Aaronwhite'sresponsepaper

UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT GREENSBORO
REACTION TO
DAVID LEWISS FROM STACKS TO THE WEB
LIS 636
DEPARTMENT OF LIBRARY & INFORMATION SCIENCE
BY
AARON WHITE
KANNAPOLIS NC
OCTOBER 2013
Perhaps one way to engage David Lewiss positions is to focus on

his five conclusions.
1. Deconstruct Legacy Print Collections
Print has been superseded, or such is the belief underlying much
of this articles assertions. Whether reality is catching up with this
belief remains to be seen. The debate over print vs. digital is ongoing
and need not end with a winner-take-all resolution. My brother likes
having his whole library on a machine that fits in a drawer; his
girlfriend prefers the tactile engagement of paper. Perhaps the future
will accommodate them both instead of insisting that one yield to the
preferences of the other. If my brother is forced to return to paper, or
his girlfriend is forced to adopt digital, it shouldnt be overhasty
decisions by the library that forces them. Maybe print will go the way
of the LP and the videocassette, but such analogies are deceptive. The
heyday of the LP was about half a century long; that of the
videocassette was shorter. They were easily replaced by more robust
technological solutions. The codex, in contrast, has existed for
millennia. If it were easy to supersede, it probably would have been
before now.
Theres also room for skepticism about Michael Bucklands Three
Eras of the Library (Paper, Automated, and Electronic). If the library
becomes all digital soon, History may judge that the period of
automation is merely the end of Paper or the dawn of Electronic.
Furthermore, announcing the Third Stage of this theoretical
progression presumes the inevitability of an all-digital future that has
yet to manifest.
Without accepting the notion that digital will utterly replace
print, it does make sense to consider ways in which digital might be
the better option. Buckland is right that librarians need to focus on

what libraries do, rather than how they currently do it, and digital
formats, which allow for efficient removal and replacement of obsolete
information while still allowing long-term storage for archival purposes,
seem ideal for legal, medical, and technological information that cant
be expected to retain its value. Its sad to see big books about
Windows 95 taking up shelf space; better to keep such documents in
easily deletable form.
Its also exciting to think the long tail of print collections could be
preserved in print repositories and brought out on a need basis, saving
materials for posterity while freeing up space and making the
materials available for other area libraries. The price to be paid in
terms of browsability is an open question.
2. Move From Item-by-Item Book Selection to Purchaseon-Demand and Subscriptions
This is peculiar advice given Lewiss admonishment to shun Big
Deals when buying journals, since subscriptions are kissing cousins to
big deals. Both involve letting a vendor handle much of the selection.
The situation resembles the debate about cable channel bundling. On
the one hand, why should a cable customer pay for channels the
customer doesnt watch? On the other hand, the bundles provide
niche channels with enough of a safety net to keep them in business,
which supports diversity. Lewis presents similar arguments regarding
journal bundling A.K.A. Big Deals, and book subscriptions; whats odd
is that he seems to switch sides depending on whether hes discussing
journals or books.
Lewis is against Big Deals in journals, not only because of cost,
but waste.
He seems to argue that any journal that cant sustain
itself in subscription format should switch to open source, but he

doesnt apply the same logic to books. Here he believes a subscription
model will provide a financial safety net for niche texts. One mediums
safety net is another mediums waste; or is it? The arguments could
be switched around to argue for Open Source books or bundled fees
protecting the solvency of niche journals.
Lewiss belief that Print on Demand will fill any future desire for
print books is dubious. Ive not had the opportunity to try the POD
vending machines, but Ive purchased some POD books online, and
theyre no substitute for proper printing and binding. They are flimsy,
and they look like photocopies. Unless POD can improve its production
quality, lovers of print will be unsatisfied.
Artists monographs and other such books that rely on precise
production values might move to digital format if and when society
decides that paintings and photos are better engaged on computer
screens than in carefully designed books, but that day is not here, and
may never be.
Another cause for concern: much digital content to which
libraries lease access remains, essentially, the property of the vendor.
The librarys traditional preservation role is outsourced to vendors.
Open Source journals will probably reduce the problem on the journal
side (as seen in organizations like LOCKSS (Lots Of Copies Keep Stuff
Safe), but eBooks remain the property of the vendor.
3. Manage the Transition to Open Access Journals
Since my spouse works on Open Source software and regularly
publishes in Open Source journals, Id be delighted for Open Source to
conquer the world, but Im not sure its wise to join Mr. Lewis in
betting the farm on that outcome. Paywall journals such as Science,

Nature, and Cell are bywords in scientific research. Ive known
scientists who refused to submit to reputable OS journals like PLoS
One on the grounds that Ive published too much Open Source. It
makes it look like I cant get into a real journal.
4. Curate the Unique
This seems like a valuable way to ensure the ongoing and visible
relevance of the library to local communities. Collecting and
preserving materials that seem disposable, but are cultural artifacts, is
an established way for libraries to serve the community. For example,
zine libraries (such as the Bingham Center Zine Collections at Duke)
which curate collections of self-published magazines, prevent these
delicate artifacts of their time and place from becoming forgotten and
inaccessible. Perhaps one future of the library is the preservation of
other cultural expressions that are easily forgotten and lost, but which
help bear witness to the culture that created them. Zines are one
venue of grassroots expression. If libraries work to discover,
collaborate with, and preserve the creations of other local creative
cultures, it will serve the interests of the community and the library
while demonstrating the value of libraries to the cultural record. The
makerspaces that are becoming part of many libraries can serve this
mission.
5. Develop New Mechanisms to Fund National
Infrastructure
Its probably true that the funding of new library initiatives will
require creative fundraising and increased sharing. To what extent this
will be anything new is another open question. Its odd that Lewis
wants to jettison so much established infrastructure in order to replace
it with unproven new models for librarianship. He seems to want

libraries to make big gambles ASAP, in the fear that a slower pace will
leave libraries behind the times.
But time is relative: my hometown
public library adopted computerized catalogs (and in-library internet

access) several years after Id first used Netscape to access the World
Wide Web. As soon as they did, a local politician tried to score points
by chastising the library for providing children access to pornography;
he threatened to cut the librarys public funding. Perhaps the library
moved too fast. For several years thereafter, the card catalog
remained in the lobby, with little signs warning that it was no longer
being updated. The library is still there, and probably doing well. Did
it move to fast on embracing computers and abandoning the card
catalog? Did it move too slowly? Either way, it is still in business.

Aaronwhite'sresponsepaper

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Aaronwhite'sresponsepaper

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Aaronwhite'sresponsepaper

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT GREENSBORO

Perhaps one way to engage David Lewiss positions is to focus on

the better option. Buckland is right that librarians need to focus on

He seems to argue that any journal that cant sustain

itself in subscription format should switch to open source, but he

betting the farm on that outcome. Paywall journals such as Science,

it with unproven new models for librarianship. He seems to want

But time is relative: my hometown

public library adopted computerized catalogs (and in-library internet

You might also like