Thanks for everyone dropping by this little blog. For the civillians in the crowd who might be horrified that we are destroying culture or censoring ideas, let me clarify a few points about this blog. Public libraries, at least in my humble opinion, have a mission to help folks navigate the increasingly abundant minefield of information. In my little corner of Michigan, we are looking at 10% or better unemployment and record numbers of foreclosures. Folks that are in trouble often head to the public library where the Internet and other materials will be available for use. Librarians have the duty and responsibility to provide accurate and helpful information. Out of date books often can cloud this objective for the general public and the librarians charged with serving them.
So in answer to some questions: No, the books on this blog are not necessarily “awful”, its just that “books-that-should- be- reconsidered- under-interpretation-of-current-collection development-policies-and-retired” is not a fun name for a blog that is just trying to instigate a discussion on quality library collections!
Also, none of the books on this blog are the property of Holly and Mary. We wander through library catalogs and ILL our choices. We aren’t selling any books, but if you are serious about collecting some of these titles, I suggest you head to your nearest public library’s book sale room. ( I am sure they would be happy to relieve you of some money!)
I am done “lecturing”. Now everyone go on about your business of laughing at the books and weeding library collections!
Mary
41 responses so far ↓
Rob Carlson // July 1, 2009 at 11:35 am |
I think this a entertaining concept and an interesting thought exercise at the same time. Thanks for doing it!
Jennifer // July 1, 2009 at 12:12 pm |
Exactly! I just did major weeding of our juvenile fiction section. Many of the books I discarded are not “bad”. But, they haven’t been checked out for years – some haven’t circulated since 1960! So, we move these books along to new homes – and make space for books that will circulate, displays, and just a more inviting display. Books with an inch of dust on top of them (I kid you not) are not inviting!
Roger Hiles // July 1, 2009 at 1:01 pm |
I love this apporach– it illustrates the concepts of weeding in an engaging and humorous way (not too common in discussions of weeding!). I just incorporated it into a weeding in-service.
Thanks, and keep it up!
Tommy // July 1, 2009 at 1:44 pm |
You actually had people complaining about the blog?
Well, some people will get in a dither over almost anything, I guess.
Corey Redekop // July 1, 2009 at 1:57 pm |
This is definitely awesome. I’ll be sending a few books your way when we start weeding.
Connie Crosby // July 1, 2009 at 2:26 pm |
I think this is a great idea for a blog! People forget that libraries are not archives. Too much obsolete materials cluttering the shelves can hinder people from finding the current, relevant materials and make them wonder why they are bothering with the library in the first place. These books were useful in their time but, depending upon the library’s mandate, may just be getting in the way.
Well done.
Cheers,
Connie
Elisa // July 1, 2009 at 4:45 pm |
I’m helping to weed our adult fiction collection. Quite a number of titles hadn’t circulated since the late 70s-early 2000s.
Pixie // July 1, 2009 at 5:00 pm |
Why would anyone complain? Its very entertaining to see these old books on your blog…but they definitely SHOULD be weeded out of libraries. Thats not censorship, its just updating!
Kagi // July 1, 2009 at 7:56 pm |
I agree that libraries are not archives, and you’re right that a neighborhood public library probably doesn’t need this stuff…but archives really do need this stuff. It’s precisely these books — the ones that seem to exist only for their own historical moment — that are most important to later people trying to understand the past. I’m sure that, as a librarian, you understand, but I’m not sure all the commenters do. So do try to make sure that these books aren’t just recycled or landfilled. The Prelinger Library in San Francisco is building a really interesting collection of ephemeral materials, with a really unusual approach to cataloging: http://www.home.earthlink.net/~alysons/library.html
Evan // July 1, 2009 at 8:15 pm |
Thanks for the blog. I really mean it.
And thanks for using “ILL” as a verb. Takes me back to grad school!
Elizabeth // July 2, 2009 at 12:42 am |
I think every librarian–public, school, academic, special, etc.–should use this blog as a way to explain the concept of collection development.
I agree special collections relating to these types of books is important. I love how you can look at these books and get an instant picture of that time period. In addition to the entertainment this blog offers, I am also hoping people may have a better understanding of what us librarians do.
publius // July 2, 2009 at 4:18 am |
The problem, as I see it, is that there is an enormous amount of useful information in “old” books. Not necessarily information one needs every day, but when one needs it, one cannot find it in anywhere else. A library which is full of the books one can find in bookstores is a library which forecloses on serendipity & cannot fulfill its function as a cultural resource.
There is more to a library, in other words, than the Ready Reference section!
