecting, measuring, apprenticing, and placing.
Note: This is an important line of argument that gives credence to the argument that library schools should not be vocational schools:
It is to be remembered, however, that school conditions differ signally [significantly?] from field situations in general and violently from specific field situations, that the circumstances and incentives in a school year for a given student are often abnormal, and that predictions based on school performance therefore are not to be made with certainty (p. 109).
Note: In short, Reece's final note:
The positive principle inescapable in any thoroughgoing consideration of school activities is that the first and last duty of a school is to instruct. This is true for library schools as well as for schools of other types; and in the case of library schools, the time has come to assert it, and perhaps to shout it, rather than merely to allow it (p. 111).
Reflection: It's helpful (and suggestive by the author) to read this article by keeping in mind the difference between and the evolution of the library school of the 1880s and 1890s with the library school of the 1930s.
* [[lq:Author-Boyer]]
* [[lq:Affil-Bowdoin College]]
This entry is about:
Kenneth J. Boyer. (1932). Interlibrary Loans in College and University Libraries. The Library Quarterly, 2(2), 113-134. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301879
Note: The third article of the second issue of the second volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Interlibrary Loan in College and University Libraries."
It was written by Kenneth J. Boyer, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Bowdoin College
Note: A survey of libraries about their interlibrary loan practices.
Note: Interlibrary loaning is one area where libraries have truly progressed, at least in practice, and the advancement in this area is partially due to the ease of fulfilling these requests (the available infrastructure, broadly envisioned).
Although I have experienced a library denying a request of mine (it is rare), I cannot imagine that it would be acceptable as a matter of routine today:
To be sure, we restricted our own requests to books for use in serious research; only once did we attempt to borrow a book for an undergraduate, an exceptional case in which the student was doing what amounted to Master's degree research (even then we were refused the loan) (p. 113).
Notice, also, the level of expectation and the level of regulation or gatekeeping in the above passage. The librarian neither expects to receive a request nor to fulfill a request. Further, requests are only really considered in matters of serious research. This meant that the librarian had to make a judgement call about the seriousness of the patron's needs and that there existed a kind of a decision rule with regards to undergraduates --- that their information needs will rarely be greater than the cost to request a loan from another library.
Given this, however, the purpose of this article involves finding a way to progress in this matter---to give more attention to the information needs of all patrons. I know a little of this history, but it would be worthwhile to investigate more deeply---to see what documentation existed that discussed this matter.
Reflection: There is in this article a really important lesson about information expectations. We expect it to be free and quickly accessible today. Tracing these expectations, from a history of ideas perspective, would be an important research topic.
Note: Two important statements and several important implications in this passage:
One library reported that in certain cases faculty members and graduate students are enabled to visit other libraries by a fund provided for that purpose.
And the rest of the paragraph and second important statement:
One southern college for negroes reported that they borrowed freely, "as libraries in the South are not always open to us"---which tells its own story (p. 120).
Note: On privacy:
Only 19 (9.3 per cent) replied that they required the name of the reader for whom the material was borrowed, while 167 (82.2 per cent) answered that they did not do so (p. 121).
Note: On the use of union catalogs:
Borrowers are now better able to learn where their books may be obtained; the Union list of serials definitely locates periodical holdings, and requests for these may be diversified; some localities have regional union lists of serials; there are certain printed aids showing the location of books in special fields (p. 123).
Note: On the accessibility of information. There is an important relationship here between accessibility and expectations (see note above):
Consider for a moment the predicament of a library in New England with one of its books lent to a California library. The book is needed at home and must be recalled. A letter sent by regular mail would take five days to reach the California library; air mail would take about two and one-half days. One day would be lost in calling in the book and preparing it for mailing, and the return trip would take not less than seven days, usually more. This would mean a minimum of ten or eleven days and a maximum of fourteen or more. Meanwhile the local borrower must wait, usually not patiently. Or, for example, a book is absent from a library on the East coast for ten days to two weeks longer when it is lent to a library on the West coast than it is if it is lent anywhere in the adjoining states or even slightly farther way (p. 123).
The beginning of the next paragraph:
Nevertheless, it is to the everlasting credit of American college libraries that 139 (68.4 per cent) reported that they either lend, or would lend if asked, books and periodicals to libraries at a great distance from their own (p. 123).
Note: Although libraries overall seemed to suffer from few losses, it did occur and mostly seemed to happen in relation to the postal service. So this is kind of funny::
Nevertheless, there are losses, and it behooves each library to be as careful as possible. Several libraries reported that they did not ship books during the Christmas season, which is a wise precaution (p. 128).
Note: Who pays for interlibrary loans? The author didn't ask this question but he writes that, fortunately, some libraries provided this anyway. A couple more interesting scenarios:
1 library reported that professors paid the charges one way and that students paid all charges (p. 129).
And:
One library, which originally paid all charges for the professors, made a change in its policy two years ago, requiring the professors to pay all charges; as a result there was a noticeable decrease in requests to borrow (p. 129).
Note: They weren't always a fan of interlibrary loans, as one librarian wrote in:
Consumes much valuable time. It proves to be a costly practice in many ways" (p. 130).
Note: Still an important consideration for any school that builds a new program:
There is the problem of the college or university giving graduate work without the necessary library equipment to care adequately for the needs of its graduate students (p. 130).
Note: Article ends with a letter about a statewide cooperative plan. Important ending and an important topic, one that would eventually shape the future of library administration.
* [[lq:Author-Crüwell]]
* [[lq:Affil-University Library]]
This entry is about:
G. A. Crüwell. (1932). Contributions to Egyptian Penmanship. The Library Quarterly, 2(2), 135-137. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301880
Note: The fourth article of the second issue of the second volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Contributions to Egyptian Penmanship."
It was written by G. A. Crüwell, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University Library (Vienna, Austria)
Note: A very brief commentary on early Egyptian scribes. Includes two plates (photos) of some early Egyptian pictographs and hieroglyphics.
Note: It is an interesting piece. I'm trying to understand the editorial intention of a piece like this, and when these kinds of pieces go extinct in this journal.
* [[lq:Author-Borden]]
* [[lq:Affil-Dartmouth College]]
This entry is about:
Borden, Arnold K. (1932). Seventeenth-Century American Libraries. The Library Quarterly, 2(2), 135-137. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301881
Note: The fifth article of the second issue of the second volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Seventeenth-Century American Libraries."
It was written by Arnold K. Borden, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Dartmouth College
Note: This is a really neat history. Consider how important a thesaurus was:
One gentleman, for instance, made a gift in 1849 to the Harvard Library of a thesaurus, in four volumes, upon condition that he would have free access to it at any time and that, in the event of having a son who needed it, he might have the privilege of recovery (pp. 139-140).
Note: Nice description of the public library (p. 140) built by the will of Captain Robert Keayne (see also Jesse Shera's [[http://uky.worldcat.org/oclc/575422|//Foundations of the Public Library//].
Note: There's a story about a man named Increase Mather and his library. Turns out Increase Mather is the father of Cotton Mather. Didn't know that. Interesting names.
Note: Regarding Reverend Thomas Bray:
It is difficult, in any discussion of early libraries, to eliminate the Reverend Thomas Bray, rector in the 1690s of the church of Sheldon, England (pp. 145-146).
And:
His genius presided over the origin of so many collections that he is easily entitled to the nook of a prophet in the history of libraries (pp. 146-147).
Note: Nice, short history. Pleasure to read. Borden's second article in LQ so far.
Reading notes for the second volume and third issue of The Library Quarterly.
To return to the list of notes on this volume: volume-2
* [[lq:Author-Uhlendorf]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Michigan]]
This entry is about:
Uhlendorf, B. A. (1932). The Invention of Printing and Its Spread till 1470: With Special Reference to Social and Economic Factors. The Library Quarterly, 2(3), 179-231. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301902
Note: The first article of the third issue of the second volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Invention of Printing and Its Spread till 1470: With Special Reference to Social and Economic Factors."
It was written by B. A. Uhlendorf, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Michigan
Note: On research in early printing, its relation to "scientific investigation" and on "connecting it to other fields of human knowledge":
When one reviews the literature on early printing, which, since about 1900, has been a field of thorough scientific investigation, one cannot but realize that the time has come when the student of incunabula must enliven the product of his labors by relating it to other fields of human knowledge (p. 179).
Uhlendorf claims that the "spiritual awakening" that took hold of Europe before the invention of the printing press was a necessary condition for the invention of the printing press.
And the rise of the city, in medieval society, was also a necessary condition. The exchange of goods and services enabled the exchange of print.
And the rise of the gild system in the city.
And the importance of the merchant at this time:
He [the merchant] provided himself with the new works at the spring and fall fairs, and thus contributed his share toward the promulgation of ideas (p. 182).
Note: As today (i.e., the web), the importance of "youth" to the rise and acceptance of printing:
The spirit of the German universities, if indeed their superannuated scholasticism can be called "spirit," was lifeless, pedantic, factional, and it was youth which revolted against ossification in its attempt to open the gates of the universities to the new ideas, which many of them had imbibed during years of study at Italian universities (pp. 185-186).
Note: After describing the method of instruction given by professors at the time (they spoke mostly from memory) and the limited availability of poor copies of their lectures:
We feel that the great need for mechanical reproduction of manuscripts was not so much an economic necessity as it was a dire need for more---and, above all, for more correct---texts (p. 187).
Note: This is relevant today, as an important function of printing and the disruption of the web:
Indeed, the Chinese word for a print and for a seal is one and the same: it implies authentication (p. 187).
Note: The author notes the importance of Chinese experimentation with printing, preceding Gutenberg 400 years, and paper-making.
Note: This is interesting: print as a new type face or print as mimicry of handwriting:
While for Gutenberg it was an essential principle to reproduce handwriting with great accuracy, even to imperfect line-endings, Schoeffer abandoned this practice and did the best with the material he had. Comparing, for example, his Durandus with Gutenberg's Catholicon, one cannot but see that, while to Schoeffer the letter was more or less a unit which merely contributed toward forming a word, Gutenberg, like a copyist, must have considered for his unit the word, using all sorts of tied letters and frequently resorting to the file (p. 195).
Note: On Peter Schoeffer:
Besides introducing into printing the practice of using colophons, Schoeffer was the first to use more than one size of font of type in one book (p. 195).
Reflection: I keep wondering, who is Uhlendorf's audience? Is it librarians? Is it library science scholars? An interesting project would involve tracing this.
Note: More on Schoeffer and his contribution to printing:
Schoeffer, on the other hand, gradually freed printing from too slavish copying of manuscript books. He introduced almost perfect line-endings, which, however, was also striven for by Pfister in his later works, even if he had to divide a word in quite a ludicrous manner (p. 198).
Note: This seems important in regards to the universalizing (for lack of a better word at the moment) of print. That is, what we have here could be at least an early kind of Copernican Revolution, in the sense that the standardization of font and typeface away from the idiosyncrasies of personal handwriting functioned to de-personalize the author -- to make less provincial. Furthermore, perhaps there is a relation here between the de-personalization of the author with respect to print and Merton's universalism norm with regards to the function of a scientist --- it's not the scientist that is important, it is the science; it's not the author that is important, it's the content. And for that content to be disseminated, it could not be provincial or too personal or suffer from local "archetypes."
While Gutenberg cut his types on local manuscript models and imitated manuscripts even in the composition of the page, and while later printers cut their own type after the style of writing of their region, perhaps even after the book hand of the particular manuscript to be copied, it is only natural that they should soon find out that it was much easier to design new type after printing books. Moreover, when the local market was well supplied and the sale of books began to depend upon more distant localities, they probably found it necessary to use fonts that were not of too local a character. In other words, the number of archetypes (Urtypen), as Haebler calls them, became less and less (p. 212).
Note: On the beginnings of publishing houses:
Again very early there prevails a certain commercial aspect; the business of printing became associated with the art of printing. A master printer perhaps hired helpers on short-term contracts, or even for the printing of a certain book only; printers banded together to form organizations; scholars either made financial arrangements with printers for the publication of one or several works, or hired some artisan, financed the establishment of a shop, and legally assured themselves of a certain percentage of the earnings---in short, we have the beginning of the publishing business (p. 225).
Note: More on the universalism:
While the German printers tenaciously held to their local type faces, the typographers of Italy, especially those of Venice, created characters which could be adopted universally, for, indeed, they had to count upon the sale of their works in all parts of Europe (p. 229).
* [[lq:Author-Oehler]]
* [[lq:Affil-Universitätsbibliothek Frankfurt am Main]]
This entry is about:
Oehler, Richard. (1932). Buch und Bibliotheken unter der Perspektive Goethe / Goethe's Attitude toward Books and Libraries. The Library Quarterly, 2(3), 232-249. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301903
Note: The second article of the third issue of the second volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Buch und Bibliotheken unter der Perspektive Goethe / Goethe's Attitude toward Books and Libraries."
It was written by Richard Oehler, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Universitätsbibliothek Frankfurt am Main / Frankfurt University Library
Note: The article is published in both German and English -- alternating pages between each language. Interestingly, and I don't know if this is common practice when journals do this, the page numbers are continuous despite the breaks in language.
Reflection: I wouldn't have guessed that I'd be reading about Nietzsche, Shopenhauer, and Goethe in a library science journal.
Reflection: I think one reason why I keep returning to the idea that the people of this era's experience is not much different than ours, and that their questions are not much different than ours, is because their experience of their own information explosion is quite similar to our own experience of information explosion. While their experience may have been a physical one, and ours a digital one, it seems qualitatively the same in many ways. In fact, our experience seems entailed by theirs -- not necessarily an inevitable outcome but a highly likely one.
One characteristic seems to distinguish our age from all that has gone before; this is our vivid personal interest and deep-seated intellectual curiosity in everything, men and objects, outside of ourselves (p. 233).
Then:
We strive to comprehend concrete reality and we reproduce more often than we create. This is the source of our superabundance of factual literature that endeavors to include the least detail. We are, above all else, men who have read and have written excessively (p. 233).
Note: The book and the self; the book and universalism. One of the most important statements on reading that I have seen in our literature:
The book is one of the most important and---let us say it frankly---one of the most baneful links between our intellectual and spiritual lives and those of other men of the present and past. Without the book we cannot get out of ourselves or back into what has gone before. A Crusoe ideal of life would be madness. That is why we live with books and value them as our very lives. We must thus value them, and yet we constantly strive against them, for they carry a threat to "snuff out the vital spark of independent thought" (p. 237).
Note: Doing and reading:
To Goethe action and reality are everything. "In the beginning was the deed." He finds it impossible to grant equal value and dignity to the word, which is written and read. And today, a century and a half later, that is still the best description of the disharmony of our inner spiritual life, real accomplishments versus literary production. Actual deeds, on the one hand; the book, on the other---real life or the book---present the same problem to us today as they did to Goethe (p. 239).
Note: Powerful stuff:
Goethe battled against excessive writing and excessive reading, much as Shopenhauer and Nietzsche did later, and as much as the Old Testament preacher, thousands of years before Goethe, with his plaint: "And furthermore, my son, be admonished, of making many books there is no end." Goethe, before all of his contemporaries, foresaw prophetically the coming mass production of books" (p. 243).
And then he quotes two passages from Goethe, one on the production of books and writings and the other on "voracious reader", which sounds like a description of present-day times and the madness of production (e.g., blogs):
And about the voracious reader:
Nowadays everybody reads, and many readers run through a book precipitately, and then take pen in hand themselves to propagate with remarkable facility a book of their own from the book just read! "Do you want me, my friend, to write about other literary productions, and thereby increase the existing mass of writing? Shall I thus spread my views, to afford others an opportunity to proclaim their views about my views, and thus keep in action the swaying of the groaning scales?" (p. 243).
Note: See my notes about the theme of decentralization, which seems to be a result, as I'm coming to believe, of the increased result of the production of information:
Possibly the almost insurmountable problems of space in the metropolitan libraries of the future could be anticipated through the following steps. Goethe disclaimed a desire to consolidate physically the libraries of several cities, though they were close to one another. One might easily conceive a plan to protect the metropolitan libraries of the future from making accessions to the limit of possibility by establishing special reserve stocks at certain points and thereby relieving the burden of the central libraries. In that way one would, to a certain extent, curb the tendency to a physical concentration in one place, as is now the case. This thought can only be suggested here. In actual experience its practicability will be increased more and more with the amplification and multiplication and cheapening of the means of transportation from city to city, from country to country, and across the seas (p. 247).
Note: And we are simply carrying out the work that our predecessors began:
After all, what we are concerned with is "virtual consolidation"--we always go back to Goethe--i.e., the possibility of encompassing the material in libraries by means of catalogues, and, at the same time, of making the deposits accessible and useful, whether in the local library or elsewhere (pp. 247-249).
And:
Thus throughout the world an active effort is actually being made to master, by means of bibliographic organization, the flood of scholarly publications. At the time time this method will serve future generations, as an organization of scholarship itself (p. 249).
* [[lq:Author-Reece]]
* [[lq:Affil-Columbia University]]
This entry is about:
Reece, Ernest J. (1932). The Student Load in Library Schools. The Library Quarterly, 2(3), 250-267. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301904
Note: The third article of the third issue of the second volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Student Load in Library Schools."
It was written by Ernest J. Reece, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Columbia University
Note: This article should be interesting. The aim is to simply gather an understanding of the norms around course loads. The data is based on a survey sent to schools that are members of the then Association of American Library Schools. Members of the individual schools collected data in a number of ways, and Reece comments on this in the first page or so of the article.
Note: Here is one area that computers may have helped solve or lessen the problem of:
There might seem to be an element of bad management in expecting the student who has spent several hours on a book selection problem to devote further hours to typing it (p. 253).
Note: Lot of discussion about what is a proper work load for students. Good stuff but also ordinary. However, the gist of Reece's argument can be summed up with this thoughtful closing remark:
The aim should be to compose courses not only in such a way as to obviate congestion and panic but so as to permit the serving of readily assimilable rather than large portions, and so as to leave leisure for the imagination of the student to play upon the material presented; and finally to bring classes to the close of the year with a sense of having done not too superficially the work undertaken, and with the vigor and enthusiasm necessary for effective effort in the library field (p. 264).
* [[lq:Author-Reeves]]
* [[lq:Author-Russell]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Reeves, Floyd W., & Russell, John Dale. (1932). The Administration of the Library Budget. The Library Quarterly, 2(3), 268-278. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301905
Note: The fourth article of the third issue of the second volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Administration of the Library Budget."
It was written by Floyd W. Reeves and John Dale Russell, who were affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago
Note: An extension of their earlier study, also published in LQ. My notes on that: The Relation of the College Library to Recent Movements in Higher Education, LQ 1(1), 57-66.
