What went wrong at one of the world’s eminent research institutions?
September 11, 2015 8:20 AM Subscribe
Scholars who use the New York Public Library are boiling with frustration. It wasn’t supposed to be this way. In 2014 the library, under pressure from a coalition that included four senior scholars, abandoned its controversial Central Library Plan, which entailed gutting the stacks at the 42nd Street Library and selling the popular Mid-Manhattan Library across the street. But the situation hasn’t turned out how many critics had hoped.
There is a certain irony with libraries moving toward a model requiring 24 hours to request a book in the age of information on demand.
posted by occidental at 8:46 AM on September 11, 2015 [3 favorites]
posted by occidental at 8:46 AM on September 11, 2015 [3 favorites]
It's a number of issues - the primary issue is probably the cost of real estate in Manhattan. It's conceivable that the NYPL system is sitting on a few billion dollars worth of investment-grade AAA real estate, and in the current climate of neoliberalism, it's pointless to expect that this massively valuable resource will not be exploited somehow. Apple Stores are, at the moment, infinitely more valuable than books.
The other issue -- which the article sorta touches on -- is that a lot of the uproar is coming from "independent scholars" (i.e., people with no official employment at a University but who nonetheless engage in serious academic research). I don't know these people directly, but I would imagine that they are -- to a one -- age 65 or older.
Independent scholarly research, as a rule, just isn't done anymore. I recently had a professor (my graduate advisor, a social sciences PhD) tell me that while my original research was valuable and informative, it could never be published (and is therefore worthless) because I don't have "Professor of ______ at University of ________" after my name. Even if I had my PhD, the lack of an official affiliation with a University or institute makes the PhD virtually worthless.
So in that sense, the backers of change at NYPL are probably correct: the political, legal and social environment of the library has been irreversibly changed (probably for the worse) and there is nothing to do now except sell off the assets and pick up the pieces.
posted by Avenger at 8:48 AM on September 11, 2015 [4 favorites]
The other issue -- which the article sorta touches on -- is that a lot of the uproar is coming from "independent scholars" (i.e., people with no official employment at a University but who nonetheless engage in serious academic research). I don't know these people directly, but I would imagine that they are -- to a one -- age 65 or older.
Independent scholarly research, as a rule, just isn't done anymore. I recently had a professor (my graduate advisor, a social sciences PhD) tell me that while my original research was valuable and informative, it could never be published (and is therefore worthless) because I don't have "Professor of ______ at University of ________" after my name. Even if I had my PhD, the lack of an official affiliation with a University or institute makes the PhD virtually worthless.
So in that sense, the backers of change at NYPL are probably correct: the political, legal and social environment of the library has been irreversibly changed (probably for the worse) and there is nothing to do now except sell off the assets and pick up the pieces.
posted by Avenger at 8:48 AM on September 11, 2015 [4 favorites]
Independent of this controversy, which sounds from a distance like the usual "looting by the rich" situation, it freaks me out enormously that we are in this time where people think that there is a lot of knowledge on the internet and we should go there. The internet is a million miles wide and an inch deep and there is a titanic amount of knowledge on books written even in the last two hundred years or so which is just going to be lost. It was always very narrowly distributed information, and I fear no one will even notice it's gone.
Ugh. i think I will go and visit my local public library now. It's a lovely remodeled space with great services for a community that desperately needs it, and of course the books are discretely tucked in the back. Thank God those services are there, but hopefully we find a way to get books in people's hands again.
posted by selfnoise at 9:09 AM on September 11, 2015 [9 favorites]
Ugh. i think I will go and visit my local public library now. It's a lovely remodeled space with great services for a community that desperately needs it, and of course the books are discretely tucked in the back. Thank God those services are there, but hopefully we find a way to get books in people's hands again.
posted by selfnoise at 9:09 AM on September 11, 2015 [9 favorites]
Looking at library hours on this page:
http://www.nypl.org/locations/
brings me back to an old question that I had which is: Why are libraries seemingly only open during school and work hours? Wouldn't it make sense to have them open when most people can actually visit them?
posted by I-baLL at 9:13 AM on September 11, 2015 [2 favorites]
http://www.nypl.org/locations/
brings me back to an old question that I had which is: Why are libraries seemingly only open during school and work hours? Wouldn't it make sense to have them open when most people can actually visit them?
posted by I-baLL at 9:13 AM on September 11, 2015 [2 favorites]
I-baLL: The New York City-area library union rules are such that you get overtime pay for working late nights and Sundays. The libraries have pretty reasonable evening hours during the week, except for Friday (and Monday, in Brooklyn -- Friday and Monday are more difficult from a staffing point of view); most of the libraries in Brooklyn are open Saturdays, and at least 2-3 days a week until 8:00 p.m. The Mid-Manhattan library is actually open 4 days a week until 11:00 p.m., which is remarkable for any public library.
