#hcod

I've been kind of captivated by the news about HarperCollins, which has cruelly decided that its ebooks will go kaboom after 26 checkouts. The company arrived at this arbitrary number because it seems to think that paper books also go kaboom after 26 checkouts, even though every budget-strapped public librarian knows that isn't even remotely true; see this awesome video for proof:



Every librarian-blogger in the universe has weighed in about the Whole Huge HarperCollins Thing in past weeks and I don't have much to add, except to say that I am glad that librarians are able to rise up as a group and oppose this. There are boycotts and coordinated efforts and angry Canadians, and that is awesome. The ALA president spoke out, and librarians forced the issue so far into the mainstream that even the NYT has had to pay attention. (That article also mentioned something I didn't know: Simon & Schuster and Macmillan won't sell ebooks to libraries at all. Seriously? That lends unhappy credence to the idea that publishers "see us as a problem," as one of my favorite bloggers put it, and makes me a little bit scared about the boycotts... clearly libraries aren't necessary for the ebook bottom line.)

But some of the media coverage is also getting one major thing wrong. The number 26 is not the point; the number 100 or 1200 checkouts wouldn't be the point. The point is that libraries have paid for those ebooks -- like, with money, and there sure isn't a lot of that going around -- and they OWN those ebooks. Getting into a licensing relationship like the one that academic libraries have for journal subscriptions would be hell, and I sincerely hope that #hcod doesn't lead down that path. The fact that academic libraries have gotten used to their sincerely crappy deals doesn't mean that their public comrades should join them.

This plan makes a lot of sense to me. I'd love to throw DRM right out the window where it belongs, but I think the universe isn't ready for it yet and that using copyright to get past the scary specter of licensing is OK for now.

Let's end with a great metaphor by Cory Doctorow, who is always amazingly adept at showing the stupidity of a shoddy argument:

Whether a HarperCollins book has the circulatory vigour to cope with 26 checkouts or 200, it's bizarre to argue that this finite durability is a feature that we should carefully import into new media. It would be like assuming the contractual obligation to attack the microfilm with nail-scissors every time someone looked up an old article, to simulate the damage that might have been done by our careless patrons to the newsprint that had once borne it.

tiger librarians

Like everyone else, I heard about this Amy Chua "Tiger Mother" thing and formed an opinion before I actually read the WSJ op-ed she wrote. I'm not going to get into the "is it wrong to call your kid 'garbage'" debate (just kidding, of course I am! calling your kids names seems pretty sad and wrong and not good to me, and I don't really see a lot of ambiguity there. being mean and bullying your kids to be successful isn't really teaching them anything except that being mean and bullying will get you what you want. and also that their parents are jerks. no.)

Anyway, here's the part that made me think of libraries:

What Chinese parents understand is that nothing is fun until you're good at it. To get good at anything you have to work, and children on their own never want to work, which is why it is crucial to override their preferences.

That struck me as a totally anti-library sentiment -- in addition to not being true, like, at all. I can think of dozens of things I find fun that I'm not good at, including dancing and riding a bike. (Off the top of his head, J has just come up with cooking, playing music, and playing any kind of sports for himself.)

And libraries are all about trying new things... doing research on an unfamiliar topic, learning new languages, figuring out that you want to knit or cook or raise chickens or grow a garden. Idealistically speaking, libraries are all about fun things you aren't good at. Also, I think libraries should be places where children do get to think about their preferences, and read or study what they want to some extent, and that is a good and freeing thing for young people.

So, in conclusion, Amy Chua, I think maybe you are not right about fun and being good at things and overriding preferences, and you probably believe libraries are unnecessary and promote mediocrity or something, and you probably would feel my parents did not raise me successfully because I am not a concert oboist math genius brain surgeon whatever. But I wouldn't go so far as to call you garbage.

News Bulletin

So I'm in the second week of the new job and I just found out today that my supervisor gave notice. The good part is she's leaving to join her husband wherever it is that he's going to school so its not like she dislikes the library or some twisty internal politicky(I know, it's not a real word) thingy.

I don't know if this will be a good thing or a bad thing or even a non-issue. Either way it will change the group dynamic at the reference desk. Also, this is something that has never happened to me at a job before and I'll just have to go with it.

At the heart of it all is one of the most important things I've learned at all my various jobs. The people you work with can make dull work fun and hard work easier. When the right combination of personalities and attitudes mix there's a lot to look forward to on your way to work. So I guess this blurb is part: hey guess what happened today and advice for the job searchers...