Note: This study was the result of quite a bit of travel:
Although the great majority of the colleges studied are in the Central West, information was gathered from institutions located in twenty-two different states. All the data are based on information gathered by personal visits in either the year 1928-29 or the year 1929-30. The studies related to financial matters are based upon a painstaking analysis of the accounts in the business offices of the institutions.
Note: When did people stop using the median! It seems common practice during this time (and more accurate than today's common use of the mean):
Investigation as to the amount of expenditures for the library in the various colleges included in this study showed that the median annual expenditure per student for this purpose is $12.25. Institutions holding the highest type of accreditation, i.e., those on the approved list of the Association of American Universities, spend notably more per student ($14.21) than is spent by institutions not on the approved list ($9.03). The typical sum spend for library services is 4 1/2-5 per cent of the entire educational expenditure (p. 269).
Note: Quite a bit of discussion about how libraries allocate book collection funds. One dominating practice of the day was to allocate book collection funds by college department. Some libraries even went the route of a flat tax--so that no matter the department, its needs, or its use of the library, each department received the same base allotment.
Note: The authors discuss a number of important factors in book fund allocation:
The development of a satisfactory distribution of book funds among departments is actually a rather complicated matter. There are at least six important factors to be taken into account in allocating funds for new books to departments (p. 271).
Note: The authors comment on the above six factors:
A review of the six factors which should be taken into account in allotting funds for new books to various departments shows how complex the problem is. Clearly, no cut-and-dried formula, applicable alike to all institutions, can be expected to work satisfactorily. Two of the factors--the amount of new material coming out in the several fields, and the cost of books per volume unit in the several subjects--can well be reduced to a constant which is valid for all colleges alike. Another factor, the enrolments in the respective departments, can be reduced to statistical terms; and the keeping of adequate circulation statistics will yield valuable data on the relative use of library materials by the several departments. The last two factors discussed--the existing condition of the library collection, and the needs of new instructors--require individual attention in each college (pp. 273-274).
Note: An important comment, which I'm glad to see, because it hasn't and will most likely always be this way:
A matter that complicates still further the allocation of book funds to departments is the fact that colleges are utterly lacking in uniformity in their departmental organization (p. 274).
And, they shouldn't be classified as such:
Furthermore, these departmental groupings do not correspond closely in detail to the systems used in classifying library books (p. 274).
Note: This problem went away a long time ago, but I can see, for reasons I'll skip now, a possible resurgence:
A final problem relates to whether the funds allotted for the purchase of new books for the several departments shall be considered a part of the departmental budget or a part of the library budget (p. 275).
* [[lq:Author-Mackensen]]
* [[lq:Affil-No Affil]]
This entry is about:
Mackensen, Ruth Stellhorn. (1932). Four Great Libraries of Medieval Baghdad. The Library Quarterly, 2(3), 279-299. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301906
Note: The fifth article of the third issue of the second volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Four Great Libraries of Medieval Baghdad."
It was written by Ruth Stellhorn Mackensen, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Hartford, Connecticut (No affiliation)
Note: Begins with a brief overview of libraries in Baghdad and their collections and then "describes four of the great libraries of Baghdad and the institutions which housed them" (p. 280).
Nice paragraph:
Probably the most interesting aspect of these libraries is the important place they held in the cultural life of the time. They were no musty storehouses where books lay seldom used and at the mercy of ignorant attendants. Instead, one sees them as centers in which assembled literary men and learned doctors. Books were gathered by men who loved them, and were in constant use by scholars and eager students. These libraries were busy places. The librarians, frequently men noted for their attainments in many fields, went out or sent others to gather rare and precious books which, if necessary, were copied and translated into Arabic. The position of librarian in Muslim lands during the medieval ages must have been an honorable one, for in these four libraries, as in others, it was often filled by great scholars, chosen apparently for their knowledge of books. They were figures important in the society of their times and often at court, members, rather than mere servants, of the cultured and learned groups which gathered in the libraries (p. 281).
Note: The article is interesting, beautifully written, and I'm learning a lot because much of the topic lies outside my scope of knowledge.
Note: I like this passage:
Abd al Salām recalled an occasion when he was present at a class conducted by a noted grammarian, Abu Saīd al Sirāfi. A student was reading aloud from a philological work, and the master interrupted him to dissertate on a fine point of grammar illustrated by a quoted poem. Abd al Salām differed openly with the professor's explanation, thereby humiliating Al Sirāfi's son who was present. He arose at once, returned to his shop (he was a butter merchant), sold his business, and took to study. He devoted himself exclusively to learning until he became a scholar of the highest rank, and then composed a treatise in which he explained the troublesome verses which had brought embarrassment to his august father (pp. 291-292).
Note: Another nice remark (leaving out the anecdote, which is delightful):
The somewhat trivial anecdote shows the concern of a librarian for the books in his care, and also that librarians were not above playing the sort of pranks one might rather expect from run boys (p. 293).
Reflection: A few weeks ago I was telling someone about this reading project of mine and I said that if I were able to teach a library history doctoral seminar, I could see myself assigning at least the first couple of volumes of LQ for reading. I think that leads to an important argument for my thesis about the importance of the journal as a whole unit as opposed to an isolated reading of selected articles. I'll need to pursue this in my paper.
Note: The author takes a jab:
Perhaps it is an early example of the type of school which seeks to attract students by imposing buildings and modern equipment rather than by high standards of scholarship (p. 298).
* [[lq:Author-Hanson]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Hanson, J. C. M. (1932). Dr. Gottlieb August Crüwell, 1866-1931. The Library Quarterly, 2(3), 301-302. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301907
Note: The sixth article of the third issue of the second volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Dr. Gottlieb August Crüwell, 1866-1931."
It was written by J. C. M. Hanson, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago
Note: I wasn't planning to comment on non-research or non-scholarly articles, but I also didn't realize that I had saved such a piece. The last article in this issue is a notice that Dr. Gottlieb August Crüwell had passed away. Hanson writes a little about his life and his contributions, which include a piece that was published in the previous issue. Hanson comments are touching and I'm surprised to find myself a little sad. A photograph of Dr. Crüwell resides on the europeana.eu digital library Crüwell, Gottlieb August.
Reading notes for the second volume and fourth issue of The Library Quarterly.
To return to the list of notes on this volume: volume-2
* [[lq:Author-Waples]]
* [[lq:Author-Carnovsky]]
* [[lq:Author-Randall]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Waples, Douglas, Carnovsky, Leon, & Randall, William M. (1932). The Public Library in the Depression. The Library Quarterly, 2(4), 321-343. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301919
Note: The first article of the fourth issue of the second volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Public Library in the Depression."
It was prepared by Douglas Waples, Leon Carnovsky, and William M. Randall, who were affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago
Note: I use the word prepared above because this article has no official author. Instead, the first footnote states the following, as a footnote to the title of the article:
This article was prepared by Douglas Waples, Leon Carnovsky, and William M. Randall from data collected by the Library quarterly (p. 321).
I feel, then, as if I'm violating something (perhaps a rule) by explicitly placing Waples, Carnovsky, and Randall's names in the reference above. It's as if the Library Quarterly itself is the author of this piece (supposed corporate authorship?). However, according to the index for the volume, these three men are listed as the authors. Randall, it should be noted, is the journal's managing editor.
Note: Aside from the authorship issue, given the topic of this article and the recent recession, this should make for a really interesting piece.
To get started:
First, decreased revenues from taxation have resulted in smaller appropriations for library purposes (p. 321).
Huh, sounds current.
The second respect in which the library has felt the effects of the depression is in the increased service the library is called upon to render (p. 322).
That also sounds current.
And then this:
We read that people out of work are spending more time either in reading for recreation - to "kill time" - or in reading seriously, to learn the fundamental economics involved in the depression or to acquire new educational equipment in the hope of improving their chances for a new job (p. 322).
And this, the reaction, sounds current:
Small wonder, then, that the leaders in the profession have raised the cry against drastic reductions in library acquisitions, for seldom before has the library stood out so sharply as a source of individual hope and social amelioration (p. 322).
Note: This is a good question / assumption to highlight:
Theoretically, if library service is to remain constant, the library appropriation should be actually increased (p. 325).
Note: Lots of relevant (to today) questions being explored in this piece -- about collections, service, salaries, buildings, and so on. I'll leave that out of these notes, but this is a nice piece of wisdom, I think:
The foregoing data should interest the librarian in so far as he can place his own institution in the general picture. But such orientation demands a knowledge of local conditions affecting other libraries like his own. Without such knowledge it does him little good to know whether or not the other libraries are effecting the same economies. The fact that other libraries of the same size and type are reducing the same items of expense in the same proportion does not in itself show whether his own budgeting is wise or unwise (p. 337).
The questions raised in the paragraph following the above passage are brilliant.
Note: My goodness, this sounds like the ROI literature of today:
Library officials will be forced, as never before in this country, to rest their claims for appropriations, not upon sentimental appeals, but upon the sort of evidence that city officials obtain from other departments. Library development may easily receive a permanent setback if, when called to account, the profession cannot demonstrate, specifically and convincingly, the nature and scope of its service (p. 338).
Note: This article continues to be brilliant.
Note: On not being trivial (this is also brilliant):
Most librarians testify to large increases in economics, sociology, political science, and history. But what are we to conclude? That the muddle which politics has made of economics is driving men to John Stuart Mill and his peers for consolation, that the reading is mostly current history of the Charles A. Beard type, or that the readers are at last taking the crisis seriously enough to read forthright explanations of it in Stuart Chase, Laidler the unfettered spokesman of the left (p. 341)?
Note: This is fascinating (it immediately follows the above paragraph:
The writer has checked a list of the better-known left-wing writers against the catalogues of two city libraries and found them very poorly represented. The problem of censorship involved here is incidentally a matter of critical importance to public confidence in the library (p. 341).
Reflection: This is simply one of the best articles I've read. Waples, Carnovsky, and Randall deserve their status as intellectual giants in library science.
* [[lq:Author-Leland]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Leland, Simeon E. (1932). Observations on Financing Libraries. The Library Quarterly, 2(4), 344-366. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301920
Note: The second article of the fourth issue of the second volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Observations on Financing Libraries."
It was written by Simeon E. Leland, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago
Note: The second article on the Great Depression and libraries.
Note: On valuating public services:
The first problem of government, therefore, is to evaluate collective social wants and create means for sating them. The techniques employed in making these valuations have to date been very crude, consisting largely in the political appraisal of voters' demands rather than in the scientific weighing of the social utilities of various governmental services or combinations of functions (pp. 344-345).
Note: More on the role of government (and an indication of future dominance of cost / benefit analyses):
In such a set-up every institution supported by public funds can reasonably be called upon to demonstrate its social utility, to prove its capacity to render service on a least social cost basis, and to demonstrate the extent of the benefits conferred upon the community (p. 345).
Leland then notes that the value of the public library, in terms of its government support, should be weighed against the value of other services and functions the government funds and supports, and this all lies with the support of the taxpayers.
Note: The Depression is influencing the important questions (note the causal link between economic scarcity and questions about essential services). Note also the attitude about recreation:
Is the library so vital a part of the educational system that its facilities should be within reasonable reach of all of the inhabitants of the country? Or is the function of the library essentially recreational rather than educational, so that it should be classified with the permissive functions of government rather than with activities rendering essential public services (p. 347).
Note: Bottom of page 348, there's an important discussion of library boards. Connect this section with the two articles written by Joeckel on public libraries and governance Joeckel 1931a and Joeckel 1931b.
Note: A discussion about government centralization and how libraries should respond:
Many library boards, with their sovereign independence to hire and fire irrespective of municipal civil service codes, and their independent tax levies and self-controlled budgets and treasuries, will oppose this general movement to simplify and improve the effectiveness of the governmental machine. A large part of this opposition probably is based upon the fear that the change will decrease the funds available for library support. To hedge against this, the libraries should study their financial problems, the methods for improving services, and the means for reducing costs (p. 350).
Note: Then more on the reasons why librarians should provide data that highlights their value. See page 351.
This discussion shows that the early drive to understand a library's community arose out of a possible need to justify the existence of the library as a tax funded institution. The input / output / outcome literature surely stems from these early discussions. The questions at the top of page 352 are still being asked.
Note: On the type of analysis:
This method of approaching the problem is designated as "unite cost analysis." The cost accounting methods which are here involved have been applied for many years to private undertakings, but only recently have they been developed as aids in intelligent fiscal administration for governmental bodies. So far as is known, the unit cost approach has not, as yet, been applied to library work. The operations of the library, however, can be readily adapted to this approach. Costs of library circulation, reference service, cataloguing, indexing, and bibliography-making can all be calculated on this basis (p. 353-354).
Note: An important discussion about costs of personnel and costs of collections takes place on pages 355-357. The discussion is based on data. The following quote is from the first sentence of the main paragraph on page 357 and highlights the importance of the librarian as a professional (even if not stated as such) relative to the material at hand in the library. The whole paragraph is highly interesting:
These personal services may also have greater social utility than the mere aggregation of reading matter and may be required to secure the greatest usefulness from book collections (p. 357).
And then, more on the importance of the librarian (as I've stated elsewhere, the librarian is what makes a library, otherwise a library is simply a warehouse):
Such a concept of the library implies more than well-filled book shelves with a clerk to dispense the volumes. It calls for adequate personnel to carry the library to its patrons, to increase the velocity of book circulation, to interest children in literature and to tell them stories, to hunt up the sources of information on any subject, to cross-index collections in order to maximize their usefulness, and to do a score of things which trained librarians daily accomplish (p. 357).
Note: I haven't commented on this yet, but there is a lot of useful data in this early articles. For example, this article cites library income per patron.
Note: This is somewhat funny, in a depressing sort of way, because it hasn't really changed:
The folly of drawing political boundary lines within which governments are to be locally supported with little or no relation to wealth or taxable capacity is rapidly being recognized. Investigations of these absurdities and inequalities in the field of library finance have not been made, but the meager income available to many small libraries reflects these conditions (p. 364).
Note: Ha, libraries have always had to apply methods to limit the monopolizing of resources:
One library has even imposed a service charge for the use of city directories and similar publications providing they are monopolized by single readers for more than a stipulated maximum time (p. 366).
And after listing a variety of ways libraries can levy fees, this important note:
Nevertheless, the revenue possibilities of such fees are probably very limited (p. 366).
Note: Interesting note about the ultimate value of the library (not in the hands of the librarians):
It remains for others to decide whether the claim of the library to a portion of the public funds is equal to, or greater than, or even inferior to, the claims of other departments and other public services. This question as to what governments should do with their limited resources is not for the librarians to determine, and in the long run the decision will not be theirs (p. 366).
And thus begins the eighty year effort to argue for the value of the library so that the public continues to support it:
They can help secure an answer favorable to themselves and to their cause by studying the institution which they manage and by learning the facts concerning their services and their fiscal operation (p. 366).
* [[lq:Author-Gosnell]]
* [[lq:Author-Schütz]]
* [[lq:Affil-No Affil]]
This entry is about:
Gosnell, Charles F., and Schütz, Géza. (1932). Goethe the Librarian. The Library Quarterly, 2(4), 367-374. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301921
Note: The third article of the fourth issue of the second volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Goethe the Librarian."
It was written by Charles F. Gosnell and Géza Schütz, who were affiliated with:
Affiliation: New York City (No affiliation)
Note: More Goethe
More discussion about Goethe and what may be considered the problem with the glut of information and managing that glut. There was early interest in a union catalog, although that term is not used. Instead, the German term "'Gesamt-Catalog'" is used and other phrases including the "'Real-Catalog'" and the "'Nominal-Catalog'" (p. 369). Essentially, the desire to unionize collections, either physically or indexically, has existed for quite some time.
Note: The number of social science articles in these early volumes of *LQ* are interesting especially in comparison to the number of historical / humanities articles.
Note: Incredible story related by Goethe on pages 371-372.
Note: The author summarizes Goethe's accomplishments:
After two years of work, in December, 1819, Goethe was able to look back with satisfaction on the work accomplished and report what he had done. A veritable revolution had taken place. The several rooms that held the library had been joined by doorways, partitions and screens had been fixed, numerous repairs effected, and painting done; and, of course, a wall had been razed and a garden improved, and a door had been cut into a room once used by the medical faculty. In the library proper, an accession book had been started, a new "Ausleihebuch" or loan-book had been introduced, a name-catalogue on slips was in the making, classification had been carried through the pure and applied sciences and was progressing in other fields, and many other reforms were being made. In November, 1824, after seven years of work, Goethe, at the age of seventy-five, was able to report that his task had been completed (p. 373).
Note: Goethe's fascination with the loan-book. See top of page 374.
Note: Of course I've read Goethe, but I had no idea, given these two articles on him, about his relationship and work with libraries. Really quite fascinating. Needs more exploration.
* [[lq:Author-Iiams]]
* [[lq:Affil-Huntington Library]]
This entry is about:
Iiams, Thomas M. (1932). Preservation of Rare Books and Manuscripts in the Huntington Library. The Library Quarterly, 2(4), 375-386. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301922
Note: The fourth article of the fourth issue of the second volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Preservation of Rare Books and Manuscripts in the Huntington Library."
It was written by Thomas M. Iiams, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: The Huntington Library
Note: The first page of the article contains a photograph of a "vacuum fumigator" that was designed by the library. Incredible photo. Kind of illustrates how self-sufficient libraries must have been at the time.
Note: This is a particularly interesting comment with regards to the future development and mission concerning special collections:
The creation of "treasure rooms" in several large public and university libraries during recent years shows a definite trend toward conservation for posterity, making it clear that librarians in research institutions are become definitely receptive to ideas other than those mainly governing the purchase and circulation of books (p. 375).
Note: The article is about bookworms, or the treatment of books that are plagued by bookworms. I did not expect this.
Note: When the librarians at Huntington started searching for a solution to the pest, they sometimes received this humorous response:
Others reported that their libraries were free from all insect pests, and seemed a bit surprised to learn that there was a bookworm other than the human variety (p. 376).
Note: The bookworms (a kind of beetle) were a serious problem (not just for the library but for the sake of preserving knowledge). While the article is written with some humor at times, it does also reflect the gravity the situation and what is at stake. Consider:
Bear in mind, also, that in each case we had to satisfy ourselves that there would be no deleterious effects on the materials fumigated, either now or two centuries from now. This, of course, necessitated months of research which would have been difficult without the very kind co-operation of the California Institute of Technology (p. 381).
Note: The article does go beyond the issue of bookworms and discusses climate and other atmospheric concerns, including mold as well as air polution in industrial cities, related to the long-term preservation of books. For example:
Our own investigation indicated that a temperature of 70 F. and a relative humidity of 50 per cent, maintained day in and day out, are ideal for the proper preservation of books and manuscripts. These precise conditions we have been able to maintain for about two years. Vellum manuscripts that curled and cracked when the humidity was low can now be conveniently handled with assurance that gold illuminations will not peel off (p. 385).