Libraries are kind of in a weird position where we're not like the post office or the DMV, where people expect to go only occasionally, with the knowledge that they're going to have to maybe take some time off work to go; but we also have higher salaries than retail and (in NYC) union contracts and employees have more power than retail employees to say "Heck no, I'm not giving up my Friday night." And the NYC libraries did see a funding increase next year, and opening hours are going to increase, which is good! We absolutely should be open more hours, and especially more evening/weekend hours, but it does take money.
posted by Jeanne at 9:36 AM on September 11, 2015 [7 favorites]
Libraries are kind of in a weird position where we're not like the post office or the DMV, where people expect to go only occasionally, with the knowledge that they're going to have to maybe take some time off work to go; but we also have higher salaries than retail and (in NYC) union contracts and employees have more power than retail employees to say "Heck no, I'm not giving up my Friday night." And the NYC libraries did see a funding increase next year, and opening hours are going to increase, which is good! We absolutely should be open more hours, and especially more evening/weekend hours, but it does take money.
posted by Jeanne at 9:36 AM on September 11, 2015 [7 favorites]
while my original research was valuable and informative, it could never be published (and is therefore worthless) because I don't have "Professor of ______ at University of ________" after my name.
Thus revealing where worthlessness really goes to live. I was told the same thing by a professor at an old worthy law school, who proposed that I write and research an entire journal article by myself and then put his name on it, because without his affiliation it would never be published. I thought about it and decided I'd rather burn down the idol than worship at its feet.
I've done research on obscure topics at the NYPL, and it's one of the few places where scholars who aren't affiliated with a university used to be able to do that. How unsurprising that so many esteemed Harvard scholars could be so stupid, so blind about the need for this kind of resource among people who don't have a Harvard ID. After all, what possible value could someone offer if they don't have a tenured chair in Cambridge?
posted by 1adam12 at 9:46 AM on September 11, 2015 [6 favorites]
Thus revealing where worthlessness really goes to live. I was told the same thing by a professor at an old worthy law school, who proposed that I write and research an entire journal article by myself and then put his name on it, because without his affiliation it would never be published. I thought about it and decided I'd rather burn down the idol than worship at its feet.
I've done research on obscure topics at the NYPL, and it's one of the few places where scholars who aren't affiliated with a university used to be able to do that. How unsurprising that so many esteemed Harvard scholars could be so stupid, so blind about the need for this kind of resource among people who don't have a Harvard ID. After all, what possible value could someone offer if they don't have a tenured chair in Cambridge?
posted by 1adam12 at 9:46 AM on September 11, 2015 [6 favorites]
The other issue -- which the article sorta touches on -- is that a lot of the uproar is coming from "independent scholars" (i.e., people with no official employment at a University but who nonetheless engage in serious academic research). I don't know these people directly, but I would imagine that they are -- to a one -- age 65 or older.
I think this is a real issue, and I also think that a lot more could be done to engage people who aren't "independent scholars" but who are maybe on the fringes of that world. Like, I only have one academic paper to my name, and I don't intend on publishing any more, but back when I lived within reasonable driving distance of Duke University (which would let non-university-affiliated folks get a card with borrowing privileges for a mere $50-ish) I'd go there every month to borrow Japanese novels and cultural history and literary criticism. Now I live in NYC, where the university libraries are prohibitively expensive to use, and I don't even use NYPL's scholarly books that much because of the lead time in requesting books.
I really think there's an underserved need for those kinds of books in New York, if you include not just the independent scholars but also the people like me and the people who might need to do that kind of serious research two or three times a year, and -- is that worth more than selling the land to developers? I don't know that there's any objective way to assess that. It is if city government says it is, and funds it accordingly.
posted by Jeanne at 9:46 AM on September 11, 2015 [1 favorite]
I think this is a real issue, and I also think that a lot more could be done to engage people who aren't "independent scholars" but who are maybe on the fringes of that world. Like, I only have one academic paper to my name, and I don't intend on publishing any more, but back when I lived within reasonable driving distance of Duke University (which would let non-university-affiliated folks get a card with borrowing privileges for a mere $50-ish) I'd go there every month to borrow Japanese novels and cultural history and literary criticism. Now I live in NYC, where the university libraries are prohibitively expensive to use, and I don't even use NYPL's scholarly books that much because of the lead time in requesting books.