(This is a completely separate issue from the practice of a university library near me of moving volumes to off-site storage based on usage statistics which completely ignore the fact that, e.g., bound periodicals are not permitted to be checked out, & so show up as unused no matter how often they are consulted.)
Leah L. // July 10, 2009 at 4:06 pm |
If your academic library is like the one I work at, they do keep usage statistics on the periodicals even though they can not be checked out. I work in the Circulation area in our library and we account for every usage when we pick up a periodical on a table, find it in a book drop or touch it for any reason. They may not have barcodes, or be able to leave the building, but trust me…we keep a count. With the ever increasing cost of journals in the academic world, the usage numbers on our serials, journals and periodicals are some of the most important numbers we track! They determine which subscriptions can be renewed each year and which just simply aren’t worth the cost.
Chuck // July 2, 2009 at 7:55 am |
This blog has created an opportunity for meaningful dialogue, humor and fun. In addition it improves a service provided to the majority of customers at the local level. Whoda’ Thunk!
All of the above represent life lessons for every entity that engages a customer, every one of us.
Knowledge content is growing at a rate that leaves Moore’s Law in the dust. Thank goodness for those who accept the challenge to provide coherence, allowing all of us to draw our personal meaning from the morass.
And we are entertained at the same time!
Rebecca // July 2, 2009 at 3:13 pm |
I am an elementary school librarian. I rarely even get time to weed but I have found that people just don’t understand the need to have shelves that are inviting and not crammed with materials the kids don’t have any use for. It makes it virtually impossible for them to find the good items. I would love to be able to somehow sort through the books I discard and pass along the gems to an archive but I can’t imagine having the time nor the expertise to do this. So I set out the books for the teachers to take what they want — with the caveat that if it shows up in the library again I’ll throw it away! Then I offer to the kids. Then they get boxed up and the district trucks them away somewhere for the public to go through. (This latter policy happened because some people became irate when they found outdated textbooks in a dumpster.) Just to echo the other commenters: I don’t operate an archives; I run a school library that is there to support the current curriculum and promote reading.
Keep up the good work on this blog! It’s one of my favorite things to read. Can’t wait to get back into my library in August and find something outrageous to send you!
Triple L // July 2, 2009 at 3:38 pm |
This blog cracks me up. The only people getting upset are the ones who have these types of books in their collections! Keep up the good work ladies!
Evil Librarian // July 2, 2009 at 6:03 pm |
It’s true that a lot of these books would be interesting to historians and critics of their subject areas, and in my state we send our “last copies” of titles to the state library, whose job it is to act as a repository. I always hate to see a fascinating, forgotten book go, but we have a responsibility to provide good information to our users. Most of them just aren’t savvy enough to look at a book’s pub. date and decide whether a book is of practical use or just historical interest.
I wish I’d found you guys before I weeded a couple of treasures from our teen collection…a book on astrology for teens from the ’70’s, which assumed that teens would frequently be asked “what’s you rsign?”, and a book on moving which covers such important topics as what to tell your teenage daughter when she cries because she won’t be able to hold her boyfriend’s hand every day anymore…
rachel // July 3, 2009 at 10:36 am |
love the blog. thinking of going to grad school to be a librarian (at 41…). if i do, i can only hope to be as thoughtful a lib. as you guys.
marykelly48 // July 3, 2009 at 11:50 am |
Rachel, go to library school! I started my MLIS at age 39 and I was not the oldest in my crowd…I loved every minute!
Mary
rachel // July 3, 2009 at 10:37 am |
(p.s. i collect fascinating old books like these. i think many private collectors are keeping this stuff around… my local thrift store in germantown, philadelphia, is a great source of old textbooks fro the 60s, 70s… with amazing art.)
Steph // July 3, 2009 at 11:07 am |
The chip on my shoulder, the voice of the grump:
Dang…I think you’re going to have to post this every 3rd entry, probably because people aren’t going far enough back into the discussions on this site to pay attention to the fact that you’ve posted this announcement of your “raison d’etre”….every 3rd entry.
I know who these folks are. I remember them from library school. We have a 2, 2 and half hour class and a lot of material to cover, and you, oh wise obstructionist smarty pants who seems to know more than the faculty at our fine institution, want to wax on about the fine points of some obscure piece of ephemera that has only a wee bit of relevance to the subject at hand. You are eating my time (and tuition) blathering about the useful inclusion of a pamphlet in a public library.
Friend, I love the obscure and arcane like nobody’s business. I do, I spend my weekends scouring junk shops and thrift stores and used books sales to buy ironic crap that I can share with my 5 cool hipster friends as we drink our imported beer and have a show and tell or the week’s awesome ironic finds. (I mean, how cool are we?)