Note: Mentions more work needed with the issue of foxing.
* [[lq:Author-Macdonald]]
* [[lq:Affil-No Affil]]
This entry is about:
Macdonald, Duncan B. (1932). A Bibliographical and Literary Study of the First Appearance of the "Arabian Nights" in Europe. The Library Quarterly, 2(4), 387-420. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301923
Note: The fifth article of the fourth issue of the second volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "A Bibliographical and Literary Study of the First Appearance of the 'Arabian Nights' in Europe."
It was written by Duncan B. Macdonald, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Hartford, Connecticut (No Affiliation)
Note: I don't usually attempt to trace all the authors who have no stated affiliation, but the following line sparked by interest:
This, then, is an attempt to give an exact bibliographical description, a visu, of the original edition of Galland's Mille et une nuit, of certain early reprints and translations of the same, and of some other early editions of cognate books, all in my possession. The Galland editio princeps is exceedingly rare; even the copy in the Bibliothèque Nationale is incomplete; and no exact description of it seems so far to have been made (pp. 387-388).
Specifically, that Macdonald would have possession of these works made me think that he might be a rare book collector, and I thought it interesting that an early contributor to LQ would be one among this trade. A quick web search, though, shows that Macdonald was a professor, retired just around the time of the publication of this article. He has a inter-faith theological center named after him (if I have truly traced the correct Macdonald): The Duncan Black Macdonald Center for the Study of Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations. The following is an article that discusses the person in a little more detail (link in the above page): A Century of Arabic and Islamic Studies at Hartford Seminary.
Note: The article proceeds according to its title. It includes rather detailed bibliographical descriptions of the volumes of work that disseminated (first in France) the Arabian Nights stories in France in the early 18th century. These descriptions also include some background stories about the volumes.
Note: A new section titled "English Translation." This interesting bit:
There seems to be no clue as to when the Nights appeared first in English. Some unknown translator at a very early date turned Galland's artistic French into the strangest Grub Street English. Also he seems to have rendered from a La Haye edition.
I have not heard the term Grub Street English, but there's a Wikipedia page for it.
Note: I omit the detail, but this line says something about the audience Macdonald hopes to reach by publishing in LQ:
But the question belongs to the history of literature rather than to bibliography (p. 412).
Reading notes for the third volume and first issue of The Library Quarterly.
To return to the list of notes on this volume: volume-3
* [[lq:Author-Waples]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Waples, Douglas. (1933). Community Studies in Reading: 1. Reading in the Lower East Side. The Library Quarterly, 3(1), 1-20. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301940
Note: The first article of the first issue of the third volume of *The Library Quarterly* is titled "Community Studies in Reading: 1. Reading in the Lower East Side."
It was written by Douglas Waples, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago
Note: The article begins with a description of brief cultural and historical description of the community and explains why this community is an important focus of study for reading habits:
To understand the distribution of reading matter, one must be able to answer such questions as these: What proportion of the population are readers? From what sources or agencies (such as newstands, rental libraries, home libraries, settlement libraries, bookstores, pushcarts, book clubs, reading-rooms, and public libraries) do the readers get their reading? What kinds of reading matter and what proportion of each kind does each occupational group obtain from each source (p. 2)?
Note: Waples then details how to collect data and then asks the important question:
Granting the possibility of securing such facts, one may well ask what they are worth. There are at least four plausible answers (p. 3).
Note: The first is to measure "social intelligence" (p. 3). But here, he notes, it is not simply that a community reads but that a community reads well-balanced material:
If the writing be sincere, competent, and multi-partisan, the more widely it is read, the better for the whole community. Its consumption by the general reader is a fair measure of social consciousness, of the desire to meet critical issues rationally, and of unwillingness to evade them. Hence the facts about community reading on current social problems teach us much about man as a social animal. They help us to find out how social he is: according to his occupation, age, schooling, race, and habitat (p. 3).
Note the demographic characteristics he adds in the above passage.
Note: The second reason is to measure the value of reading. Even then, librarians and library scholars were dealing with alternate methods of communication, then it was radio, today it is the Internet. In the paragraph after the one below, he also mentions as sources of competition with reading: friends, motion pictures, museum exhibits, lectures, and school courses (p. 4):
Secondly, the facts show what reading is actually worth in the given community as a vehicle for ideas, and as compared with other arts of communication. One sure thing is that critical reading in some American communities is not provoked even by national disaster. The angels weep when devout public librarians foist "good reading" upon a radio-minded town (p. 3).
Thus:
Hence, before we take adult reading too seriously, it behooves us to learn how successfully reading competes with the other arts of communication (p. 4).
Note: A third reason is to measure the comparison between library reading and reading obtained from other sources. This point is a matter of economy and of, according to Waples, libraries being efficient agencies.
In the third place, and assuming that adult reading is sufficient in amount and distribution to be an> important source of ideas, we need to know how library reading in the given community compares with reading obtained from other sources, if only to avoid expensive duplication. Given a picture of the total reading situation, where does library reading fit in? To answer this question is the first step toward a planned economy of public librarianship, that is, a program aimed at results of cultural value to the whole community that are not accomplished by other agencies (p. 4).
It's interesting that he writes this:
In times of economic collapse, these questions matter a great deal more, particularly to the watchdogs of the city treasury. Hence, the urge toward self-preservation, if not professional curiosity, should make them interesting. Having mastered the essential problems of administration and come to grips with the psychology of reading, librarians now confront the mysteries of sociology. The present time is ripe for a formulation of social policy, and we
lack the necessary facts (p. 4).
Note: A fourth reason is to understand how to provide the appropriate reading material. This is an historically important reason:
A fourth reason for collecting the facts is that the more we know about the sort of reading most acceptable to different population groups, the better able we are to select good reading for the library. We cannot say what is good reading until we can answer the questions "good for whom?" and "good for what?" (p. 5).
Waples then criticizes the use of the Pulitzer award, but it would seem that any such device as an indicator of good reading would be sufficient for questioning, as a measure of what is good reading. Very interesting argument.
Note: Waples proceeds to discuss the neighborhood under study. This bit on sexual material, just by nature of being in this article, is fascinating:
There has been a perceptible decline in the sales of the sex magazines---partly due to the competition of salacious books and partly to the fact that sex magazines have not reduced their price; Gay parisienne, La Paree, Paris nights, Pep stories, Snappy stories, Spicy stories, and Ten story each sell for a quarter. These are obtainable only from the stands, including the ten or twelve stationary shops that sell old magazines for a very few cents, depending on how old they are (p. 7).
Note: Seems like book stores have always looked back to some golden age (of course, the following passage could simply be referring to times before the Depression):
Also, the proprietors know books. They impress one as good people---courageous in their determination to believe that this unhappy world will always contain readers of good books, yet wistful of the old days whenever the talk turns upon sales (p. 9).
Note: This is a really provoking description of a book store:
The famous shop of Maisel on Grand street deserves a book of its own. One rarely meets an individual more competent than the proprietor to select the sort of books that everyone should read; nor does one often feel the seductive fascination of books so strongly as when poking around his shelves. Forty-five years at the same address, a warm interest in people as such, and an instinct for the well-written book in any tongue and on any theme, have produced a literary shrine of unusual richness. It feels a holy place (p. 9).
Note: The next passage relates an interview, with quotes, with someone who sells books by a pushcart.
And then Waples, with or without explicit intention, makes a case for qualitative methodology:
Such people are mentioned with no interest of substituting sentiment for figures. They demonstrate the presence of thoroughly good people in the local book trades--nearly prostrate though the business is. Such people make for a qualitative influence of reading which numbers do not catch (p. 10).
Note: Next Waples begins to focus on the public library. He first describes the role of occupation and the kind of information the occupation variable can contain.
Occupation is the central fact in the lives of most Americans. Hence in comparing populations of any sort, it is convenient to compare the proportions engaged in different kinds of work. Occupation is perhaps the best single label, because it usually implies significant differences in schooling, intelligence, and economic status, and often implies differences in cultural status and age (p. 11).
Note: Interesting observation about the relationship between sex and reading (see page 12). Waples finds, surprisingly for him, that sex does not predict the amount of reading (both sexes read about the same amount) but it is able to say something about what is read.
Note: This is kind of funny. On page 13, Waples lists a number of reasons that affect library use. The list includes items that are still valid today, but this one is striking and telling of the times:
Among the conditions which obviously affect popular use of the library are ... the inability to smoke (which should bother some women as much as it bothers some men) ... (p. 13).
Note: I've left out a lot of details of this study, but I should note that the questions asked and the data presented is as sophisticated and as meaningful as anything done today.
Note: The conclusion of the article is poignant.
The wealth and variety of writing that records the spiritual and intellectual adventures of all manner of men in all countries during all these vicissitudes is available for our own guidance today. It stands ready to explain what any one of us has enough curiosity to learn regarding the chances for Western civilization to survive. Such reading is as valuable an experience for any rational person as modern society has to offer (p. 20).
* [[lq:Author-Kuhlman]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago Libraries]]
This entry is about:
Kuhlman, Augustus Frederick. (1933). Some Implications in the New Plan of the University of Chicago for College Libraries. The Library Quarterly, 3(1), 21-36. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301941
Note: The second article of the first issue of the third volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Some Implications in the New Plan of the University of Chicago for College Libraries."
It was written by Augustus Frederick Kuhlman, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago Libraries
Note: The article discusses the impact or implications resulting from changes that the University of Chicago President Robert Maynard had overseen (the *New Plan*). I've read about this before, but I can't recall which work it was. Will have to investigate later.
Note: The author then discusses how the library will support the New Plan. He discusses the new courses and the specific ways the library will support these courses. Very detailed.
Note: Nice observation:
Third, in this new curriculum and as part of the teaching method and content, books hold a position of major importance. But not just books, not even titles in a standard list, are called for. As was just pointed out, quality of titles, and specific titles for a specific purpose, is what counts. Once a college abolishes course credits and grades as a basis for granting a degree and tries to set up genuine and tested educational attainments as the prerequisite, the great problem becomes: How can the best that the human spirit has achieved be made available to the student? (p. 33).
Note: I'll have to search for where I read about Robert Maynard Hutchins and his work at the University of Chicago. It's at the tip of my tongue, but it'll have to wait till next week.
* [[lq:Author-Carnovsky]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Carnovsky, Leon. (1933). The Dormitory Library: An Experiment in Stimulating Reading. The Library Quarterly, 3(1), 37-65. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301942
Note: The third article of the first issue of the third volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Dormitory Library: An Experiment in Stimulating Reading."
It was written by Leon Carnovsky, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago
Note: The University of Chicago, in the 1931-32, opened a new dorm that offers new amenities to its students. Carnovsky seeks to understand how the new dorm, which has "two library rooms, one at either end of the building" (p. 37), influences reading.
The rooms (libraries) have ash-trays, a noted convenience. Interesting.
Note: The article does not (yet) make specific mention of the previous article that covered the University of Chicago's new educational plan, but it does discuss the new dorm with respect to that plan.
Note: The Graduate Library School maintains the dormitory libraries. This is on purpose -- as the School intentionally desired to maintain these dormitory libraries in order to study and learn,
something about reading habits, motives, incentives--in short, about reading behavior" (p. 40)
of these students.
Note: Carnovsky mentions Kuhlman's article in the third footnote.
Note: Carnovsky and the School kept two records. A book record recorded titles in circulation. The other record:
The reader record was something of an innovation. It consisted of a card for each student upon which the titles withdrawn by any student were at once written (p. 41).
Note: Carnovsky discusses various limitations of the study. See bottom of page 41.
Note: Based on Table II (p. 42), it appears students charged books much less frequently toward the end of the year than they do at the beginning. Reference books in circulation are not included in the figures.
Note: More limitations discussed on pages 42-43. Many of these limitations are normal limitations based on the kind of data that is based on circulation records. For example, such records cannot indicate the reading of a book in the library (i.e., one not checked out).
Note: Carnovsky confirms on page 44 that,
library withdrawals decreased steadily from quarter to quarter (p. 44).
Note: Carnovsky discusses the reading habits of the optional books by General Course category. I may not have noted in this in my Kuhlman notes, but the University of Chicago's new educational plan included four areas of educational emphasis:
Based on Carnovsky's study, the distribution of reading is very positively skewed, as it is in most such distributions, e.g., Bradford. Carnovsky makes this conclusion:
Even granting that some reading has taken place of which we have no record, it seems safe to conclude that the amount of reading done is disappointing. In the case of each course, were it not for a few individuals who have read somewhat extensively, the average number of books borrowed would be altogether negligible (p. 49).
Note: Carnovsky notes that while reading course related material may not have been substantial, the presence of books outside the scope of the courses (a "general collection of books" p. 50) may have been substantial. That is, the dormitory libraries may have influenced reading, just not reading for coursework. He refers to this as "independent reading" (p. 50). In light of this scenario, Carnovsky asks the following two research questions:
1. Are the heavy readers of optional books also heavy readers of independent material; and conversely, are the light readers of the optional also light readers of the independent? Or, more directly in line with the proposed hypothesis, are the heavy users of independent reading matter among the light readers of the optional (p. 50)?
And:
2. What is the relationship between types of material read and scholarship? Are the heavy readers of independent materials good or poor students; and are the non-library users necessarily poor students (p. 51).
Note: Even though it's a minor sentence in the whole, Carnovsky makes an important conceptual distinction here:
Group two, on the other hand, contained the readers, or better, the library users (p. 52).
Note: In general, Carnovsky finds, after analyzing optional and independent reading, that there are a significant number of non-readers in this total group of students.
Note: Regarding the second question above, some interesting findings:
From the data presented it would appear that the more optional reading one does, the better one's chances for creditably passing the four general courses. This is exactly what would be expected, but it is possible to go farther. For example, the contrary does not necessarily follow: namely, that little or no optional reading is necessarily associated with poor grades (p. 54).
Note: This is not a controlled study and there are a number of errors related to sampling, mostly, but also the lack of good statistical tests at the time, that leave me doubtful of the conclusions here. But Carnovsky is aware of this limitation:
Even remembering the qualification that one year's experience with a small sample is too limited to justify generalizations ... (p. 55).
Note: The next few pages discuss the reading habits of sophomores, juniors, and seniors. In short, they read more. Carnovsky discusses a few reasons why this may be the case, which I'll leave out here, and suggests some future studies that will help explore the issue.
Note: On to the reading habits of graduate students.
Note: Nice conclusion. Ties together the work done by librarians and the work done by instructors with the collective aim to pursue the University's new educational plan. Faults or no, the implementation of the educational plan really does seem like it was a collective effort.
Note: Interesting, from a historical perspective, note about the use of circulation statistics as a research instrument:
Finally, the study is perhaps worth undertaking as a demonstration of how circulation statistics may be used not only to measure the effects of instruction but also to study the similarities and differences in the reading of college students (p. 31).
* [[lq:Author-Stone]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of North Carolina]]
This entry is about:
Stone, Charles H. (1933). Difficulties Encountered by Trained School Librarians as a Basis for the Revision of the Professional Curriculum. The Library Quarterly, 3(1), 66-86. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301943
Note: The fourth article of the first issue of the third volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Difficulties Encountered by Trained School Librarians as a Basis for the Revision of the Professional Curriculum."
It was written by Charles H. Stone, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of North Carolina, Woman's College
Note: A really interesting article on the particular needs of school librarians and their library education.
Note: The following can be generalized beyond school librarian training / education. It's a common concern:
Third, librarians going into school libraries experience greatest difficulties in problems which involve the dealing with personalities. The school library supervisors agree that this is true. In this case, again, about half of the persons reporting lack of adequate training state that library science courses could help prepare for that situation. Many comments were made to the effect that only tact, experience, or innate personality would avail (p. 80).
But there's been advancement with this.
* [[lq:Author-Eurich]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Minnesota]]
This entry is about:
Eurich, Alvin C. (1933). Student Use of the Library. The Library Quarterly, 3(1), 87-94. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301944
Note: The fifth article of the first issue of the third volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Student use of the library."
It was written by Alvin C. Eurich, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Minnesota
Note: A nice early study of library use. Most students, for example, during the study period checked out books in the following areas: literature (primarily English / British), history, education, economics, philosophy, and sociology. Etc. There is some disagreement between the surrounding text and the accompanying figure on page 88. In the surrounding text, the author refers to the fourth ranking item as philosophy but in the accompanying chart, it's referred to as philology and it's ranked fifth. This is because the paragraph doesn't include Education, which in the chart is ranked third. This is all from the general circulation.
Note: The author then describes the use and circulation of reserve books. The question the author is interested in, partly at least, is whether the books on reserve are serving their purpose. Seems so:
In other words, the circulation of books follows closely the number of books in each field that are placed on reserver (p. 92).
Note: Next periodicals.
Whoops:
A misunderstanding caused the call-slips to be destroyed for the first day of the period of observation (p. 92).
Note: On to student use of the library by ratio. The author goes to lengths to stress the difference between the ratio and the proportion of use.
Note: This is an extremely interesting comment that just comes kind of as an accident but is revealing of the times and the university movement in general:
If the new freedom that college students are being given is to develop greater initiative in the realm of scholarship, an increased use of the library should become evident (p. 94).
Reading notes for the third volume and second issue of The Library Quarterly.
To return to the list of notes on this volume: volume-3
* [[lq:Author-Wilson]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Wilson, Louis R. (1933). The Service of Libraries in Promoting Scholarship and Research. The Library Quarterly, 3(2), 127-145. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301964
Note: The first article of the second issue of the third volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Service of Libraries in Promoting Scholarship and Research."
It was written by Louis R. Wilson, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago
Note: Article begins with a description of two new libraries "devoted exclusively to the purposes of scholarship and research" (p. 127). The section concludes with a description of the article's purpose:
Let us consider briefly, and largely by means of illustration, five types of service which American libraries are effectively rendering the scholar today. They are: (1) the accumulation of materials; (2) making materials available; (3) personal assistance to scholars; (4) directing research and publication; and (5) aiding scholarship through international co-operation (p. 128).
This is a timely discussion.
Note: The next seven pages document the efforts many university and special libraries have made in order to build collections in the first part of the 20th century. This section contains valuable historical information and includes a discussion, among other things, of various cooperative efforts.
Note: The next section, on "making materials available," begins with a discussion of library buildings and the use of them for reading. Then comes a segment on libraries providing catalogs to its users. This includes,
the development of a complete dictionary catalogue of its holdings, with duplicate catalogues for departmental libraries, indexes of periodicals and proceedings of learned societies, printed catalogues of othe notable libraries, and bibliographical and critical apparatus concerning all the subjects contained in the holdings of the library (p. 136).