I really think there's an underserved need for those kinds of books in New York, if you include not just the independent scholars but also the people like me and the people who might need to do that kind of serious research two or three times a year, and -- is that worth more than selling the land to developers? I don't know that there's any objective way to assess that. It is if city government says it is, and funds it accordingly.
posted by Jeanne at 9:46 AM on September 11, 2015 [1 favorite]
I hope this isn't a derail but the disconnect for me is the expensive and seemingly unnecessary prestige fluff that goes along with all this. I think reasonable people can disagree about how the NYPL should serve researchers; modernized climate control and off-site storage (common at other major research libraries) aren't objectively bad things. Surely libraries do need to evolve to serve new populations and adapt to the digital age. But why does this have to involve a vanity 300 million remodel? Why does it have to involve selling off a popular and historic branch building? Surely there are ways to accomplish the goals of the central plan without the fluff.
I had some disagreements with the article but this bit seemed spot on:
posted by Wretch729 at 9:47 AM on September 11, 2015 [11 favorites]
I had some disagreements with the article but this bit seemed spot on:
Three factors gave rise to the central plan: The library was under severe financial pressure, the value of real estate in Manhattan was soaring, and the Board of Trustees was controlled by business leaders at the highest echelons of Manhattan real estate and finance, who believed that the market could ameliorate the complex, longstanding troubles.It frustrates me to the point of alienation that my society seems so determined to refuse to accept the notion that there are institutions that are important for maintaining a thriving society that are simply unprofitable and should be subsidized by taxes. Our priorities are so screwed up. Blackstone brought in over 1.5 billion in profit last year while the NYPL, a cultural jewel, is selling property and moving books to New Jersey. But wasn't it nice of Stephen A Schwarzman to kick in $100 million for the main branch in 2008. I notice Sherman refuses to use the new name (the Stephen A. Schwarzman Building) in his article. Sigh.
posted by Wretch729 at 9:47 AM on September 11, 2015 [11 favorites]
> It frustrates me to the point of alienation that my society seems so determined to refuse to accept the notion that there are institutions that are important for maintaining a thriving society that are simply unprofitable and should be subsidized by taxes.
Hey look, a pinko commie! Next they'll probably want a public transit system, or a public park or something.
I wonder what this paragraph would look like if it was framed today:
We the People, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution.
I guess providing for a common defense would survive, and definitely domestic tranquility, as enforced by military-surplus-equipped SWAT teams. The rest of it, I'm not so sure about.
posted by RedOrGreen at 10:05 AM on September 11, 2015 [1 favorite]
Hey look, a pinko commie! Next they'll probably want a public transit system, or a public park or something.
I wonder what this paragraph would look like if it was framed today:
We the People, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution.
I guess providing for a common defense would survive, and definitely domestic tranquility, as enforced by military-surplus-equipped SWAT teams. The rest of it, I'm not so sure about.
posted by RedOrGreen at 10:05 AM on September 11, 2015 [1 favorite]
I work for a public library, and the tension between those who want The Library to remain in some kind of pure, frozen-in-amber state that is defined by the musty smell of old books versus the need for the institution to stave of its own death by innovating and transforming into an institution that people actually want to (or need to) use is felt every day.
The NYPL case is an example of that tension times a thousand (because New York). I found the crux of the matter encapsulated in one short sentence in the linked article that referred to one of the opponents of the Central Library Plan: "Scott didn’t know how to create an online petition, so the letter was dispatched from her personal email account."
I have a deep sense of nostalgic love for the libraries of my youth, and I loved getting a chance to tour the depths of the 42nd Street Library (pneumatic tubes!). And I'm an IT guy who uses a pencil and paper to take notes, and I still prefer to read actual books. But if libraries continue to make decisions based only on what their current (diminishing number of) users say they want, they will never be able to meet the needs of younger and upcoming generations.
posted by majorsteel at 10:14 AM on September 11, 2015 [6 favorites]
The NYPL case is an example of that tension times a thousand (because New York). I found the crux of the matter encapsulated in one short sentence in the linked article that referred to one of the opponents of the Central Library Plan: "Scott didn’t know how to create an online petition, so the letter was dispatched from her personal email account."