But during the day, when I’m working for “the man” or the “the county”, I rep the people, and they don’t care about my eccentric tastes. They want what they want, it’s my job to give it to them practical job seeking books, entertaining Oprah book club selections, Hayne’s auto repair manuals, those teenage vampire books…
Okay, I’m done.
rachel // July 3, 2009 at 2:29 pm |
i suspect that there isn’t really disagreement, at base, on any of this.
Raksha // July 3, 2009 at 4:43 pm |
I do think it’s rather sad that books that aren’t popular are evidently destined for ‘retirement’. Perhaps it’s a sign of the times.
gothougeekly // July 6, 2009 at 6:18 pm |
Not that I think anyone will see this anymore, but …
It’s really not a sign of the times, except perhaps the speed with which space must be made. Was reading something the other day that the bigger libraries in the U.S. had to start weeding in the early 1800s. And that was when libraries had a paternalistic, only-what’s-good-for-you, everything-just-in-case attitude about collection.
basketcase // July 4, 2009 at 1:49 am |
I full support the weeding process. If it’s not being read – then it’s time to go. I will reorder classic titles or important authors if possible, but if the book is old, tatty or just unappealing to teens and juniors (my subject area) well it’s just too bad. It’s sad to see them go but they need to make room for the books people read.
As for non-fiction, I just don’t understand how people can happily use old guidebooks. They date so quickly. I do like the really old ones for the kitsch value – but not on my library shelves.
adhd librarian // July 6, 2009 at 6:13 am |
I just wish I could weed some of the books in my collection, but being an academic & theological librarian I need to hold on to all sort of old (and scarily outdated ’stuff’)
mmm,
doesn’t mean I can’t make fun of them though.
Perhaps that is an idea for some blog posts at a later date (with appropriate attribution to the inspiration of course)
Amanda // July 6, 2009 at 11:08 am |
I used to be an adult services librarian in a large capital city. The branch manager and I had to surreptitiously weed the collection because the children’s librarian went ape-shit whenever we tried to throw anything away. It drove us insane. We used to tell her all the time, “we ain’t the library of congress – we can’t keep everything!” However, a solution to our weeding problem, sadly, was found:
http://dcpl.dc.gov/dcpl/cwp/view.asp?a=1266&q=563972
gothougeekly // July 6, 2009 at 6:20 pm |
My condolences, Amanda. I feel sick just thinking about it — and it isn’t even my district.
rosemerrie // July 6, 2009 at 2:44 pm |
I found your blog through fellow tweeter victoriastrauss. I love it and I’m studying to be a librarian. I’m finishing up my bachelor’s degree now.
WeedingGirl // July 6, 2009 at 5:05 pm |
Unfortunately, many of us in smaller facilities just don’t have the physical space to keep every book we’ve ever bought (or been given as a well-intentioned “gift”). We weed not only to keep the collection current and to meet the requirements of our academic programs’ accrediting bodies, but so we literally don’t run out of shelf space. So sharing weeding wisdom with others in the same boat is instructive and comforting. We send many of our discards to Better World Books, so if you’re really interested in rescuing some obscure old book that still has one accurate fact in it, by all means, buy it from them.
Jason // July 6, 2009 at 6:54 pm |
The local village or township library is not the Library of Congress. Don’t let get them confused. It will only lead to pain and suffering.
If one does want an archive, please donate the millions of dollars required to build the building, hire and pay a staff, build collection, and maintain all.
Andrea // July 7, 2009 at 3:00 am |
I’m a California public and community college librarian and I <3 your blog. I also agree with your philosophy – of course we can't keep everything! That's right, little Araceli, it says right here in this book that someday man will walk on the moon! sheesh.
But I'm wondering a tiny bit about ILLing. What, you have no derision-worthy books in your own system? You have unlimited ILL funds in your library? And you do realize that by ILLing these books you are making them more likely to be kept, just by virtue of their stats being better? It would be nice to think that someone in the sending library would look at it when it comes back and say: "Heavens! We must week this right away!" But in reality I doubt that happens much — more's the pity.
I do love the blog, though, so I guess it is worth it! I'll try to look around our library for some gems to scan and send. We moved last year, though, and weeded heavily before that, so a lot of the weirdest stuff is gone. I saved some, though, okay to send a ringer?
marykelly48 // July 7, 2009 at 9:09 pm |
Andrea, I sincerely hope I am not making the situation worse! Hopefully, lending libraries are not just depending on circ as the sole determining factor. Our ILL process is pretty simple within our network. Frankly, I usually don’t have to go to far to find a “bad” book.
Andrea // July 10, 2009 at 7:21 pm
Ah, these are >within< network ILLs? Okay, I take most of it back then.