Even as early as 1933, television (as an electronic information technology) was considered a possible tool for libraries. See last paragraph of last section on p. 138.
Note: The next section is on "personal assistance to scholars." Here's a key point:
In most libraries emphasis has very naturally been placed on the acquisition of materials and their preparation for use. Too seldom has it been placed on assistance in use. But this is changing (p. 139).
Wilson proceeds to document the many ways that librarians are doing expert work in the services they provide to scholars. Many of these services are still done today although some may look a little different given changes in various technologies.
Note: The next section is on "directing research and publication." The discussion focuses on librarians as scholars amidst scholars. That is, the focus is not only on librarians as scholars, but it is also on the unique position librarians have as scholars because they are not tied to any specific department but are institutionally oriented.
I like this line on the importance of bibliography:
His service to bibliography, the starting-point and foundation of all sound investigation, has been of inestimable value as he has given it precision and form (p. 142).
Note: The next section is on "aiding scholarship through international co-operation." Discusses the beginnings of IFLA. More generally, it discusses the kinds of activities librarians among various nations have worked together exchange documents and help build each others libraries.
Note: Wilson finally asks the following question:
What have libraries done, and what are they doing to kindle the enthusiasms of youth and to make men scholars (p. 144).
He draws from a letter written by a former student and then he writes this really eloquent bit:
His letter stopped here, but I can imagine something further. One day, while at work with rare books or early manuscripts, or in conference with his instructor in the library, a new spirit stirred within him. The passing of graduate courses, as such, ceased to be a goal. Knowledge of the civilization of which the books or manuscripts were evidences became a passion ... (p. 144).
Note: Wilson ends by stating that while he doesn't know the magnitude of the effect that libraries have produced in their aid to scholars, he does believe that libraries are a necessary condition for scholarship.
Really nice piece.
* [[lq:Author-Chiu]]
* [[lq:Affil-Harvard University]]
This entry is about:
Chiu, A. Kaiming. (1933). National libraries in China. The Library Quarterly, 3(2), 146-169. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301965
Note: The second article of the second issue of the third volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "National libraries in China."
It was written by A. Kaiming Chiu, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Harvard University
Note: As the title indicates, this article is about the national libraries in China. There were three of them at the time, and all were open to the public. This should be a really interesting article. Chiu will discuss their history, their collections, and how the collections are organized.
Reflection: Just a side thought. Since I know very little about Chinese libraries, this article may or may not impact me as much as, for example, previous articles on topics I'm very close to have (e.g., articles on library school education, etc.). So it may be, as it has been with other articles that are outside my experience, that I may post very little in this entry. I need to examine which of my posts are the longest. That should say something about which articles have meant the most to me. But also look at which posts are the shortest -- identify my areas of weakness or areas that may be of interest at a later time.
Note: Some interesting stuff on classification in here. Not a whole lot though (yet).
Note: Discussion of readership, circulation, catalogs, reference works such as gazetteers, encyclopedias, rare works, printing, stone tablets, maps, paintings, manuscripts.
Regarding The National Library of Peiping, too bad:
The library seems unwilling to make known its classification system until it has perfected it (p. 160).
Note: On page 167, an interesting description of the rules that resident research scholars had to follow at The National Sinological Library of Nanking.
Note: Alfred Kaiming Chiu was an interesting person. This seems to be a brief biography: http://www.chiamonline.com/People/afwas/CHIU.htm
* [[lq:Author-Reece]]
* [[lq:Affil-Columbia University]]
This entry is about:
Reece, Ernest J. (1933). Work-contacts for library-school students. The Library Quarterly, 3(2), 170-179. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301966
Note: The third article of the second issue of the third volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Work-contacts for library-school students."
It was written by Ernest J. Reece, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Columbia University
Note: This is not an exceptionally profound article, but it does require some reflection. Also, this is Reece's fourth article in *LQ*, and each article is on some aspect of library education. The first three articles by Reece:
Here's the most important question that Reece raises, and there are parts of it that I find problematic:
How best to supplement theoretical instruction with work-contacts has been the subject of much controversy in professional circles generally, and latterly among librarians. Probably most of this disputation, at least in the case of librarians, has been quite needless. All concerned hold that work-contacts and work-participation are antecedent to competence, and that therefore they constitute an indispensable element in professional participation. On the other hand, most doubtlessly would agree that the services of schools in imparting certain knowledge, attitudes, and skills are of value if only in the reducing of apprenticeship and in the consequent saving of time to the intending practitioner (p. 171).
It's that last sentence that is most troubling and yet, most interesting.
* [[lq:Author-Lyle]]
* [[lq:Affil-Antioch College]]
This entry is about:
Lyle, Guy R. (1933). A royal book-collector. The Library Quarterly, 3(2), 180-191. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301967
Note: The fourth article of the second issue of the third volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "A royal book-collector."
It was written by Guy R. Lyle, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Antioch College
Note: A brief history of King George III's pursuit of a royal library, which eventually, through his son, was bequeathed to the British Museum. The article is highly favorable of the King, and the story reminds me of Thomas Jefferson's role with the Library of Congress, although only superficially analogous.
There's an interesting and rather delightful story about an exchange between Dr. Samuel Johnson and the King. It's entirely quoted. Much of this article is quotes, though.
Reading notes for the third volume and third issue of The Library Quarterly.
To return to the list of notes on this volume: volume-3
* [[lq:Author-Kuhlman]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago Libraries]]
This entry is about:
Kuhlman, Augustus Frederick. (1933). The Social Science Research Council and the preservation of source materials. The Library Quarterly, 3(3), 229-247. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301985
Note: The first article of the third issue of the third volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Social Science Research Council and the preservation of source materials."
It was written by August Frederick Kuhlman, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago Libraries
Note: Begins with a great description (definition) of research libraries.
The objectives of a research library may be said to be twofold. From one point of view, it is an end in itself. Its object as a depository is to acquire, organize, and preserve all of the material of merit within those fields of human knowledge and activity that fall within its defined scope. The aim is to be a treasure house which in its acquisitions has kept abreast of the progress of those sciences with which it is concerned, or has even anticipated coming trends. It stands ready to offer the scholar unexplored materials with which he can make new discoveries and extend the bounds of knowledge. From another point of view, however, the research library is a means and not an end. Its function is one of mediation between the scholar's research goals and the sources that must be discovered, acquired, and placed at his disposal under favorable working conditions if he is to be effective. To serve either of these functions well, particularly the latter, presupposes active teamwork between scholars and librarians, for the building of collections represents the product of constantly integrating sources that are to be acquired and preserved with the changing and evolving research objectives and goals of scholars (p. 229).
Reflection: I read those words above and I feel as if they are now fighting words. Those words are inspiring. And I want to talk with people about them.
Note: The rest of the paragraph highlights the important relationship between librarians and scholars in the pursuit of social science research.
Note: This is an important article. Details the history of the Social Science Research Council, discusses some of the important work in developing collections that would enhance social science research, and this includes important reference works such as Social Science Abstracts, and highlights the important role that librarians had in advancing social scientific research.
* [[lq:Author-Mitchell]]
* [[lq:Affil-Carnegie United Kingdom Trust]]
This entry is about:
Mitchell, J. M. (1933). The library service in Great Britain: Effects of the financial crisis. The Library Quarterly, 3(3), 248-252. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301986
Note: The second article of the third issue of the third volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The library service in Great Britain: Effects of the financial crisis."
It was written by J. M. Mitchell, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Carnegie United Kingdom Trust
Note: Simply put, an upbeat and short piece on the advancements libraries were making despite the financial hardships Britain was facing as a result of the Depression.
My favorite line, I think:
Those who attended the 1932 Annual Conference of the Library Association, held at Bournemouth under the presidency of Sir Henry Miers, could not fail to be impressed by the fact that the attendance was practically normal, and that, with due allowance for the inevitable percentage of "web blankets," the spirit of the profession as a whole remained undaunted [emphasis added] (p. 250).
* [[lq:Author-Wang]]
* [[lq:Affil-No Affil]]
This entry is about:
Wang, Charles K. A. (1933). Selecting applicants to a library school or training class: An approach to a technique. The Library Quarterly, 3(3), 253-266. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301987
Note: The third article of the third issue of the third volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Selecting applicants to a library school or training class: An approach to a technique."
It was written by Charles K. A. Wang, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Kaifeng, China (No Affiliation)
Note: The study reported in this article is based on personnel records. This could be interesting. Given the reported location of the author, it's not yet clear if the library system he refers to is one that is located in the U.S. or in China.
Note: I believe this is the first article that most closely resembles the modern structure of a "scientific" article. It has a "procedure" section, a "results" section, and a "discussion section."
Note: The amount of information libraries had on their personnel is staggering:
On the other hand, the library does have personnel records covering the graduates in its training class. Such records are of varying completeness and include application blanks, entrance-examination scores, library-training records, and intelligence scores (p. 253).
And:
Up to the present, selection has been based in part on entrance examinations, school records, and, more recently, intelligence scores; but the number of qualified applicants so far exceeds vacancies in the training class that selection has rested largely on the subjective opinions of a few interviewers. This study undertakes to evaluate certain personality factors which by their presence or absence may contribute to one's success as a library assistant (p. 254).
Note: In the procedure section, the author uses personnel records but also questionnaires. Plus! Two personality tests. One that measures introversion and extroversion and the other, which the author developed, that measures "persistence." Plus!! An efficiency rating was devised --- to measure how efficient a person was at books or with people, and so could be placed in the appropriate position. This is incredible.
Note: Interesting correlations throughout.
Note: Although it's not labeled, there's essentially a section that discusses limitations. See the middle paragraph on page 262.
Note: His suggestions:
When these tests are given, the test scores are of selective value in themselves aside from the part they contribute to the total efficiency scores. In the case of the entrance examinations now in use, it is suggested that candidates be eliminated if their score is under 55. In the case of the intelligence test, candidates with scores of under 100 may be removed from further consideration. On the test of introversion-extroversion, it is probably safe to eliminate the extreme introverts, i.e., those with a score of +20 or more. With regard to the persistence scale, there is probably little to lose in eliminating candidates with a score below 60 (p. 263).
Note: Wow, the importance of being "objective":
If, however, they are supplemented by intelligent observation on the part of the interviewer, such occasional errors might be avoided, although this subjective judgment is by no means encouraged (p. 263).
* [[lq:Author-Waples]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Waples, Douglas. (1933). Graduate theses accepted by library schools in the United States from June, 1928, to June, 1932. The Library Quarterly, 3(3), 267-291. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301988
Note: The fourth article of the third issue of the third volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Graduate theses accepted by library schools in the United States from June, 1928, to June, 1932."
It was written by Douglas Waples, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago
Note: In an examination of Master's theses coming out of library schools, Waples asks:
What is the field of librarianship as defined by the 148 theses reported?
The question reminded me of a more current LQ article, which I thought might cite Waples, but doesn't.
Note: The paragraph below captures what this entire enterprise is about: what is the one, necessary purpose of the library?
There is no question, of course, but that libraries will endure, as they always have endured, if only for the purpose of preserving records that each age considers important---witness the pyramids of Gizeh. But now the question of most immediate importance is how many and which of the other recreational and educational values to contemporary society, as urged by the American public library in justification for generous public support, can be made convincing to the present taxpayers and city councils (p. 268).
Waples assumes it's preserving records, and he assumes that for good reason. But now that records are increasingly decentralized, the question is whether that will remain a continuing assumption. Perhaps it is "the other recreational and educational values" that will become the necessary purpose of the library. This is part of the modern question, it seems to me.
Note: As a reminder, this article was published amidst the Great Depression. One concern that Waples is addressing concerns the relevancy of libraries in such times.
Note: Here is one instance where the early library scientists defined one of the fundamental questions of the field:
To attack the problems directly may require some change in professional attitudes toward the reading needs of the community. For example, some studies may best proceed from the assumption that the economic situation requires the public library, by analogy with the tax-supported schools, to identify those now receiving its benefits in order to make plain that it reaches a sufficiently large and diversified part of the population to justify public support; to show that certain benefits of reading are not so readily obtained from other distributing agencies; and to specify the scope of benefits peculiar to library services. From this point of departure, the definition of the library's social benefits is a task to which some students of librarianship should devote their full energies. The problems which need to be studied from this point of view have consequently suggested our headings [emphasis added] (pp. 269-270).
Note: Table 1 on page 271 lists the theses subjects. In my study of the history of library science, I need to find and read these.
Waples asks:
"What is the field of librarianship as defined by the theses?" (p. 271).
Here's the paragraph that outlines the theses:
The field of librarianship as defined by the titles in general terms in Table 1. The headings for the three of the classes are ambiguous, namely, "Description of current library practices," "Library organization," and "All others." The forty-one theses classed as description of current practice are subdivided as follows: twelve on cataloguing and classification, nine on book selection, eight on educational activities, five on library extension, two on interlibrary lending, two on lending and circulation, and three on general practices. Library organization, with the exclusion of historical and survey treatments, is represented by eleven theses---two on legislation, four on finance, two on buildings, and three on holdings. "All others" include seventeen theses: seven in the field of reading, three on publishing, four on criteria for library services, and three on sources and methods of research (pp. 271-272).
Note: Waples compares these theses with non-library PhD dissertations that are about libraries in some way and that were published in 1930. It's not entirely clear what areas or fields have launched these dissertations, but Waples provides a way to track them down.
* [[lq:Author-Herbert]]
* [[lq:Affil-Public Library District of Columbia]]
This entry is about:
Herbert, Clara W. (1933). Personnel requirements for library branches in relation to circulation. The Library Quarterly, 3(3), 292-304. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4301989
Note: The fifth article of the third issue of the third volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Personnel Requirements for Library Branches in Relation to Circulation."
It was written by Clara W. Herbert, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Public Library, District of Columbia
Note: Another article relating to personnel and to standards (see also Article 3 from this issue).
Note: Interesting quote from George Washington about having too many students per instructor. See page 293.
Note: There is a very real desire to make the evaluation of library work as non-subjective as possible. The desire for objectivity is, it should be noted, a desire for fairness. This article, for example, at least begins in search of some mathematical way to determine how many circulation personnel are needed at any given library in order to maximize the benefit these services offer to the community and to minimize the cost to the taxpayers.
For example (and I can't get over this paragraph):
Perhaps the following explanation will make Table I clearer. It will be noted that the unit of measurement was based on the smallest agency; for example under administration, if the square footage of the D branch is 2,211, the units for A, B, C branches will be there square footage divided by 2,211 or 3.4, 3.6, and 6.1, respectively. Again, if one unit is assigned to a staff of 4 persons, the units for a staff of 7 will be as many as 4 will go into 7 or 1.7; a staff of 12 will be as many as 4 goes into 12 or 3.0; and a staff of 22 will be as many as 4 goes into 22 or 5.5. This procedure is followed throughout the table to give a picture of the relative demands of branches of different types. In translating the total units into time required, however, the standard of comparison was shifted to the B or Southeastern Branch because of its more typical aspects. All comparisons could have been made on the Southeastern Branch, but to avoid the use of decimals it was thought more convenient to compare the activities on the basis of the smallest branch. To complete the explanation: If the sum of the units representing the activities under "Administration" is 13.6 at the Southeastern Branch and it takes thirty-two hours weekly to perform them, it will take as many at the Mount Pleasant Branch as 13.6:32::23.6:x, or 56 hours (p. 296).
Reflection: Now refer to Kuhn and his discussion of paradigms and rules. As much as Kuhn's discussion of these topics applies to the social sciences, generally, and to library science, specifically (and that's doubtful), there is something to be said in that while we may maintain the same paradigms as these 1930 library researchers, our rules for expressing and rationalizing these paradigms are much different today. In short, the paragraph above is not the kind of paragraph, I think, we'd see in present day literature.
Note: This article also follows the standard structure (LQ articles are evolving): It's outline:
Also has various subsections.
Note: The "factory" statement is good because I was thinking that's what the author was trying to do:
Standards of achievement.---Third, we wish to set up standards of achievement. We have no desire to turn the library into a factory or to place upon the staff strain additional to that inherent in public service. We felt, however, that reasonable standards based on figures of day-in and day-out work, not those obtained under the pressure of making a record, would be a satisfaction to the assistant and give us a sound position before economy boards. Accordingly, the following standards are before us tentatively. After experimentation they may require further revision (p. 302).
Reflection: Interestingly, this is the exact kind of thing I desired to know when I was a cataloger. I wanted some idea of how many books I was supposed to process per hour.
Note: Just wondering what kind of mechanical devices the author refers to:
we are using forms and mechanical devices whenever possible ... (p. 303).
Reading notes for the third volume and fourth issue of The Library Quarterly.
To return to the list of notes on this volume: volume-3
* [[lq:Author-Shera]]
* [[lq:Affil-Miami University]]
This entry is about:
Shera, J. H. (1933). Recent Social Trends and Future Library Policy. The Library Quarterly, 3(4), 339-353. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302010
Note: The first article of the fourth issue of the third volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Recent Social Trends and Future Library Policy."
It was written by J. H. Shera, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Miami University
Note: Enter Shera.
Note: This piece begins with a scolding (Shera was good at this) of those librarians who fail to see "the need for a sociological concept of the library profession" (p. 339).
Note: Shera discusses Borden's work (see my notes on the piece by Borden).
Any adequate interpretation of future library policy must necessarily, therefore, be based on a thorough recognition of the library as the product of social and economic forces that have been evolving during the past three-quarters of a century. Mr. Borden, in the paper previously cited, has admirably paved the way for these new concepts [emphasis added] (p. 340).
Note: It's weird reading this because it's so current:
Suffice it here to state that the downward trend of the birth-rate and the extension of the expectation of life and resulting aging of our population cannot but affect materially the type of public that librarians of the future will serve. The census of 1930 showed unmistakably that our period of rapid growth in numbers is definitely at an end. With the older people constituting an increasingly larger percentage of our population, the demand for leisure-time activities and the services of the librarian should increase, while the children's librarians, relieved of the burden of ever increasing numbers to serve, can shift their attention from quantity to quality (pp. 341-342).
Note: I'm often interested in what people and sources these early LQ authors cite. It would be interesting to study that.
Note: Interesting discussion of decentralization. See p. 345.
Note: Writing about how libraries can serve various aesthetic functions, "make beauty increasingly a vital part of our lives" (p. 349), Shera writes for a fluid definition / conception of the library:
There will be many who will argue that all this is without the province of the library---that a library is not a museum---that such confusion of purpose strikes at the very heart of the library's true function. In the cities, with large art collections and great museums just around the corner, such a rigid interpretation of the function of the library may be well and good. But in the increasingly important village the library must broaden its scope and become a true cultural center (p. 349).