I have a deep sense of nostalgic love for the libraries of my youth, and I loved getting a chance to tour the depths of the 42nd Street Library (pneumatic tubes!). And I'm an IT guy who uses a pencil and paper to take notes, and I still prefer to read actual books. But if libraries continue to make decisions based only on what their current (diminishing number of) users say they want, they will never be able to meet the needs of younger and upcoming generations.
posted by majorsteel at 10:14 AM on September 11, 2015 [6 favorites]
Lest I end up looking like a grumpypants I should note that despite the controversy over the issues mentioned in the article New York City is actually not terrible about funding libraries, and de Blasio in particular has pushed (and been pushed) to meaningfully increase the budget for the city's three library systems. It's not a panacea but I don't want to give the impression that the NYPL is doomed. Just that society in general is frustrating.
posted by Wretch729 at 10:30 AM on September 11, 2015
posted by Wretch729 at 10:30 AM on September 11, 2015
Independent scholarly research, as a rule, just isn't done anymore. I recently had a professor (my graduate advisor, a social sciences PhD) tell me that while my original research was valuable and informative, it could never be published (and is therefore worthless) because I don't have "Professor of ______ at University of ________" after my name. Even if I had my PhD, the lack of an official affiliation with a University or institute makes the PhD virtually worthless.
This is a field specific thing, I believe. There are a number of humanities disciplines and areas where independent scholar do not just publish but are among the leaders in their fields. Book history, an area where Darnton works, is one. Regional history is another: it takes a real lover of some small village to dig through the records and produce information about historical wages, conditions, books, etc. And that information gets used by people working at universities. You see it cited. You hear those people at conferences. I myself was an independent scholar when I taught in a high school and knew several other people in similar situations doing their own research.
Independent researchers - and others who come to NY to use the library - are often on very tight schedules. Having items that may or may not be useful take 2 days to get to you is a long time when you've got 4 days in NY. And you may not know what you need until you talk to a librarian, anyway.
I'm a fan of digitzation, but it should really be a supplement, not a substitute, for the physical resource. Looking through material in situ is very different than browsing on a site. And, even more importantly for independent researchers, research librarians with subject specific knowledge are absolutely vital. Well, they're vital for all researchers. People who work with collections on a regular basis just know things. Amazing things. I've talked to a librarian and watched them jot down 5 other sets of material (all ephemera from the 19th century) that I should sift through. And those sets produced some amazing things that were nowhere recorded and probably wouldn't have been captured by digitization even with very diligent management. And many of these texts probably weren't important enough in the great scheme of things to be recorded.
Great collections are hard to assemble and easy to ruin. These collections were not just gathered for us, but for future generations. What is happening here is the destruction of one of the greatest publicly accessible research resources in the world.
posted by lesbiassparrow at 10:34 AM on September 11, 2015 [12 favorites]
This is a field specific thing, I believe. There are a number of humanities disciplines and areas where independent scholar do not just publish but are among the leaders in their fields. Book history, an area where Darnton works, is one. Regional history is another: it takes a real lover of some small village to dig through the records and produce information about historical wages, conditions, books, etc. And that information gets used by people working at universities. You see it cited. You hear those people at conferences. I myself was an independent scholar when I taught in a high school and knew several other people in similar situations doing their own research.
Independent researchers - and others who come to NY to use the library - are often on very tight schedules. Having items that may or may not be useful take 2 days to get to you is a long time when you've got 4 days in NY. And you may not know what you need until you talk to a librarian, anyway.
I'm a fan of digitzation, but it should really be a supplement, not a substitute, for the physical resource. Looking through material in situ is very different than browsing on a site. And, even more importantly for independent researchers, research librarians with subject specific knowledge are absolutely vital. Well, they're vital for all researchers. People who work with collections on a regular basis just know things. Amazing things. I've talked to a librarian and watched them jot down 5 other sets of material (all ephemera from the 19th century) that I should sift through. And those sets produced some amazing things that were nowhere recorded and probably wouldn't have been captured by digitization even with very diligent management. And many of these texts probably weren't important enough in the great scheme of things to be recorded.