I do still think having a book circulate recently would make it more likely for it to be kept. I too hope it is not the sole determining factor, but I think that in many libraries one way to determine likely candidates for weeding is running a report that lists, for example, no circs in the last 4 years. If they get checked out, then they might not end up on those lists, and would have to get noticed some other way. I hope this happens, but obviously it doesn't always!
jennylu // July 9, 2009 at 11:27 pm |
Love what you are doing here. I smile every time I open the site. We are weeding at the moment in my school library and keep finding worthy additions for you. Do you want us to send you fodder?
Leah L. // July 10, 2009 at 3:53 pm |
Well said comment about the site! We are undergoing a HUGE weeding project at our library this summer and are getting rid of a ton of books. Some are being shipped to other libraries, some are going in our book sale, and yes, some are (gasp!) being recycled. I once was of the notion that EVERYTHING EVER published was sacred and must be saved, no matter low usage, outdated information and space considerations. Work in a library for a while and you begin to change your tune. Our shelves will look better, be easier to navigate through and be visited much more often once this project is finished. I am excited for the students to return in the fall and see the fruits of our efforts. Now, back to work…
karim // July 11, 2009 at 7:47 pm |
Ahhh– but the real problem isn’t the jokey books you’re putting in here — it’s libraries that weed all books from, for example, first wave feminism because it’s old and dated — as if somehow feminism didn’t change the world, and as if one can really understand the concepts behind it from reading, say, Christina Hoff Summers. People use the basic philosophy of weeding to go well past CREW recommendations and strip their communities of valuable and persistently in-demand resources just because it’s more than 3 or 4 years old. I’m sure you wouldn’t do that — but it does happen, and it’s a poor value for taxpayers.
Removal of access to material based on an ideology by the government is the definition of censorship. What you’re highlighting here is for the most part, responsible professional practice. But it can, and does, go too far, and it’s because of the ideology that in non-fiction, only new is good.
And @basketcase, the tattiest books in your library are the most popular. Buy new if you can, always. But if there’s a serious case that users would prefer no copy of Diary of Young Girl to a worn (but complete) one, I have never heard it.
Bryan C // July 13, 2009 at 4:24 pm |
I worked in a college library for a couple years, including helping to sort donations and with moving the entire collection to a new facility, so I am sympathetic. The problem, as I see it, is when one that assumes that newer = better.
Space exploration is a good example, since we’re upon 40th anniversary of Apollo 11. A kid browsing in a library would probably never see any of Willy Ley’s or Werner von Braun’s incredibly influential books from the 50’s or early 60’s. Or any contemporary materials from the Apollo era. Or even from the development of the Voyager program or the space shuttle in the 70’s and 80’s. They were removed long ago. Their library may even have tossed out Carl Sagan’s wonderful “Cosmos” series, probably on the grounds that the dated fashions and special effects were just too distracting. All that’s left is a bland and simplified recitation of selected facts. Hardly the stuff to inspire future generations. And. all in all, I think that’s a darn shame.
Librarians, being human, are as subject to the whims of fashion and politics as anyone else. It’s fine to say that we should consider removing these books from the shelves, but don’t be surprised or upset when someone pushes back.
Forexabica // July 25, 2009 at 8:26 am |
I think this is a cool blog so I finally decided to make a post.I thought about starting my own board but I‘m glad I found this one instead. Great Info!
FutureAlien // July 29, 2009 at 9:13 pm |
I can understand that people wuld want to update the collections in their libraries, but imagine what wonderful resources they will be for alien archaeologists who visit Earth in 3000 years! They will need to know about our “stag lines” and how teens cleaned their rooms, won’t they?
A. // September 10, 2009 at 10:01 am |
Word. I do love old books–one of the gems of my personal collection is a hotel library catalog from…dang, it’s upstairs…I think 1904. An actual bound book, listing and giving a brief summary of all of the books you can borrow to read while you’re staying at the hotel. Completely useless, but when I saw it at a sale, I knew I had to have it. It also has an introduction that explains how the hotel library’s collection was chosen–why, for instance, they don’t have the complete works of Shakespeare, Dickens, and Twain (answer: because nobody would actually read them, and the hotel library is not a museum of great literature, and the hotel is better off using their limited funds and space for things people might actually want to borrow and read).
Similarly, the public libraries of today aren’t museums of quirky old books, and they don’t have room to keep everything–and even if shelf space was unlimited, you’d still have to move the old and quirky stuff out of the way so the stuff that people actually want can be found. No matter how much I love my 1904 hotel library catalog, it doesn’t belong in an actual public library’s catalog.