Note: How like the 1930s to the present.
The Depression and its effects:
The profession is confronted by the first serious crisis in its short history. Ever since the publication, over a year ago, of Mr. Joeckel's important study of supply and demand in the library field, librarians have long known of the ravages of unemployment in their ranks; and much has been written about it but little has been done (p. 350).
Shera is referring to a piece Joeckel published in Library Journal, but Joeckel has also published articles in LQ (search wiki for more by Joeckel).
Note: Again, scathing. Shera continues from above:
It is needless to point out the inevitable consequences and economic folly of this short-sighted policy. Suffice it to say that if a service is worth rendering, it merits compensation, and if librarians persist in the sanction of such practices they can anticipate little relief from their present ills (p. 350).
And now he scolds library schools (just continuing from previous sentence):
Yet, in the face of all this, the library schools are not cooperating as they should. Even the chairman of the Junior Members Round Table of the A.L.A. is compelled to admit that "While some schools are radically reducing enrollment, others are merely making a gesture." This is not time to allow personal institutional pride to work against the best interests of the profession. There must be a "domestic allotment plan" for the library schools (pp. 350-351).
Note: Could see it coming. He proposes a central planning commission that would have a great deal of authority of all libraries in the U.S.
Note: Reading Shera is always interesting. Usually brilliant. I must admit, though, that I can almost hear a Palpatine laugh when I read this line:
This does not mean that local libraries will have to surrender much of their present autonomy. As a matter of fact they will be virtually as independent as they now are. Only as their individual policies might work at cross-purposes with the master-plan will they feel the presence of any restraint or authority [emphasis added] (pp. 351-352).
Note: Sometimes I think that Shera is way too quick on the draw, and I disagree with some of his arguments in this article, but I do think this is true:
Librarians must create vision and venturesome leadership or the profession will suffer. They must take their calling more seriously, define their functions more closely, engage in more searching self-criticism, in more radical professional thought; ... (p. 353).
* [[lq:Author-Morris]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Michigan]]
This entry is about:
Morris, Adah V. (1933). Anonyms and Pseudonyms: An Annotated List. The Library Quarterly, 3(4), 354-372. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302011
Note: The second article of the fourth issue of the third volume of *The Library Quarterly* is titled "Anonyms and Pseudonyms: An Annotated List."
It was written by Adah V. Morris, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Michigan
Note: This is the first article that I've only skimmed and not read thoroughly. The reason is that it is an annotated bibliography (rather than a standard narrative of some wort) of reference works related to anonyms and pseudonyms. As the author states:
This list has been compiled as an aid to librarians and cataloguers in the purchase and use of books which treat of anonymous and pseudonymous literature (p. 354).
Note: The article begins with a description of the list and how it was compiled. It has the following sections:
* [[lq:Author-Wachtel]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Wachtel, Lee. (1933). State Provisions for the Support of Municipal Public Libraries and Some Comparisons with State Provisions for the Support of Public Schools. *The Library Quarterly, 3*(4), 373-389. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302012
Note: The third article of the fourth issue of the third volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "State Provisions for the Support of Municipal Public Libraries and Some Comparisons with State Provisions for the Support of Public Schools."
It was written by Lee Wachtel, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago
Note: Another article that deals with some aspect of public education and public libraries. Previous articles (based on a quick search) that I've noted include:
Note: Historical note:
Whereas almost every state has some provision in its constitution for the establishment and maintenance of the public school, only one state, Michigan, provides in any way at all for the public library (p. 373).
More:
Notwithstanding this, the establishment and support of the public library is still considered to be a local function, and not an obligation of the state. This is quite evident from the legislative enactments. In no case is library legislation compulsory as is school legislation (p. 375).
Note: Good article for anyone interested in public library funding --- especially the history of it.
Note: There is a lot of good and detailed information in this article, but here's one of the author's main points:
As has been indicated above, the most significant difference between school legislation and library legislation is that the one is compulsory and the other permissive, though the general property tax is the main source of revenue for both these services (p. 386).
More:
The library receives little state aid because it is still conceived of as a local function (p. 386).
Note: Another historical note / observation:
The county library system as developed in California and other states is a serious attempt to avoid wastefulness and duplication in basic library collections, buildings, equipment, catalogues, et al., in communities which are sufficiently close to one another to receive library service from a common source. It would, however, be premature and perhaps inaccurate to infer that the county is the ideal unit for purposes of library organization (p. 387).
The rest of the paragraph contains important points about determining library unit sizes, scopes, reach, etc. based on empirical data rather than on politic divisions.
Note: So, like Shera, the author makes note of the increasing centralization of government. This would have been on the public's mind at the time (given President Roosevelt's efforts at the time to combat the Depression):
The problem of determining the proper unit for library organization and support is bound up with the larger problem of governmental consolidation and centralization. The movement toward consolidation is close at hand, and it is a question whether independent library boards and library districts will remain unaffected (p. 387).
The above line suggests the need to understand more about the relationship between the Depression, federal government efforts to combat it, and the rise of public libraries. This would be the kind of research project very much in line with what many of these early LQ authors are trying to push (sociological, economical, political lines of inquiry).
Note: Important comment on the relationship between libraries and government:
The second assumption results from a hazy conception of the place of the library in the government structure. State provisions for library support assume that public libraries should have little or no relation to other governmental agencies. The bogey of "politics" and the battle-cry, "Keep politics out of the library," have resulted in the establishment of independent boards with segregated funds and separate powers. But here also the forces of centralization are at work, and there is a tendency to modify the position of independent boards. This tendency is especially noticeable in city manager cities where the librarian is made directly responsible to the city manager, and the library board is either entirely dispensed with or given advisory power only. Students of political science have contended that independent boards with segregated funds and separate powers are harmful; that they complicate governmental machinery by adding additional units to it; and that they hinder the development of sound budgetary and fiscal practices (p. 388).
* [[lq:Author-Brown]]
* [[lq:Author-Joeckel]]
* [[lq:Author-Munn]]
* [[lq:Author-Williamson]]
* [[lq:Author-Wilson]]
* [[lq:Affil-Advisory Board for the Study of Special Projects]]
This entry is about:
Brown, Charles, H., Joeckel, Carleton B., Munn, Ralph, Williamson, C. C., & Wilson, Louis R. (1933). Proposals Submitted to the American Library Association for Study and Investigation. The Library Quarterly, 3(4), 390-407. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302013
Note: The fourth article of the fourth issue of the third volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Proposals Submitted to the American Library Association for Study and Investigation."
It was written by Charles H. Brown, Carleton B. Joeckel, Ralph Munn, C. C. Williamson, and Louis R. Wilson, who were affiliated with:
Affiliation: Advisory Board for the Study of Special Projects
Note: ALA establishes a committee to help determine priority and coverage of research fronts in librarianship. The authors, serving on this committee, take into consideration a list of proposals that have been submitted to ALA in the previous years by various members and other entities. The committee categorizes, ranks, and charts the progress these areas of research.
One of the stated purposes of this study reflects the nature of our field and its complexity, but also something about science in general:
Publication of this report in the present form is primarily intended to serve two closely related purposes. The first is to draw a clear distinction between service studies, which are often best undertaken locally in terms of actual conditions that render the problem acute, and research of genuine theoretical value to the profession at large (p. 391).
This purpose mirrors the scientific enterprise in the following way:
Note: This is an important report as it lays out what the authors and the field, in general, have in mind in regards to the values held by the field and its domain. It highlights what research has been completed on certain topics, where research needs to direct its attention, etc.
The general outline of the research is:
I. Readers and reading II. Reading matter, publications III. Administration of distributing agencies
Those three top level topics are too broad to illuminate the all the details.
* [[lq:Author-Blom]]
* [[lq:Affil-Tulane University]]
This entry is about:
Blom, Frans. (1933). Maya Books and Sciences. The Library Quarterly, 3(4), 408-420. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302014
Note: The fifth article of the fourth issue of the third volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Maya Books and Sciences."
It was written by Frans Blom, who were affiliated with:
Affiliation: Tulane University
Note: *LQ*'s scope at this time was certainly interesting. This article discusses the Mayans and the Aztecs and the state of knowledge of these two cultures at the time. Also, it discusses, in some detail, the writing and the mathematical abilities of the Mayans. Blom is highly enthusiastic about these cultures.
Regarding *LQ*, this is not the first article that is somewhat outside the modern library box. Others, historical and international, include:
Frans Blom, the author, seems to have had an interesting history.
Reading notes for the fourth volume and first issue of The Library Quarterly.
To return to the list of notes on this volume: volume-4
* [[lq:Author-Kelley]]
* [[lq:Affil-Queens Borough Public Library]]
This entry is about:
Kelley, Grace O. (1934). The Democratic Function of Public Libraries. The Library Quarterly, 4(1), 1-15. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302034
Note: The first article of the first issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Democratic Function of Public Libraries."
It was written by Grace O. Kelley, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Queens Borough Public Library
Note: And this is one of the core beliefs about (free) public libraries:
Of all such essays none has been more truly democratic and liberal in motive, or, dare we say, in some respects naïve, than the creation of the free public library (p. 1).
This article does not take the above notion granted. Instead it examines, and perhaps, criticizes the notion. Such that:
Today, economic and political conditions are such that librarians are being forced to examine these broad assumptions to find out what measure of truth lies therein; to determine more clearly the actual relation which exists between the library and the people whom it serves; and to explain the nature and to justify the results of library service. They are realizing that the hoped-for ends are not implicit nor realized automatically, but that "critical attention" to the direction and character of its growth" is needed if the public library is to be a "true agency for education" (p. 3).
Again, this is written during the Great Depression.
Note: If there has been a paradigm shift, in a slightly Kuhnian sense but more cultural, then it happened because of a gestalt switch in how libraries have been conceived over time:
Before the appearance of the free library as we know it today it is worth noting that the word "library" had a different meaning. The precursors of the public library had been the private libraries, the proprietary, academy, and society libraries, the college, university, and state libraries, none of these wholly free or tax-supported. The right of using the books was usually granted only to those who met prescribed conditions as to education, fees, and membership, although it is doubtless true that the serious student could obtain the privilege without subscribing to all of the conditions (p. 4).
Note: Just a tidbit -- the author uses the term "library world" on page 5. Earliest record of the use of that term?
Note: On special libraries -- the term special is in quotes in the previous sentence (unquoted):
The special library, so called for want of a better term, is the direct and inevitable product of the machine age and of the era of specialization in all fields of knowledge. Wealth has increased, education has expanded, and occupational opportunities have changed, releasing vast numbers from routine work and making it necessary for them to prepare themselves for other kinds of activity. The older professions have increased their numbers and have required that their employees meet definite educational standards (p. 5).
Note: The relation of special library and other libraries to the topic of this article, the free public library:
Thus, before and since the era of the free public library, all other libraries have been almost entirely selective institutions established for use under prescribed conditions. Particular needs of certain classes of readers have been met. With the exception of the proprietary libraries, the various types which existed before the public library continue to function today in increased strength and numbers. To these have been added the highly selective special library, a direct outgrowth of the present age of specialization (p. 7).
And in light of these contrasting libraries:
In distinction to all of these, the function of the free public library has been to serve the people as a whole, collectively; the masses, the general public, the ordinary folk, were to be supplied with books in preparation for the duties which democracy was thrusting upon them (p. 7).
Note: Important distinction between public education and public libraries, in terms of control from above:
Where in education youth is guided and regimented in its activity by state-supported teachers who are influenced by the authority of tradition in the form of established curricula, the only guide for service to the clientèle of the library has been the variety of reading interests of library patrons as interpreted by the librarian. True, occasional social pressures restricting the librarian's choice have been brought to bear in the way of censorship of certain books; the actual effect of this, however, has been small in comparison with the total amount of freedom enjoyed (p. 8).
Note: Nice point about what it means to be a librarian given that library use is not at all obligatory by anyone:
The librarian must use his ingenuity and tact to the utmost to arouse and hold his patrons, the actual use of the library never being obligatory in any way, but resulting always from the purely voluntary urge of the patron (p. 9).
Note: As relevant a discussion point today as then:
"An industrial civilization founded on technology, science, invention, and expanding markets must of necessity change and change rapidly." Any institution which does not change too, adapt itself to the times, and become part of the onward "drive to change," will be pushed aside to be left perhaps for a time to make a harmless life of its own (p. 10).
The quote is from footnote 16:
C. A. Beard, A Charter for the social sciences in the schools (New York, 1932), pp. 28, 31.
Note: On page 12, the author discusses the recent development of reader adviser services.
Note: Interesting argument about the role of librarians at the end of the article --- to make accessible specialized research to the general public in a form that the general public will appreciate.
* [[lq:Author-Danton]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Danton, J. Periam. (1934). Our Libraries: The Trend toward Democracy. The Library Quarterly, 4(1), 16-27. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302035
Note: The second article of the first issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Our Libraries: The Trend toward Democracy."
It was written by J. Periam Danton, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago
Note: The Depression is really becoming evident in these articles now.
Note: The previous article hinted at the same idea:
The very fact that an institution is forced to retrench may bring to light possible economies or improvements in efficiency or service which would not otherwise have been noticed (p. 16).
Note: Examining not just libraries but democracy itself:
It is by way of being platitudinous to say that the country and age in which we live are constitutionally democratic, but it may be valuable to recall and examine the assumption from time to time, particularly with regard to certain aspects of institution control and management as these are currently practiced (p. 16).
Note: Interesting turn. This article is about the management of libraries and how democratic their practices are. First the author writes about book selection and incorporating the entire staff, next the author writes about composing annual reports, and then the author provides other examples. This would make an good, historical article for a library admin / management course.
Note: True today?
Corporate wealth has given up within the past twelve months more power than in any previous decade; labor now meets the representatives of government, industry, and the public on equal terms, and the voice of the employee, speaking through the new trade codes, has more authority and receives more attention than at almost any time in our history since the earliest colonial days (p. 19).
Note: The above is followed with remarks on the administration and organization of universities. Important higher education comments here.
Note: On the evolution of librarianship:
To be sure, the librarians-collector, the librarians-bibliographer, and the librarians-scholar of an older day have largely given place to, or been combined with, the librarian-organizer and executive of today (p. 24).
Note: Ends with some provoking questions:
In short, is not the change from the present fairly autocratic administration of libraries to a more or less completely active, participating, democratic one an almost inevitable change to which we ought and must look forward, a change which should be aided in every way, and one for which librarians should prepare and be prepared (p. 27)?
Note: J. Periam Danton was a very interesting person. More about him and his work at Berkeley here: http://senate.universityofcalifornia.edu/inmemoriam/JosephPeriamDanton.htm. E.g., while this is his first *LQ* article, his last one was published in LQ 65 years later, in 1999.
* [[lq:Author-Borden]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Pennsylvania]]
This entry is about:
Borden, A. K. (1934). Libraries and Cultural Renaissance. The Library Quarterly, 4(1), 28-35. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302036
Note: The third article of the first issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Libraries and Cultural Renaissance."
It was written by A. K. Borden, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Pennsylvania
Note: Borden's third LQ article. The first one (quote a few times so far in *LQ*) is The Sociological Beginnings of the Library Movement. The second one, also historical, is Seventeenth-Century American Libraries. This article is also historical (dealing with cultural revolutions in early England, France, and Italy and the causal necessity of books and libraries), and it's essential thesis is nicely summarized in the last sentence:
Where and when the love of knowledge will blaze forth with renaissance proportions, no one knows, but the genius of the past will doubtless smile first on that place which has been busy storing its treasures (p. 35).
* [[lq:Author-Fuchs]]
* [[lq:Affil-Staatsbibliothek]]
This entry is about:
Fuchs, Hermann. (1934). The "Gesamtkatalog" of the Prussian Libraries. The Library Quarterly, 4(1), 36-49. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302037
Note: The fourth article of the first issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The "Gesamtkatalog" of the Prussian Libraries."
It was written by Hermann Fuchs, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Staatsbibliothek
Note: The article is on the development of a union catalog of most of the major libraries in Germany at the time. It's odd reading an article like this knowing a bit about what's happening in German in 1934 (e.g., Hitler was Chancellor of Germany at this time) and what will happen in just a few years from this date.
In fact, I just did a search on Fuchs and it seems he became a Nazi:
Between Two Worlds: The American Library in Paris during the War, Occupation, and Liberation (1939 – 1945) doc file by Mary Niles Maack.
All of the sudden, this article is really hard to read.
Note: In light of future developments, it's also odd to read about American involvement in the creation of this union catalog:
On January 1, 1933, help arrived on a grand scale. The Rockefeller Foundation, in order not only to double the editorial staff but also to aid the participating libraries, granted the funds for five years which make it possible, though not without sacrifice, to do the necessary additional work (pp. 46-47).
And:
Equally gratefully they [the participating libraries] welcome the support offered by the American Library Association and the Bibliographical Society of America in soliciting subscribers for the Gesamtkatalog in the United States (p. 47).
I don't know if anyone has pursued research on ALA's relationship with Germany up to WWII. Needs investigation.
* [[lq:Author-Fuchs]]
* [[lq:Affil-Staatsbibliothek]]
This entry is about:
Fuchs, Hermann. (1934). Der Gesamtkatalog Der Preussichen Bibliotheken. The Library Quarterly, 4(1), 50-64. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302038
Note: The fifth article of the first issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Der Gesamtkatalog Der Preussichen Bibliotheken."
It was written by Hermann Fuchs, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Staatsbibliothek
Note: The article is the German version of the previous article.
* [[lq:Author-Hanson]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Hanson, J. C. M. (1934). Sound and Unsound Economy in Cataloging. The Library Quarterly, 4(1), 65-75. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302039
Note: The sixth article of the first issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Sound and Unsound Economy in Cataloging."
It was written by J. C. M. Hanson, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago
Note: This is a nice piece on the importance of doing good cataloging work and on the lack of understanding that some administrators had (at the time) about the complexity of doing good cataloging work (and the associated costs). Good article to cite in case I do more work related to the historical view of librarians by administrations.
Note: Quotes Charles Martel, then "chief of the Catalog Division of the Library of Congress" (p. 67). See footnotes for information about the Martel papers to read. The author indicates that this material should be,
read and re-read by those who ever and anon feel called on to attack the catalogues which aim to give somewhat full and explicit information (p. 67).
Note: And this is essentially the modern agenda:
The arguments so far presented may be summed up as follows: (1) curtailment and omission of information and a lowering of standards of academic and professional training required from the cataloguing staff are not sound economy; (2) not only must the staff be permitted to make the bibliographical investigations necessary to insure an accurate and satisfactory entry, but it must be encouraged in these efforts; (3) competent supervision and revision must be provided to insure a proper correlation of results, harmony, and unity of interpretations and decisions; (4) the road to sound economy lies through the cooperation of many libraries---the more the better---agreement on rules and methods, and the establishment of a central authority to insure unity of effort (p. 71).
