Respectfully disagree.

There are times in my life when people do things, say things, or make decisions that I don’t agree with, and I get a little upset.

I really shouldn’t, but it takes a lot of patience and maturity to respond to (mostly irrational) comments, actions, and decisions. Which is why I’m extremely impressed by the way that librarian Jamie Larue dealt with a recent library patron who challenged the inclusion of a book in the library because it dealt with gay marriage.

Instead of dismissing the patron, or even being taken aback by what seems (to me at least) a particularly ridiculous challenge, Larue wrote a letter that dealt directly with the patron’s issues. From his letter:

I think a lot of adults imagine that what defines a children’s book is the subject. But that’s not the case. Children’s books deal with anything and everything. There are children’s books about death (even suicide), adult alcoholism, family violence, and more. Even the most common fairy tales have their grim side: the father and stepmother of Hansel and Gretel, facing hunger and poverty, take the children into the woods, and abandon them to die! Little Red Riding Hood (in the original version, anyhow) was eaten by the wolf along with granny. There’s a fascinating book about this, by the bye, called “The Uses of Enchantment: the Meaning and Importance of Fairy Tales,” by psychologist Bruno Bettelheim. His thesis is that both the purpose and power of children’s literature is to help young people begin to make sense of the world. There is a lot out there that is confusing, or faintly threatening, and even dangerous in the world. Stories help children name their fears, understand them, work out strategies for dealing with life.

Next time someone disagrees with me or challenges my decisions and actions, I’m going to definitely try and address that challenge with the grace, poise, and poesy that Jamie Larue demonstrated in his own response.

Do you have any other examples of this kind of poise in the face of challenge?

Tonight’s party is hosted by your local public library

When I was studying at Georgetown University, our euphemism for going to the library to study was to go “out to party at Club Lauinger.” Sure, we were being facetious at the time, but in light of the changing role of the library and the librarian, I think that statement may not be far from the truth.

I only have one core message today, so I’ll keep today’s post short.

The library needs to go from a place where you access collections to a place where you access connections.

Sure, there is immense value in housing books and videos in one big building, and then letting people browse that physical media when they are in the building. There is, however, more value in letting those buildings be places where people connect with people, rather than simply the books and other titles.

The library should be a place where I can have a coffee and conversation with people who are engaging with the same ideas — and subsequently, same titles from the collection — as me. It should be a place where conversation is encouraged and not shushed, where debate flourishes, where innovation happens.

Having a meeting for a small community group? Have it at the library. Looking for someone that knows something about cooking Thai food? Meet them at the kitchen in the library. Having a wine and cheese reception for your local design awards? Have it in the foyer at the library.

Once the library opens up and starts allowing people to use it in multiple ways rather than just being a repository of information, it becomes a focal point of your community. So push the shelves aside, and start creating spaces for collaboration and creativity.

The librarian is dead. Long live the librarian.

Some of my most vivid memories from my childhood involve spending summer mornings in the library, discovering new books and great VHS tapes along with Brenda, my neighborhood librarian. Brenda would recommend new titles and would help me explore the world of information that was on the shelves in front of me.

These days, that same information is on my screen, available at the click of a mouse button. And Brenda is nowhere to be seen.

The librarian is dead.

(For the record, I’m mainly referring to public libraries here, but these thoughts also apply to academic libraries to a certain extent. I’m not sure how it applies to private and corporate libraries, as I’m not too familiar with that area.)

It’s easy to call out the death of the librarian. Google makes searching for information simple, Wikipedia provides an excellent starting point — and I emphasize starting point, because too many people use it as an authoritative source rather than a place to begin inquiry — for research, and getting an answer to a question is as easy as writing 140 characters on Twitter.

If I can get good, extensive, and personalized information in a few seconds using the internet, what good is the librarian?

Aside from being the keeper of the physical institution of the library (more on that later this week), the librarian’s other roles of conducting reference interviews (to help navigate information) and sorting through collections (to help manage information) seem to be waning. Collaborative tools on the web are taking their place, with social recommendation engines and direct access to a large group of people doing most of the work that was formerly in the domain of the librarian.

So why, in my eyes, is the librarian still one of the most important players in society? The answer is simple: capacity.

Long live the librarian.

If the in-person reference interview is losing relevance because of the ubiquity of online resources, it is the librarian — a person uniquely trained in sifting through data deluge — that is best poised to be at the center of the online recommendation resources.

Librarians, after all, have a lot going for them:

• They are trained in critical analysis of good information.
• They have experience in filtering and searching information.
• They are employed (read: paid) to work with information.
• They have access to more information than simply what’s online.
• They know how to work with people and ideas at the same time.

If anyone is ready to embrace the online world and use social tools to help others access information, it’s librarians. A librarian, by tagging and annotating online, print, and other resources, can create a massive wealth of information that can then be sorted dynamically for many uses. The reference interview, which used to benefit one person, can now be reshifted to be a reference repository where data can easily be sorted, sifted, filtered, and used for anyone’s benefit.

Ascending the throne.

What libraries need to do now is make it easier for librarians to share their work on the wider web and not just hide them behind a library login. Instead of publishing bookmarks with “cool reading lists for this month” or putting big signs on their shelves indicating good reads, libraries should instead feature librarian online resource lists as their primary offering.

One day, when people are looking for help finding and filtering information, they will turn to a librarian — whether that librarian is using Twitter or Yahoo! Answers or the library website — because of the breadth of the resources at their disposal and the depth of their experience in processing those resources.

After all, everyone needs their own personal Brenda to help you navigate the content-rich and information-dense world. The only difference is that now she’s on your screen and available at the click of a mouse.

(Photo: Another Dead Librarian by DouG!!)