Great collections are hard to assemble and easy to ruin. These collections were not just gathered for us, but for future generations. What is happening here is the destruction of one of the greatest publicly accessible research resources in the world.
posted by lesbiassparrow at 10:34 AM on September 11, 2015 [12 favorites]
Independent researchers - and others who come to NY to use the library - are often on very tight schedules. Having items that may or may not be useful take 2 days to get to you is a long time when you've got 4 days in NY. And you may not know what you need until you talk to a librarian, anyway.
The NYPL isn't a prime destination for me, as much of what they have that's germane to my work is digitized (in fact, the last time I was there, it was to use a microfilm that couldn't be ILLd), but a 24-hr wait would be a death blow to my willingness to use it. Researchers can't really predict the rhythms of their work. When I was sitting in the British Library this summer, reading 130+ religious novels (oy), there were days when I would blast through every single book; days when one book was such a chore (or turned out to be so long) that I couldn't finish even that one; days when I would discover that half of what I had asked for was irrelevant, and so I needed something else; and so forth. If I discover that I need something entirely different from what I've taken out, I don't want to wait another day for it--that's possibly an entirely wasted day at NYC hotel prices.
posted by thomas j wise at 11:40 AM on September 11, 2015 [1 favorite]
The NYPL isn't a prime destination for me, as much of what they have that's germane to my work is digitized (in fact, the last time I was there, it was to use a microfilm that couldn't be ILLd), but a 24-hr wait would be a death blow to my willingness to use it. Researchers can't really predict the rhythms of their work. When I was sitting in the British Library this summer, reading 130+ religious novels (oy), there were days when I would blast through every single book; days when one book was such a chore (or turned out to be so long) that I couldn't finish even that one; days when I would discover that half of what I had asked for was irrelevant, and so I needed something else; and so forth. If I discover that I need something entirely different from what I've taken out, I don't want to wait another day for it--that's possibly an entirely wasted day at NYC hotel prices.
posted by thomas j wise at 11:40 AM on September 11, 2015 [1 favorite]
I don't know much about the subject but I'm surprised by these reactions. Yes, it's important that such an important collection of scholarly books and archives be accessible to researchers. No, they should not be subject to multi-day waits. But why do they need to be accessible, specifically, in one of the most central areas of one of the most densely populated places in in the country? Why not use that space for books that would serve a dramatically larger audience -- a nice huge fiction collection, history, science books written for a non-academic audience -- and build a destination research library complex for the scholars to use somewhere accessible by public transit (so, not Princeton) but not literally smack in the middle of Manhattan?
posted by ostro at 1:44 PM on September 11, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by ostro at 1:44 PM on September 11, 2015 [2 favorites]
But why do they need to be accessible, specifically, in one of the most central areas of one of the most densely populated places in in the country? Why not use that space for books that would serve a dramatically larger audience -- a nice huge fiction collection, history, science books written for a non-academic audience -- and build a destination research library complex for the scholars to use somewhere accessible by public transit (so, not Princeton) but not literally smack in the middle of Manhattan?
Precisely because that's where the people are. Or can easily get to. The building is walking distance to Port Authority, Grand Central and Penn Station, so perfect for tri-state researchers. Seriously, where else would you put it?
As to the dramatically larger audience - there are 91 other library branches throughout the five boroughs, most catering to more general needs, and that includes the Mid-Manhattan Library right across the street. Regardless, I think you may not be aware of just how diverse both the 42nd street collection and the clientele is. There's plenty of general interest non-academic material in the catalog and plenty of non-academic (and non-geriatric) readers accessing it any day of the week. Even if you don't read, the reading room is a fascinating place to people watch.
posted by IndigoJones at 3:08 PM on September 11, 2015 [3 favorites]
Precisely because that's where the people are. Or can easily get to. The building is walking distance to Port Authority, Grand Central and Penn Station, so perfect for tri-state researchers. Seriously, where else would you put it?
As to the dramatically larger audience - there are 91 other library branches throughout the five boroughs, most catering to more general needs, and that includes the Mid-Manhattan Library right across the street. Regardless, I think you may not be aware of just how diverse both the 42nd street collection and the clientele is. There's plenty of general interest non-academic material in the catalog and plenty of non-academic (and non-geriatric) readers accessing it any day of the week. Even if you don't read, the reading room is a fascinating place to people watch.
posted by IndigoJones at 3:08 PM on September 11, 2015 [3 favorites]
Why are libraries seemingly only open during school and work hours? Wouldn't it make sense to have them open when most people can actually visit them?