Note: Great article. Interesting story about a conversation the author had with Charles A. Cutter. See page 73.
* [[lq:Author-Carnovsky]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Carnovsky, Leon. (1934). A Study of the Relationship between Reading Interest and Actual Reading. The Library Quarterly, 4(1), 76-110. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302040
Note: The seventh article of the first issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "A Study of the Relationship between Reading Interest and Actual Reading."
It was written by Leon Carnovsky, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago
Note: This is the fourth article by Carnovsky. He has an article in each volume so far.
Note: As with Carnovsky's first article in LQ, this is an article about adult education and adult reading. He writes:
When the Graduate Library School was established at the University of Chicago, the field of adult reading was recognized as one directly pertinent to the primary objectives of librarianship and as a field of great social importance in itself. It was felt that cultivation of the field might serve to clarify certain fundamental objectives of public libraries, college libraries, and other agencies for the distribution of substantial literature (p. 78).
Then he provides an outline, with research questions, of what this field of adult reading seeks to ask. Quoted in part (questions omitted):
A. Reading matter available B. Reading population C. The demand for reading D. The status of reading E. Consumption of reading F. Effects of reading (p. 78).
Note: Nice quote:
For the union between book and reader is a much more complex phenomenon than might appear at first glance (p. 79).
Note: Much mention of Waples' work on reading. See previous articles by Waple in LQ:
Note: Inasmuch as this article is about preferences (reading), Carnovsky does a wonderful job revealing how complicated preferences are and how complicated it is to measure them. Consider the following passage. Carnovsky makes a go at measuring preferences, but he hedges his bets:
But if it were possible to measure, however roughly, the extent to which the objective factors have been present and thus have influenced reading, it would be possible to understand their influences as affecting reading interests. In the following discussion an approach is made to the problem of indicating and measuring certain factors whose presence or absence probably bears a definite relationship to the reading done (p. 83).
Note: This is a long, detailed article and what Carnovsky is trying to do is to, begin at least, establish some causal factors that lead to reading particular works. Or at least have a discussion about the possibility of that. He knows it's big game hunting and that he's not going to accomplish it with this study (which is nicely described), but the goal seems to be his main agenda.
* [[lq:Author-Wilson]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Wilson, Louis R. (1934). Richard Rogers Bowker: September 4, 1848-November 12, 1933. *The Library Quarterly, 4*(1), 111-112. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302041
Note: The eighth article of the first issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Richard Rogers Bowker: September 4, 1848-November 12, 1933."
It was written by Louis R. Wilson, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago
Note: A respectful obituary of Richard Rogers Bowker, one of the founders of the American Library Association and the Library Journal.
Note: It should be noted that Bowker (and many in the profession) were not a fan of LQ at the beginning. See my notes on Steve Norman's (1988) article on the early years of LQ:
Reading notes for the fourth volume and second issue of The Library Quarterly.
To return to the list of notes on this volume: volume-4
* [[lq:Author-Butler]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Butler, Pierce. (1934). James Christian Meinich Hanson. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 127-135. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302055
Note: The first article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "James Christian Meinich Hanson."
It was written by Pierce Butler, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago
Note: J. C. M. Hanson retires from the University of Chicago. Butler, then associate editor of LQ and faculty at University of Chicago, writes a biography of Hanson. Article includes a bibliography. First work is dated 1889 and last work is dated 1934 (this last work is Hanson's article in the previous issue: notes).
Hanson's long career was a boon to the development of cataloging. There doesn't seem to be an introduction to this issue, nothing that frames it, but this issue is unlike the others so far in that it contains 30 articles, and many of these are about cataloging and classification and some are about Hanson.
* [[lq:Author-Ansteinsson]]
* [[lq:Affil-Tekniske Höiskole]]
This entry is about:
Ansteinsson, John. (1934). Dilemmas of Classification. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 136-147. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302056
Note: The second article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Dilemmas of Classification."
It was written by John Ansteinsson, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Tekniske Höiskole
Note: The author wrestles with some very fundamental problems with classification, and these problems deal not only with aboutness but also with direction. Consider an experiment by a chemist and one by a physicist, each examining much the same thing but from different perspectives:
The subjects of the two investigations are to a large extent identical, the results coincide almost entirely, or at least to such an extent that the two authors are disputing over the priority. Nevertheless, the problem has been attacked by them from different points of view, even with different aims in view, and in any case through different methods. The one probably is physical chemistry, the other one perhaps chemical physics. According to the two systems of classification most in use in America, the one would go into physics, the other into chemistry. But the walls of our pigeonholes are smashed to pieces by the incessant bombardment of radiations from the restless atoms oscillating between our nicely built-up compartments, all of which want to occupy the same space in our system (p. 140).
Note: On a book with many topics:
Are we to pick our book to pieces and scatter it in the various places in the system where the different parts belong, or are we to put it into one of them which will do justice to only a minor part of the contents (p. 141)?
Note: What I enjoy about these early classification and cataloging articles is how well they bring to light the attempt to form and complete a rational system.
* [[lq:Author-Arnesen]]
* [[lq:Affil-Deichmanske Bibliotek]]
This entry is about:
Arnesen, Arne. (1934). How Norway Became the Focus of American Library Methods in Europe. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 148-155. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302057
Note: The third article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "How Norway Became the Focus of American Library Methods in Europe."
It was written by Arne Ansteinsson, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Deichmanske Bibliotek
Note: Really interesting history of modern libraries in Norway. On introducing the Dewey system:
With regard to sixteenth- to eighteenth-century books it may safely be said that the introduction of D.C. was an act of violence (p. 151).
Next he says, in a rather nice way, that it was the best available to them at the time.
Note: Note on systems of charging:
The old charging ledgers in book form had been given up before his time, but he exchanged the established slip system with another of English origin. During a short stay in England in 1900 he became acquainted with the American Browne system, which he introduced upon his return. Some years later (1908), the Browne system was also abandoned on account of its slow operation at the delivery desk. It was replaced by the Newark system, which at that time was already in use in other Norwegian libraries (p. 151).
Note: Lots more on the specifics of various functions of the library at the time. Also, details about the influence of American libraries and library practices on Norway, including education of librarians.
* [[lq:Author-Bay]]
* [[lq:Affil-John Crerar Library]]
This entry is about:
Bay, J. Christian. (1934). Women Not Considered Human Beings: A Bibliological Curiosity. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 155-164. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302058
Note: The fourth article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Women Not Considered Human Beings: A Bibliological Curiosity."
It was written by J. Christian Bay, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: John Crerar Library
Note: The author quotes from a quarto that was written in Latin. Does not translate and assumes that the reader will be able to translate.
Note: Very progressive (for the time):
The thesis that woman is of an inferior clay and therefore socially and legally negligible, was exploded long ago. Women now function in all professions, indeed even as librarians, and excel beyond measure in physical, political, and academic competition with man everywhere, some nearly abrogating their cultural state (p. 156).
Note: This is largely a bibliology. Not sure why the author is arguing against the above premise (he does so as if the premise is current and he is attempting to discount it).
* [[lq:Author-Bishop]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Michigan Library]]
This entry is about:
Bishop, William Warner. (1934). J. C. M. Hanson and International Cataloging. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 165-168. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302059
Note: The fifth article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "J. C. M. Hanson and International Cataloging."
It was written by William Warner Bishop, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Michigan Library
Note: A nice intro that puts cataloging in historical perspective from the 1934 vantage point:
Few of the younger librarians of the present day can realize or fully understand the situation of cataloging in the nineties of the last century. Libraries in Britain and America were mostly small, as we now count numbers. In Europe there were more of the sizeable sort, almost all of the learned or "scientific" type. What agreement on cataloging practice had been reached in any country was chiefly based on certain well-known codes intended for very large libraries---the British Museum Rules, the Bodleian rules, the Bibliothèque Nationale rules, and the foreshadowings of the Prussian and the Austrian Instructions. In America, breaking away in part from these examples, Mr. Cutter had published two editions of his Rules for a dictionary catalogue, first in 1876. There were certain practices reduced to rules by the New York State Library School (p. 165).
The paragraph continues. What strikes me about it is that even Cutter's rules today are presented as if they were created *ex nihilo*. This paragraph, all by itself, puts the entire enterprise in context.
Note: The following is an interesting footnote. After making a statement, Bishop writes in footnote 6:
I am writing this on the ocean far from any books of reference for verifying what I trust are fairly accurate recollections (p. 165).
Note: As far as I can tell, there is finally a straightforward indication that this issue is dedicated to J. C. M. Hanson. On Hanson's work to develop "preliminary edition of the Anglo-American Code of catalog rules (p. 166), Bishop writes:
No one claims it is perfect, but it is a great piece of constructive work, due to the labor of many able men, but guided by one whom we honor in this group of articles (p. 167).
Note: Nice explanation of the intent behind the above named rules. This has been the intent of various rules and schemes (perhaps but more broadly) unto this day:
One feature of Hanson's work is but little understood. His aim---and that of his committee---was to make a code usable and indispensable for great libraries, but also capable of being followed in smaller and more popular libraries without serious vexation and undue confusion (p. 167).
Note: This achievement cannot be understated:
Ninety-nine out of a hundred titles in the ordinary library can be and are cataloged with printed cards made under this code. It requires a genius for concrete statements and for clearness to make this sort of result possible (p. 167).
* [[lq:Author-Childs]]
* [[lq:Affil-Library of Congress]]
This entry is about:
Childs, James B. (1934). Author Entries for Canadian Government Publications. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 169-174. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302060
Note: The sixth article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Author Entries for Canadian Government Publications."
It was written by James B. Childs, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Library of Congress
Note: Begins with a brief history of Canada and then lists the names to use as author entries for various Canadian government organizations, departments, boards. I have no idea why this is in LQ. It could be very appropriate for the journal, but the author does not provide much of any reasoning. Not sure why this is an issue dedicated to Hanson, either.
* [[lq:Author-Currier]]
* [[lq:Affil-Harvard College Library]]
This entry is about:
Currier, Thomas Franklin. (1934). The Whittier Leaflet "Pericles." The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 175-178. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302061
Note: The seventh article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Whittier Leaflet 'Pericles.'"
It was written by Thomas Franklin Currier, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Harvard College Library
Note: Another bibliology. These are interesting pieces that deserve their own historical inquiry. Perhaps someday.
* [[lq:Author-Dieserud]]
* [[lq:Affil-Washington DC]]
This entry is about:
Dieserud, Juul. (1934). The Abbreviation of Imprints. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 179-184. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302062
Note: The eighth article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Abbreviation of Imprints."
It was written by Juul Dieserud, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Washington, D.C. (No Affiliation)
Note: The first sentence of this article helps put this issue in context.
I feel very much honored by the request to furnish a brief article on some library subject for the number of Library quarterly devoted to my esteemed former chief of the Catalog Division of the Library of Congress (p. 179).
Note: I like this if only because it provides some insight into the academic background on the author (a librarian):
In 1900 he [J. C. M. Hanson] recommended me for a position in the Library of Congress as revisor of cataloging---I am sure rather on the strength of personal knowledge of my philological degree from the University of Oslo than for the reason of my slight seven years' experience as a cataloger and later librarian of the Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago (p. 179).
Note: The article is, as the title suggests, about the use and rules of abbreviations in cataloging. It is, at times, humorous. Some remarks on enforcing a practice of collecting daily statistics on the daily work of LC catalogers:
From my own experience of some forty years I unhesitatingly say that this would spell disaster to the accuracy of the output, in addition to reducing the force to a nervous, irritated body of works with chronic dyspepsia (p. 183).
* [[lq:Author-Dorf]]
* [[lq:Affil-Brooklyn NY]]
This entry is about:
Dorf, A. Th. (1934). The University of Chicago Libraries: A Historical Note. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 185-197. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302063
Note: The ninth article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The University of Chicago Libraries: A Historical Note."
It was written by A. Th. Dorf, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Brooklyn, New York (No Affiliation)
Note: This article is a valuable history of both J. C. M. Hanson's work at the University of Chicago Libraries but also of the libraries themselves. Any future work on the history of libraries should reference this article and its contents.
Note: Nice quote:
It was one of Mr. Hanson's axioms that "there is no short-cut to anything, least of all in library science" ... (p. 196).
Note: Might be interesting to examine someday, as a thesis / hypothesis:
Nor did he hesitate to point out, which is customary honesty, that the larger the library the more costly the addition of each book. "Increasing perfection and completeness of the catalogs reduce expense, but growth will of itself increase it" (p. 196).
Note: Important historical note on Hanson's view of librarianship:
It remains to say a word about the development of a library staff. Mr. Hanson himself was an excellent, though a severe, teacher. His own standards were high, and he insisted that these standards be maintained by his staff. Some of this staff he brought with him from the Library of Congress; others he himself trained to the special needs of the university library. It was his firm conviction that the library science was an exacting one, and he insisted that assistants serve an apprenticeship before they were given positions of responsibility. The chief bibliographer, for example, was required to work for several years in the bookstacks and the classification department before he was given an opportunity to work in his special field (p. 196).
And:
Mr. Hanson was particularly anxious to avoid, in library work, the narrow specialization that is characteristic of so much of American life. Foreign library journals and publications were distributed among the members of the staff who, in his opinion, had the maturity to profit by them, and they were given an opportunity to review these articles at the regular monthly meetings of the staff where the various problems of the library administration came up for discussion (p. 197).
* [[lq:Author-Drachmann]]
* [[lq:Affil-University Library]]
This entry is about:
Drachmann, A. G. (1934). Call Numbers. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 198-206. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302064
Note: The tenth article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Call Numbers."
It was written by A. G. Drachmann, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University Library
Note: Begins with a very neat description of the University Library in Copenhagen, Denmark before call numbers were used. Insightful. And then describes the process of incorporating call numbers into the system given various constraints.
His proposal, or at least his arguments for his proposal, seem overly complicated and based all too much on reasoning than on some evidence. But I shouldn't judge too harshly from this far into the future.
* [[lq:Author-Farrell]]
* [[lq:Affil-The Abbey Library]]
This entry is about:
Farrell, Colman J. (1934). The Classification of Books in Libraries. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 207-222. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302065
Note: The eleventh article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Classification of Books in Libraries."
It was written by Colman J. Farrell, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: The Abbey Library
Note: This is a critical review of a book on classification written by a Henry Evelyn Bliss. It's a good review and I'm not finding much to discuss, but the author raises are very good question:
The all-important question, which Bliss's book raises in the mind of a classifier of books, is this: why does the author propose to discuss the problems of book classification and, straightaway, enter into a discussion of the divisions of knowledge? Even if there were some kind of identity, why does he choose to discuss the problem in terms of knowledge rather than in terms of books (p. 213)?
And then Farrell writes:
This is not a question of "logical" versus "arbitrary" procedure, but a question of deductive versus inductive procedure (p. 213).
Note: More humor:
It was a formula which led the man with eight white horses and two black horses to kill all the white horses when he observed that the white horses ate more than the black horses (p. 220).
And so Farrell's criticism in two sentences:
The method of the author [Bliss], therefore, is to "conceive" classes. The method of the Library of Congress is to investigate the literature to "discover" the classes (p. 220).
It's a delightful critique -- without overtly stating it, it draws upon a lot of Western philosophy -- including Kant.
And this is very scathing:
Professors of book classification in library schools will be forever indebted to Bliss for this capital illustration of the distinction between book classification and the classification of knowledge, between the classification of material things as they exist in nature and the classification of the limited conceptual knowledge as it exists in individual minds. It is one of those things which fairly defies explanation until one can illustrate it by means of a concrete example (p. 221).
This topic should really be revisited. The argument weighs heavily on the more modern issue of the organization of information as opposed to the organization of things:
in the organization of knowledge there can be no correlation of the abstract with the concrete, but merely a division of an abstract whole into immaterial parts. The second distinction is found in the procedure: classification of books is necessarily synthetic; organization of knowledge can only be analytic (p. 222).
Note: After highlighting some of the imperfections inherent in the Library of Congress classification schedule, Farrell write:
The aspect of the Library of Congress classification schedules with which the present writer has not been able to find fault is the theory and method which they are grounded. They seem to be unimpeachable; and it is a most singular and unfortunate phenomenon that the profession as a whole has remained oblivious, during the past thirty-five years and apparently to this day, of the true nature of the work being done in the national library (p. 222).
Note: I'm interested in the fact that the author of this article is a monk of the Order of Saint Benedict (O.S.B) and is writing from an abbey in Atchison Kansas.
Note: Bliss was not always well received (as he was not here): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_E._Bliss.
* [[lq:Author-Frauendorfer]]
* [[lq:Affil-International Institute of Agriculture]]
This entry is about:
Frauendorfer, Sigmund von. (1934). Classification Problems in an International Special Library. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 223-233. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302066
Note: The twelfth article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Classification Problems in an International Special Library."
It was written by Sigmund von Frauendorfer, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: International Institute of Agriculture
Note: The main gist of the article is the difficulty in adapting and applying a classification system in a special library. I don't have much to say about this piece. It is probably most interesting to those who are concerned with the classification of specific fields of study (in this instance, agriculture) and to those who manage libraries with a patron base that is international.
* [[lq:Author-Jacobsen]]
* [[lq:Affil-Luther College]]
This entry is about:
Jacobsen, Karl T. (1934). The Reorganization of the Library of a Small College. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 234-243. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302067
Note: The thirteenth article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Reorganization of the Library of a Small College."
It was written by Karl T. Jacobsen, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Luther College
Note: Presents an image of a small college library. Historically important for that alone. Important aspect: when the librarian was hired in 1920, it seems he was given full faculty status. See page 236, end of 2nd paragraph, for the sentence.
Note: The author, as a librarian, had to reclassify and re-catalog the collection. Used LC. Students' appreciation of the library apparently increased as a result of the reorganization and more used the library and more became interested in librarianship.
If the constant increase in the use of the books corresponding to the progress of the re-cataloging process experienced in this library is any criterion, it certainly would indicate that the character of the catalog and classification has made a very decided difference in the reaction of the students toward the library. This is also reflected in a somewhat different way in the number of students and graduates of the college who have become interested in librarianship as a life work during the past ten years (p. 239).
Good example of the relationship between how the library is presented to patrons and how often the patrons use the library.
Note: Information-literacy by any other name. On library instruction:
For the freshman, two lectures by the college librarian as a part of the college orientation course have been followed by a practice period in groups of twenty-five or less. This year an attempt is being made to supplement this procedure by co-operation with the course in freshman English (p. 240).
Detailed account of library instruction follows the above paragraph. For example:
This has resulted in what virtually amounts to individual tutoring by the librarian of the more than 125 freshman. The topics assigned, all biographical, have been such that to find the material available the students have had to make use of the various tools of the library, particularly the catalog and periodical indexes and a considerable number of reference books, both general and those connected more closely with the specific topic of the student. In each case the student was required to look up all the material he could find in the library on his topic and---except in a few instances where the material was very extensive and a selection had to be made---to record these references in accurate bibliographic form (pp. 240-241).
The librarian graded the above work and that grade was used by the English professor as part of the final grade. Collaboration.
Note: Expense details on page 242. And circulation details on page 243.
* [[lq:Author-Koch]]
* [[lq:Affil-Northwestern University Library]]
This entry is about:
Koch, Theodore W. (1934). New Light on Old Libraries. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 244-252. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302068
Note: The fourteenth article of the second issue of the fourth volume of *The Library Quarterly* is titled "New Light on Old Libraries."
It was written by Theodore W. Koch, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Northwestern University Library
Note: This is a historical outline of library buildings from antiquity to the present date of the article. Contains cultural history. The article was a nice read and contains five plates of images of libraries.
* [[lq:Author-Koenig]]
* [[lq:Affil-No Affil]]
This entry is about:
Koenig, Walther F. (1934). Ernesto and Eugenio do Canto: A Contribution of Azorean Bio-Bibliography. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 253-264. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302069
Note: The fifteenth article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Ernesto and Eugenio do Canto: A Contribution of Azorean Bio-Bibliography."
It was written by Walther F. Koenig, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Oldenburg, Germany (No affiliation)
Note: This is, as the title suggests, both a biography and a bibliography. Not sure why it's printed in this issue that is, essentially, a dedication to Jameson. I may not have stated this explicitly before, but there is no editorial introduction to this issue (or to any of the other issues in the volumes under study).
That aside, I like the idea of a bio-bibliography.
* [[lq:Author-Lamb]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Wisconsin Library]]
This entry is about:
Lamb, Eliza. (1934). The Expansive Classification in Use. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 265-269. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302070
Note: The sixteenth article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Expansive Classification in Use."
It was written by Eliza Lamb, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Wisconsin Library
Note: An account of the University of Wisconsin Library's use of Cutter's expansive classification. Short, insightful read.
* [[lq:Author-Lichtenstein]]
* [[lq:Affil-No Affil]]
This entry is about:
Lichtenstein, Walter. (1934). Library Education. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 270-273. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302071
Note: The seventeenth article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Library Education."
It was written by Walter Lichtenstein, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Chicago, Illinois (No affiliation)
Note: An interesting comment on library schools / education, which comes after a comment on education as an example of mass production:
So also in our library schools much time is spent in teaching pupils how to catalog, how to order books, how to classify the books for the shelves when received, what is the best manner of distributing them to the people, etc. Much less time seems to be spent in teaching what books really are, what differentiates one book from another, what type of books a particular library had better specialize in, and how the people ought to get the most out of libraries (p. 270).
Although the article begins with some good comments, as above, it uses those comments as premises to derive invalid conclusions. One of the conclusions drawn in this article is that library schools cannot teach people to know books as well the specific academic fields can and, therefore, academic libraries should be staffed by scholars and not librarians.
I don't mind arguments against library schools or library education, but the arguments presented in this article are foolish. The author would have served his argument better if he had continued his argument against library education rather than arguing, implicitly by support of other academic fields, that it could never suffice. This is the first *LQ* article in these first four volumes that left me rather annoyed.
* [[lq:Author-MacPherson]]
* [[lq:Affil-Columbia University]]
This entry is about:
MacPherson, Harriet Dorothea. (1934). The Anonymous Classic and Some Problems of Its Cataloging. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 274-281. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302072
Note: The eighteenth article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Anonymous Classic and Some Problems of Its Cataloging."
It was written by Harriet Dorothea MacPherson, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Columbia University
Note: Quite a delightful read about cataloging anonymous works; issues include: the selection of main or added entry, state of knowledge with historical and literary scholarship on authorship of texts, the nature of texts (e.g., epics, fairy tales), and so forth.
* [[lq:Author-Merrill]]
* [[lq:Affil-No Affil]]
This entry is about:
Merrill, William Stetson. (1934). Order of Books by Date under Subjects. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 282-284. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302073
Note: The nineteenth article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Order of Books by Date under Subjects."
It was written by William Stetson Merrill, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Oconomowoc, Wisconsin (No affiliation)
Note: While not completely without merit in some cases (such as in indexes), the author here makes a case for arranging books in chronological order (most recent last) instead of in alphabetical order by author. This is because, the author argues, patrons want the most recent work on a subject rather than what any particular author has to say about a subject (esp., the author argues, in books on science and technology and biographies). For the most part, this is a weird article. But it, at least, indicates something interesting about how young this subject matter was at the time---that such a thing could be seriously presented.
* [[lq:Author-Minto]]
* [[lq:Affil-Signet Library]]
This entry is about:
Minto, John. (1934). The Library Association Examinations. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 285-295. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302074
Note: The twentieth article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Library Association Examinations."
It was written by John Minto, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Signet Library
Note: In short, this article highlights how extremely challenging it would have been to become a librarian in the United Kingdom in the early to mid-20th century. The examinations required quite a bit of knowledge. Provides a short history of the various library schools that came into existence during the first few decades of the last century.
Reflection: While many of the articles in this special issue are interesting, the issue itself is becoming rather tedious to read through. Previous issues alway contained a good proportion of stimulating material, but this issue seems stressed by the apparent motivation to include a lot of material.
* [[lq:Author-Munthe]]
* [[lq:Affil-Universitetsbiblioteket]]
This entry is about:
Munthe, Wilhelm. (1934). National Departments in Scandinavian Libraries. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 296-299. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302075
Note: The twenty-first article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "National Departments in Scandinavian."
It was written by Wilhelm Munthe, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Universitetsbiblioteket
Note: A very respectful response to a critique written by J. C. M. Hanson on the Norwegian:
practice of dividing the books in national libraries into two main divisions, one to hold the books printed or published in the country itself and the second to include all foreign books (p. 296).
* [[lq:Author-Noé]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Noé, A. C. (1934). The University Library and Research. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 300-305. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302076
Note: The twenty-second article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The University Library and Research."
It was written by A. C. Noé, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago
Note: Herein is a really interesting argument about the advantages that librarians as bibliographers can provide to scientists who lack the assistants and machinery to produce the equivalent of what scientists in, as the author explicitly names, Germany can produce. The author's analogy:
Does this difference in personnel help permanently to condemn the American professor to a position of relative inferiority in research work? This question can perhaps be answered by a comparison with the American farmer. The latter has also much less help than a western European farmer, and yet he produces more per man than any other agriculturalist in the world. He does it through superior organization of work and through the use of machinery. The same could be true of the American research worker. What he lacks in assistants and technicians could, in a measure, be replaced by organization and machinery---both to be supplied by departments of bibliographic research in university libraries (p. 300).
* [[lq:Author-Pierson]]
* [[lq:Affil-Library of Congress]]
This entry is about:
Pierson, Harriet Wheeler. (1934). The Forest of Pencils: Adventures in Corporate Entry. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 306-313. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302077
Note: The twenty-third article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Forest of Pencils: Adventures in Corporate Entry."
It was written by Harriet Wheeler Pierson, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Library of Congress
Note: Probably the best title in these first volumes so far. Begins with a short history of the Chinese Emporer Taitsung and his founding of a library that lasted for 1200 years only to be burned down during the Boxer rebellion in 1900.
Note: Although this is an important and very complicated topic, I think the following is humorous, and I think, given how this article reads in general, that it is meant to be humorous (see, e.g., last paragraph on page 312):
particularly did he [J. C. M. Hanson] clarify the rules for corporate entry, a subject more open to differences of opinion than, perhaps, any other (p. 307).
Note: Here ya go:
Catalogers are not only transcribers, they are seekers of truth.
Note: I celebrate this author's passion, as I read her voice from the past.
To the uninitiated the profession of cataloging may appear dry and uninteresting; in reality there is no profession which affords so great an opportunity to look into the mirror of life. The revelation is absorbing and full of interesting surprises: a glimpse of beauty in some forgotten volume, a flash of humor from some dusty shelf. The voices of the past are audible, their joy and pain, their triumph and defeat, their ambition and resignation, their eager and unending struggle to solve the mystery of life (p. 313).
* [[lq:Author-Hanson]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Hanson, J. C. M. (1934). Letter to Mr. Hanson. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 314. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302078
Note: The twenty-fourth article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Letter to Mr. Hanson."
It was written by J. C. M. Hanson, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago
Note: This is a very short, humorous half-page letter to J. C. M. Hanson and appears to be from himself too. There is an illegible signature at the end of the letter.
* [[lq:Author-Solberg]]
* [[lq:Affil-No Affil]]
This entry is about:
Solberg, Thorvald. (1934). Copyright and Librarians. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 315-328. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302079
Note: The twenty-fifth article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Copyright and Librarians."
It was written by Thorvald Solberg, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Washington, DC (No affiliation)
Note: Important text on early copyright issues for librarians. Rather than the focus today, which is often on term length and reuse, the focus in the early 20th century concerned accessing books printed in foreign nations and the requirement that such books be reprinted by American publishers and printers.
Thorvald Solberg was an important figure in early 20th century copyright reform.
* [[lq:Author-Starr]]
* [[lq:Affil-James J Hill Reference Library]]
This entry is about:
Starr, Helen K. (1934). Mr. Hanson and His Friends. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 329-333. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302080
Note: The twenty-sixth article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Mr. Hanson and His Friends."
It was written by Helen K. Starr, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: James J. Hill Reference Library
Note: This is a really sweet piece that describes some of the personalities of the librarians who worked in the cataloging division of the Library of Congress when J. C. M. Hanson headed the division. The piece is like a gold mine of biographical insight.
* [[lq:Author-Stejneger]]
* [[lq:Affil-United States National Museum]]
This entry is about:
Stejneger, Leonhard. (1934). Who Was J. L. S.? The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 334-340. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302081
Note: The twenty-seventh article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Who Was J. L. S.?"
It was written by Leonhard Stejneger, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: United States National Museum
Note: Authorial detective work. The content deals with a history that I am woefully ignorant, but I greatly admire the ability to fashion a narrative concerning tracing the identity of a work.
* [[lq:Author-Tisserant]]
* [[lq:Affil-Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana]]
This entry is about:
Tisserant, Eugène. (1934). On the Use of Ultra-Violet Rays for Detecting Repairs in Printed Books, Especially Incunabula. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 341-343. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302082
Note: The twenty-eighth article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "On the Use of Ultra-Violet Rays for Detecting Repairs in Printed Books, Especially Incunabula."
It was written by Eugène Tisserant, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana
Note: A short piece on detecting repair work in rare books. Repair work had advanced and it was sometimes difficult to tell with the naked eye if a work had been treated. The author presents a simple technique for identifying whether a rare book had been fixed.
* [[lq:Author-Trommsdorff]]
* [[lq:Affil-Bibliothek der Technischen]]
This entry is about:
Trommsdorff, Paul. (1934). Technische Literatur in Deutschen Bibliotheken. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 344-351. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302083
Note: The twenty-ninth article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Technische Literatur in Deutschen Bibliotheken."
It was written by Paul Trommsdorff, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Bibliothek der Technischen
Note: I'm not sure what the thesis of this article is, but it's clearly in some sense about the growth of German scientific and technical literature.
* [[lq:Author-Van Hoesen]]
* [[lq:Author-Kilpatrick]]
* [[lq:Affil-Brown University Library]]
This entry is about:
Van Hoesen, Henry B., & Kilpatrick, Norman L. (1934). Heights of Books in Relation to Height of Stack Tiers. The Library Quarterly, 4(2), 352-357. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302084
Note: The thirtieth article of the second issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Heights of Books in Relation to Height of Stack Tiers."
It was written by Henry B. Van Hoesen and Norman L. Kilpatrick, who were affiliated with:
Affiliation: Brown University Library
Note: On the most economical and efficient use of shelving. Again, it's utterly important to think about this kind of thing in a library. In many ways, this is a very important topic if only because of the amount of money that is needed to store and care for so many books. However, it's not really clear why this article is in this issue. The only connection to Hanson is the issue of describing the physical dimensions of books in the catalog, but this is only mentioned briefly at the beginning of the article.
Here's a nice quote:
We have recently measured about 100,000 volumes at Brown University. The results are in Table I (p. 355).
And to continue:
This paper should be considered merely tentative and incomplete. Our estimate of 82 per cent for octavos (25 cm. high), Mr. Gerould's estimate of 85 per cent, and the Yale estimate of 87 1/2 per cent (reckoning the octavo at 26 cm. high) may not be so different when we have measured 400,000 volumes instead of 100,000 (p. 357).
And more measuring of books:
Four hundred thousand is quite a lot of books to measure, but it may not be enough, and we should welcome collaboration in further measurements, tabulations, and conclusions (p. 357).
Reading notes for the fourth volume and third issue of The Library Quarterly.
To return to the list of notes on this volume: volume-4
* [[lq:Author-Scribner]]
* [[lq:Affil-Bureau of Standards]]
This entry is about:
Scribner, B. W. (1934). The Preservation of Records in Libraries. The Library Quarterly, 4(3), 371-383. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302089
Note: The first article of the third issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Preservation of Records in Libraries."
It was written by B. W. Scribner, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Bureau of Standards
Note: This piece is largely an update to an earlier article by Scribner on preservation. See Scribner, 1931.
It is also, I believe, the third article dealing with preservation. The other one is Iiams, 1932.
* [[lq:Author-Dale]]
* [[lq:Author-Tyler]]
* [[lq:Affil-Bureau of Educational Research]]
* [[lq:Affil-Ohio State University]]
This entry is about:
Dale, Edgar, & Tyler, Ralph W. (1934). A Study of the Factors Influencing the Difficulty of Reading Materials for Adults of Limited Reading Ability. The Library Quarterly, 4(3), 384-412. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302090
Note: The second article of the third issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "A Study of the Factors Influencing the Difficulty of Reading Materials for Adults of Limited Reading Ability."
It was written by Edgar Dale and Ralph W. Tyler, who were affiliated with:
Note: This should be an interesting study. It's about identifying the characteristics of reading material that make the material easier to comprehend for adults with limited literacy abilities.
Note: The study will use multiple regression. Until now, only correlation coefficients with confidence intervals have been used in these early articles, so this is the most advanced use of statistics to date in *LQ*. Note that it is written by people outside of the library science field.
Note: The study, for some reason, includes only people of color as participants. Not sure why yet. The authors do seek to generalize to all the population and do, for the most part, seem respectful of their participants, but some of the remarks seem to be a bit condescending.
Note: The study includes only personal health reading material.
Note: Very detailed description of creating and administering the test.
Note: The authors are checking for reliability and validity of their test instrument.
Note: An audience statement:
For most purposes librarians and others interested in selecting reading materials of given difficulty will find these three counts valuable (p. 402).
Note: The authors state their multiple regression equation and then describe how to use it:
The use of this regression equation may easily be shown by illustration. Suppose one wished to select some reading material which are easy enough so that they would be comprehended by at least 80 per cent of adults who have from third- to fifth-grade reading ability. Samples of these selections of similar size to those used in this study could be examined and the number of different technical words, the number of different hard, non-technical words, and the number of indeterminate clauses counted. These counts could then be multiplied by -9.4, -0.4, +2.2, respectively. The resulting products could then be added to 114.4. If all the selections were chosen in which the resulting sums were 80 or higher, we should have those in which the predicted difficulty of comprehension would be such that the selections would be understood by 80 per cent or more of the adults who have third- to fifth-grade reading ability. For these selections we should probably find half of them within 9 per cent of the difficulty predicted. Hence this regression equation does give a reasonably accurate prediction of the difficulty of reading materials similar to those used in this study (pp. 402-403).
Note: The article contains three "exhibits." Exhibits A, B, and C are samples of the three tests administered in this study.
* [[lq:Author-Adams]]
* [[lq:Affil-Rosemead School District]]
This entry is about:
Adams, A. Elwood. (1934). The Use of the School Library by Teachers and Pupils in Junior and Senior High Schools. The Library Quarterly, 4(3), 413-419. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302091
Note: The third article of the third issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Use of the School Library by Teachers and Pupils in Junior and Senior High Schools."
It was written by A. Eldwood Adams, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Rosemead School District
Note: This is a brilliant article on school libraries. As relevant today as it was 80 years ago.
* [[lq:Author-Hely]]
* [[lq:Affil-Western Kentucky State]]
This entry is about:
Hely, Margie M. (1934). Copies of Collateral References for College Libraries. The Library Quarterly, 4(3), 420-435. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302092
Note: The fourth article of the third issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Copies of Collateral References for College Libraries."
It was written by Margie M. Hely, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Western Kentucky State
Note: The author defines collateral reading as "'outside reading'" (p. 421) that is related to coursework.
Note: Brilliant:
Records kept by the writer over a period of many weeks from two reserve desks revealed that there are relationships between these factors which remain constant. The number of students multiplied by the number of pages each must read will give the total number of pages to be read by all the students. The number of pages read per hour by the typical student multiplied by the length of the average loan in terms of an hour will give the number of pages read by the typical student during one average loan period. If the first product (the total number of pages) be divided by the second product (the number of pages read by the typical student ini one loan period), the number of loans needed for all the students will be ascertained. Then if this total number of loans be divided by the number of loans one book may be expected to make in the given period, the quotient will give the number of books needed. Thus by an objective method, the number of duplicate copies necessary for a given class under given conditions may be determined (p. 422).
It's a common theme that early authors were very concerned with coming up with objective methods and measures.
Library Science arises out of a push for this objectivity.
Another example:
The number of pages that an average student can read in an hour was believed to be a determining factor. From Mr. Ivan A. Booker, assistant director of research, National Education Association, it was found that his studies of the reading rates of college freshmen entering the University of Chicago in the fall term of 1930 and of 1931 revealed the mean rate of 3.68 words per second for the first year and 3.83 words per second for the second year (p. 424).
I couldn't help myself. I just timed my reading of this article and clocked myself in at 6.25 words per second (375 words in 60 seconds). I guess I beat college freshmen from 1930.
Note: As I said, brilliant. After proposing a formula for determining how many reserve books a course will need, she tests it:
At Western Kentucky State Teachers College an instructor in a psychology class purchased with department funds five copies of Warren and Carmichael's Human Psychology. He placed them at the reserve desk with the comment that these were believed to be sufficient. Two weeks elapsed and he came to say that his students were complaining that they did not have enough books. With facts about his class and the assignment furnished, the librarian used the formula to determine how many copies his class needed.