Believe it or not, in my large public library, nobody visits in the evening or on Saturday mornings. We used to be open reasonably late (9pm) and the only people in there that late were people camping out on the computers and a few stragglers studying. It's much busier during business hours.
posted by jabes at 4:25 PM on September 11, 2015 [1 favorite]
Believe it or not, in my large public library, nobody visits in the evening or on Saturday mornings. We used to be open reasonably late (9pm) and the only people in there that late were people camping out on the computers and a few stragglers studying. It's much busier during business hours.
posted by jabes at 4:25 PM on September 11, 2015 [1 favorite]
I don't know much about the subject but I'm surprised by these reactions. Yes, it's important that such an important collection of scholarly books and archives be accessible to researchers. No, they should not be subject to multi-day waits. But why do they need to be accessible, specifically, in one of the most central areas of one of the most densely populated places in in the country? Why not use that space for books that would serve a dramatically larger audience -- a nice huge fiction collection, history, science books written for a non-academic audience -- and build a destination research library complex for the scholars to use somewhere accessible by public transit (so, not Princeton) but not literally smack in the middle of Manhattan?
As IndigoJones pointed out here are a lot of libraries where you can go to borrow fiction - one right across from this building. But public libraries dedicated to research - and open to all researchers - are very rare. Universities often charge for access unless you are a graduate or have an academic affiliation. So they're not that accessible to many people outside certain circles. Building a new complex would cost money. A lot of it. That would have to come from somewhere, probably another part of the system, given that getting money for such things from other sources is hard. Moving fragile collections without good reason is not a good thing. And stuff always gets lost. It won't be the flashy things that get lost, but the small things, the books that maybe might be seen as important, but could be gold to some researcher. Books that aren't accessible anywhere else.
The other wonderful thing about this building is that it is a temple to open research, right there in the middle of NY. Many great works were written there; many lesser works too, but important to their authors. Many people found knowledge there that they could not have accessed anywhere else. They found guidance and help. They mixed with other researchers of all backgrounds. Digitizing the collection and moving the entire thing somewhere out of sight suggests that open research collections are not really that important. That they're not a social good that we should admire when we see them. That's why people are upset, not because they're antique dinosaurs who only read books if they're bound in leather and gilt.
posted by lesbiassparrow at 8:19 PM on September 11, 2015 [3 favorites]
As IndigoJones pointed out here are a lot of libraries where you can go to borrow fiction - one right across from this building. But public libraries dedicated to research - and open to all researchers - are very rare. Universities often charge for access unless you are a graduate or have an academic affiliation. So they're not that accessible to many people outside certain circles. Building a new complex would cost money. A lot of it. That would have to come from somewhere, probably another part of the system, given that getting money for such things from other sources is hard. Moving fragile collections without good reason is not a good thing. And stuff always gets lost. It won't be the flashy things that get lost, but the small things, the books that maybe might be seen as important, but could be gold to some researcher. Books that aren't accessible anywhere else.
The other wonderful thing about this building is that it is a temple to open research, right there in the middle of NY. Many great works were written there; many lesser works too, but important to their authors. Many people found knowledge there that they could not have accessed anywhere else. They found guidance and help. They mixed with other researchers of all backgrounds. Digitizing the collection and moving the entire thing somewhere out of sight suggests that open research collections are not really that important. That they're not a social good that we should admire when we see them. That's why people are upset, not because they're antique dinosaurs who only read books if they're bound in leather and gilt.
posted by lesbiassparrow at 8:19 PM on September 11, 2015 [3 favorites]
If you want to save books, scan them and publish the bits.
Google tried, incredibly hard, to do this.
posted by effugas at 5:13 PM on September 12, 2015
Google tried, incredibly hard, to do this.
posted by effugas at 5:13 PM on September 12, 2015
Why not have a smaller lending library at the current site, and then a larger, research library on the edge of town where rent is cheap? You could put a hotel beside it for researchers with low rates, since you are outside of town.
posted by Canageek at 3:02 PM on September 14, 2015
posted by Canageek at 3:02 PM on September 14, 2015
« Older Jason Derulo coming to your house to thank you... | Annotated Syllabus of Literary Journalism in... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
One would think that the NYPL would have learned from the MoMA film stills archive debacle, but alas. Stacks without books seems to be the future--lots more room for fundraising events without all those "rotting" books.
posted by Ideefixe at 8:46 AM on September 11, 2015 [5 favorites]