>
a = 50 students in the class b = Approximately 50 pages to be read per week c = 28 pages read per hour by the typical student k1 = 0.62 hours (37 min.) per average loan k2 = 19 loans per average week
>
Substituting in the formula, we get
>
a X b / c X k1 / k2 = 50 X 50 / 28 X 0.62 / 19 = 50 X 50 / 28 X 0.62 X 19 = 7+, or 8 copies (p. 432).
Incapable of reproducing the exact representation of the above calculations.
She then writes:
The five copies had evidently been too few. The instructor agreed to purchase three extra copies, and no further difficulties were reported throughout the three remaining months of the semester. Since each copy is good for about nineteen loans to a week, the class was short fifty-seven loans. No wonder they were in trouble. The instructor was completely converted to the efficacy of the formula (p. 433).
Reflection: This is an important article not because of the findings but because it represents a way of going about solving a problem that was representative of the time period and of the beginnings of library science.
* [[lq:Author-Hurt]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of California]]
This entry is about:
Hurt, Peyton. (1934). The Need of College and University Instruction in Use of the Library. The Library Quarterly, 4(3), 436-448. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302093
Note: The fifth article of the third issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Need of College and University Instruction in Use of the Library."
It was written by Peyton Hurt, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of California
Note: This will be an important article too -- simply because of its topic matter. However, I'm always surprised by this expectation:
College and university librarians are repeatedly astonished at the lack of knowledge of library technique on the part of students, research workers, and even on the part of instructors (p. 436).
Why would they have the expectation that any of these people would have the necessary skills?
Note: This is one of those studies that show we still ask the same kinds of general questions today.
There is a question, however, of just how much or how little the average person knows of the technique of using a library as a source of information on subjects that interest him personally (p. 436).
And:
How much does the undergraduate and the graduate student, in the course of his college and university studies, learn concerning methods of using a library (p. 436)?
And:
What changes, if any, are needed in our educational system if we are to develop a greater degree of student independence and initiative in using the library as a source of information (p. 436)?
The last question is especially important. Note the desired outcome: student independence. Long the goal of academic libraries.
Note: One of the subtle points of this article seems to be that reference is an overused substitute for solid library use instruction. That's an interesting point. Take the following:
One familiar with the library research methods employed by the great majority of students must realize that this independent work is far too often work for the library assistant, with little beneficial training for the student (p. 443).
Note: And this is a brilliant passage:
It would seem fair to ask if it would not be advisable to teach the use of library materials and then throw the students into the ponds of economics, history, biology, and other subjects, to the abandonment of the time-honored method of instruction by lectures and assigned reading. Would not such procedure lead to continued study and reading on the part of those who become interested in various subjects? Would it not tend to create independence and initiative which would be highly useful after college courses were a thing of the past? Would it not pave the way for intelligent adult self-education (p. 443)?
Note: Library use instruction:
As a result of the present study, the university is introducing a course in library use and general bibliography. The course, under the School of Librarianship, will be open to upper division and graduate students in all fields, but will be designed especially to meet the needs of students in the social sciences (p. 444).
Note: Need to come back to this article in the future. Aside from the topic matter, the article is historically interesting for its listing of general reference works and library methods that were considered necessary at the time.
* [[lq:Author-Krassovsky]]
* [[lq:Affil-Hoover War Library]]
This entry is about:
Krassovsky, Dimitry M. (1934). Bibliographical Work in Russia. The Library Quarterly, 4(3), 449-466. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302094
Note: The sixth article of the third issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Bibliographical Work in Russia."
It was written by Dimitry M. Krassovsky, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Hoover War Library, Stanford University
Note: It is interesting to read a library science article about the USSR and that predates the Cold War.
Reflection: Mental note: Incorporate bibliographical and bio-bibliographical work.
Note: Nice turn a phrase the captures what a library is without people to use it:
The revolution gave impetus to the development of libraries, and the introduction of technical facilities made of them not "cemeteries of books" but living bodies (p. 461).
In essence, library science is the study of library as a living body -- of its health, its use, its betterment, etc.
Note: Interesting history of library science developments in post-revolutionary Russia.
* [[lq:Author-Spratt]]
* [[lq:Affil-Science Museum Library]]
This entry is about:
Spratt, H. P. (1934). Notes on Some Scientific and Technical Libraries of Northern Europe. The Library Quarterly, 4(3), 467-486. url:[http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302095
Note: The seventh article of the third issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Notes on Some Scientific and Technical Libraries of Northern Europe."
It was written by H. P. Spratt, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Science Museum Library
Note: These are actual notes. The first paragraph explains that what follows are simply notes the author took on a tour of "some of the most important scientific and technical libraries of seven nations in Northern Europe" (p. 467). Spratt writes:
The notes which follow should therefore be accepted as an objective review; those who do n ot look for a philosophical treatise will not be disappointed (p. 467).
Note: Spratt describes the use of an "'Adrema' machine" that was adapted for information retrieval. See page 476. Not much on the general web about this device. This site outlines the use of this device by the Nazis for documenting forced laborers: http://berliner-unterwelten.de/the-card-index-of-forced-labourers.485.1.html. A full description should be in the following piece, currently head by NY Public Library: http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/44994165.
Note: Author describes a really cool public library in Stadsbiblioteket, Stockholm. Although this article is a rather straightforward, dry description of libraries, this is rather more lively:
In the children's department, which is beautifully decorated and furnished with miniature chairs, tables, and bookshelves, there is the remarkable Story-Teller's Room. Seats for fifty children are set out in semicircular rows in front of a recess in which the story-teller sits and talks about fairies and "trolls" for an hour every afternoon. The walls are decorated with all kinds of fantasies, and the roof is an enormous umbrella (p. 483).
Note: The author speaks to a different topic, but this is, at heart, the agenda of the time:
to rationalize the work of the library (pp. 484-485).
* [[lq:Author-Lyle]]
* [[lq:Affil-Antioch College Library]]
This entry is about:
Lyle, Guy R. (1934). College Literary Societies in the Fifties. The Library Quarterly, 4(3), 487-493. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302096
Note: The eighth article of the third issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "College Literary Societies in the Fifties."
It was written by Guy R. Lyle, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Antioch College Library
Note: A very lively depiction of college literary societies in the 1850s. As noted in either Hamlin or Shiflett or both (as well as others), the libraries these societies built would become important contributions to academic libraries later in the 19th and early in the 20th centuries.
Reading notes for the fourth volume and the fourth issue of The Library Quarterly.
To return to the list of notes on this volume: volume-4
* [[lq:Author-Danton]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Danton, J. Periam. (1934). Plea for a Philosophy of Librarianship: Philosophia vero omnium mater artium. The Library Quarterly, 4(4), 527-551. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302121
Note: The first article of the fourth issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Plea for a Philosophy of Librarianship: Philosophia vero omnium mater artium."
It was written by J. Periam Danton, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago
Note: This is probably the most cited article from these first few volumes.
Note: Equates librarianship with library science by applying one definition to the two terms:
Librarianship or library science is that branch of learning which has to do with the recognition, collection, organization, preservation, and utilization of graphic and printed records (pp. 528-529).
Note: First reference to Ranganathan's *Five laws of library science*. Danton writes:
But this treatise, as stimulating and interesting as it undoubtedly is, does not attempt to define the functions of library activity on any other bases than that of present-day good library service; ... (p. 532).
So it's interesting that S. R. Ranganathan's book had sparked some discussions at this early of a date.
Note: A one sentence summary of Danton's criticism:
The crux of the matter is that the librarian has thus far concerned himself almost exclusively with process, achievement, and the immediate objective, and has given little or no thought to function or to justifying that function (p. 533).
Note: Danton addresses my above remark:
The term "librarianship" may be said to be equivalent to "library science" (p. 535).
Note: On science and philosophy (important to note for, at the very least, having a historical understanding of their use of the terms):
Any science deals fundamentally with the acquisition of facts and data; the description of those data through definition, analysis, and classification; explanation of them by the ascertainment of causes; and, finally, evaluation and the formulation of laws. Science concerns itself directly with concrete phenomena. A philosophy, on the other hand, is interested in aims and functions, in purpose and meaning (pp. 535-536).
Note: The aesthetic factor:
In contrast, although a philosophy of librarianship would be vitally interested, indirectly, in the scientifically derived data on reading interests, abilities, etc., it would be primarily concerned with purpose---that is, with finding out whether librarianship should concern itself with the question at all, and if so why... (p. 536).
Reflection: It's too often ignored --- that science without philosophy and philosophy without science is impossible. To pretend that the relationship does not exist is, also, dangerous.
Note: I'm taking this out of context but I think it's an important example of what Danton thinks is an instance of the science of librarianship in practice. The preceding sentences, not quoted here, are important in that they reference some of the authors that have dominated these early volumes of LQ:
It should be noted, too, that one phase of library work---is, in a not very different sense, scientific in its approach and techniques. This is enumerative bibliography which, at its best, is the examination, description, and listing of books in accordance with certain well-defined principles and by means of a more or less universally accepted terminology (p. 538).
Note: Beginning at the top of page 540, good criticism on the lack of interest in libraries by sociologists, political scientists, etc. Need to come back to this someday. Interesting / respectful quote by a Wesley C. Mitchell that responds to this lack of treatment and attention.
Danton, though, soundly rejects Mitchell's argument.
Note: More aesthetic. See Danton's concrete example at the top of page 544.
Reflection: The *LQ* pushes the library science in the first volumes, and now pushes the philosophy of library science.
Reflection: I should have reread this article before I submitted my Parker piece. The discussion about isolation in the first paragraph of section 6 on page 546 would have been useful to add.
Note: Important discussion about the necessity of libraries on pages 548-549. They may or may not be, Danton seems to argue, but if we state they are, then that statement needs to be justified and not simply taken as an ideological presupposition.
* [[lq:Author-Schütz]]
* [[lq:Affil-Montclair Free Public Library]]
This entry is about:
Schütz, Géza. (1934). Bibliotheca Corvina. The Library Quarterly, 4(4), 552-563. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302122
Note: The second article of the fourth issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Bibliotheca Corvina."
It was written by Géza Schütz, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Montclair Free Public Library
Note: Nice history of the Bibliotheca Corvina library.
Note: I wonder if any economic historians have examined the economics of early printing. I find this statement relevant to today:
unemployment was provoked there by the manufacture and the sale of printed books (p. 559).
* [[lq:Author-Gaskill]]
* [[lq:Author-Dunbar]]
* [[lq:Author-Brown]]
* [[lq:Affil-Iowa State College Library]]
This entry is about:
Gaskill, H. V., Dunbar, R. M., & Brown, C. H. (1934). An Analytical Study of the Use of a College Library. The Library Quarterly, 4(4), 564-587. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302123
Note: The third article of the fourth issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Analytical Study of the Use of a College Library."
It was written by H. V. Gaskill, R. M. Dunbar, and C. H. Brown, who were affiliated with:
Affiliation: Iowa State College Library
Note: Although this article is about library use, some of the questions the authors raise in the first paragraph border on information behavior questions.
Note: This is a very thorough piece. Mentions the need for a qualitative study and I haven't seen that term used before in these early issues.
Note: Data collection and research questions:
Three methods were used for the collection of data: (1) count and analysis of attendance, (2) personal interviews, (3) count and analysis of slips for books charged over the assigned reading desk. An attempt was made to answer four questions: How many students use the library? For what purpose do students come to the library? Why do students fail to get what they want? What is the nature of the use of reserved books?
The authors pretested their interview questions.
Note: Important passage about information desires and librarians:
Five or six of the students who failed to obtain the material desired were not very complimentary to the library in their expressions of dissatisfaction. Students, like most of the rest of us, "want what they want when they want it." One observant student complained that "the perpetual costume of a librarian seems to be a frown" (p. 582).
Note: The daily use number, given the student enrollment, is a bit high.
The mean daily use of the library at Iowa State College was 4,200 volumes. The student enrollment was 3,384.
* [[lq:Author-Houlette]]
* [[lq:Affil-No Affil]]
This entry is about:
Houlette, William D. (1934). Parish Libraries and the Work of the Reverend Thomas Bray. The Library Quarterly, 4(4), 588-609. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302124
Note: The fourth article of the fourth issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Parish Libraries and the Work of the Reverend Thomas Bray."
It was written William D. Houlette, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: No Affiliation (Des Moines, Iowa)
Note: A history of colonial, parish libraries in Maryland, North Carolina, and South Carolina. Dry reading but interesting.
* [[lq:Author-Freer]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of the Witwatersrand]]
This entry is about:
Freer, P. (1934). The Compilation of Union Lists of Serial Publications According to the "H.C.F." of Titles. The Library Quarterly, 4(4), 610-623. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302125
Note: The fifth article of the fourth issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "The Compilation of Union Lists of Serial Publications According to the "H.C.F." of Titles."
It was written P. Freer, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of the Witwatersrand
Note: Technical article on cataloging union lists of periodicals. This is proto stuff --- signifies some of the complicated problems that librarians were dealing with as scientific communication really began to take off. Nice example of the problem:
Incidentally, the arrangement here suggested will meet, perhaps better than any other, Mr. Smith's requirements of a union list, where he says: "The purpose of a Union List of periodicals is to enable a researcher to discover where he may consult a given periodical, from a reference which is generally not completely accurate, is frequently abbreviated, and is sometimes truncated to the point of lunacy" (p. 621).
Note: There's a good point on the importance of typesetting the list of periodicals so that the list is readable. We might call this a usability issue now.
Note: I have no idea what "H.C.F." means. Aside from looking up some references the author points to, the main clue is this:
By that I mean that the all-important arranging word---the "H.C.F."---occurs as part of their titles" (p. 611).
* [[lq:Author-McCue]]
* [[lq:Affil-No Affil]]
This entry is about:
McCue, George S. (1934). Libraries of the London Coffeehouses. The Library Quarterly, 4(4), 624-627. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302126
Note: The sixth article of the fourth issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Libraries of the London Coffeehouses."
It was written George S. McCue, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: No Affiliation (New York City)
Note: Right away, the first sentence reminds me of an article written by Robert Darnton:
The London coffeehouses of Dryden's time had a great deal to do with the dissemination of the printed page (p. 624).
Darnton, R. (2000). An early information society: News and the media in eighteenth-century Paris. The American Historical Review, 105(1), 1-35. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2652433
Note: Books (libraries) in coffee houses goes back centuries. The reference to one here is to the year 1694. Another reference to one in 1668.
Note: The author describes how publishers were really against lending libraries. Ah publishers.
Note: Really nice, short history of these early types of libraries. Good addition to any world library history reading list.
* [[lq:Author-Spratt]]
* [[lq:Affil-Science Museum Library]]
This entry is about:
Spratt, H. P. (1934). Further Notes on Scientific and Technical Libraries in Northern Europe. The Library Quarterly, 4(4), 628-638. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302127
Note: The seventh article of the fourth issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Further Notes on Scientific and Technical Libraries in Northern Europe."
It was written H. P. Spratt, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Science Museum Library
Note: This a continuation of this article: Spratt, 1934a
Note: The article begins by describing libraries in Warsaw, Poland.
At the "*Bibljoteka Publiczna (Public Library), Warszawa*, the author writes something about a school and a library collection on librarianship:
There is a special "library of librarianship" with a collection of 3,000 volumes, so comprehensive that even some of the present writer's articles are to be found there (if looked for). Finally, I was shown the school of librarianship, where students learn the use of decimal classification and so forth (p. 630).
Note: After describing a number of libraries in Poland, the author moves on to libraries in Helsinki and then to Russia.
Note: Just kind of interesting -- about the "Central Transport Library, Leningrad":
It is of interest to mention that, in more than a hundred years, there have only been four successive librarians (p. 635).
* [[lq:Author-Waples]]
* [[lq:Affil-University of Chicago]]
This entry is about:
Waples, Douglas. (1934). Graduate Theses Accepted by Library Schools in the United States during the Academic Year 1932-1933. The Library Quarterly, 4(4), 639-641. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302128
Note: The eighth article of the fourth issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Graduate Theses Accepted by Library Schools in the United States during the Academic Year 1932-1933."
It was written Douglas Waples, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: University of Chicago
Note: This a continuation of this article: [Waples, 1933
Note: The article is a simple bibliography. The introduction mentions the previous year's article and then introduces this one. Waples writes:
Thirty-six graduate theses were accepted this year by four schools, namely: California, seven; Chicago, two; Columbia, thirteen; and Illinois, fourteen.
Waples then distributes the theses under the thirteen headings he created in the previous article. It's an interesting mix. Three of his subject headings are dedicated to some facet of bibliography:
*Reflection:* I really would like to look at a lot these theses some day.
* [[lq:Author-Bowerman]]
* [[lq:Affil-Public Library]]
This entry is about:
Bowerman, George F. (1934). Shall the Library Board Be Retained? The Library Quarterly, 4(4), 642-651. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302129
Note: The ninth article of the fourth issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Shall the Library Board Be Retained?"
It was written George F. Bowerman, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: Public Library (Washington, D.C.)
Note: Public library governance was a major concern at the time. Not just the quality of governance, but the actual system of governance. Off the cuff, I think this is the fourth article on the broad topic (but there may be more) in these early volumes. The three I can immediately recall are:
- Joeckel, 1931a - Joeckel, 1931b - Wachtel, 1933
Note: One apparently persistent theme is a tension between public libraries and institutions of public education. Consider lines like this:
The specialized interests of the library should not be jeopardized by being merged with, and submerged by, the overshadowing interests of the schools (p. 644).
Note: Important historical perspective:
The recognized authoritative publication on the public library in America is The American public library by Dr. Arthur E. Bostwick, librarian of the St. Louis Public Library and former president of the American Library Association (p. 646).
The author quotes both Bostwick and Joeckel.
Additional sources:
Nice article on the importance of the library board.
* [[lq:Author-Hanson]]
* [[lq:Affil-No Affil]]
This entry is about:
Hanson, J. C. M. (1934). Fritz Milkau, September 28, 1859-January 23, 1934. The Library Quarterly, 4(4), 652-654. url:http://www.jstor.org/stable/4302130
Note: The tenth article of the fourth issue of the fourth volume of The Library Quarterly is titled "Fritz Milkau, September 28, 1859-January 23, 1934."
It was written J. C. M. Hanson, who was affiliated with:
Affiliation: No Affiliation (Sister Bay, Wisconsin)
Note: From his retirement, Hanson writes this tribute to Fritz Milkau, an important German librarian.
Note: As a side note, I haven't researched the length it took for these articles to go from submission to publication, but the death of Milkau (end of January) and the publication of this article (last volume of the year) provides a bit of a clue. Other articles have mentioned current years (the last one did), so my guess would be that it took less than a year for an article to go through the process.
Reflection: This is the last article in my study.