🚀 go-pugleaf

[ Article crossposted from rec.arts.books ]
[ Author was Stephanie Stokes ]
[ Posted on Sun, 20 Oct 1996 20:30:54 -0700 ]

*********************************************************************
San Francisco Public Library's response to Nicholson Baker
and the New Yorker may also be found on our on website at:
http://www.sfpl.lib.ca.us

[Reprinted here]
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE      CONTACT: MARCIA SCHNEIDER
                                            557-4355

     SAN FRANCISCO  PUBLIC  LIBRARY  CHALLENGES
         ACCURACY  OF  THE  NEW  YORKER'S
             "AUTHOR VS.  THE  LIBRARY"


San Francisco, October 11, 1996 - In the October 14, 1996 edition of the 
New
Yorker, novelist and essayist Nicholson Baker has published a diatribe
against
the San Francisco Public Library. While purporting to write on a matter 
of
national significance, the increasing use of information technology in
libraries throughout the country and the impact of such technology on
traditional library services, the piece is in fact largely devoted to the
library's previously intended disposal of its card catalog, as well as 
its
book selection and weeding practices.

In fact, the San Francisco Public Library's policies regarding the card
catalog and book selection and weeding of its collection are completely 
in
line with standard library practices throughout the nation. Any 
suggestions
to
the contrary are simply wrong.

Baker's article contains a number of errors and false suppositions, in
addition to many basic philosophical disagreements with the library. 
These
errors range from misnamings, (correct names and spellings, as well as
measurements, such as linear miles, capacity of dump trucks, height of
ceilings, etc., appear to be a particular weakness of the writer), to 
false
conclusions based on hearsay and incorrect information.

Mr. Baker's crusade against San Francisco's new Main Library ignores a 
simple
truth: the new library is exceedingly popular. The average number of 
daily
visitors, circulation, and the budget for new books and materials have 
all
more than doubled, and the number of new library cards issued each day 
has
increased 450% over the old Main Library. Far from undermining the new 
San
Francisco Main Library, technology is in part responsible for its
extraordinary popularity. Children and teens flock there to use the
computers,
multimedia programs and Internet access. The circulation of print 
materials
has risen in the branch libraries as well as the Main Library. The San
Francisco Public Library has undergone a renaissance in recent years, 
with
longer hours, more books, and more computers. It is a vital, dynamic
institution, strongly supported by the people of San Francisco.

Mr. Baker appears to be particularly concerned with the Library 
Foundation of
San Francisco. Although the S.F. Public Library has a distinguished and
active
Friends of the Library organization, the library had no formal donor base 
to
support a capital campaign prior to the formation of the Foundation. The
Foundation was originally formed to raise the funds to furnish and equip 
the
new Main Library. Currently, an expanded mission statement will enable 
the
Foundation to continue to raise funds for endowment purposes, branch 
library
renovations and improvements, the book budget, and other priorities set 
by
the
library administration.

In a very brief period of time, the Library Foundation raised nearly $34
million to support the new Main Library. Nearly 18,000 donors contributed 
to
the campaign, ranging from individuals, families, family foundations,
corporate donors, and foundations. Not one of these donors had the means 
or
desire to exert undue influence on the library, though Mr. Baker would 
have
the reader believe otherwise. The campaign was inclusive in the finest 
sense
of the word - Chinese Americans, African Americans, gays and lesbians,
Filipino Americans, the Latino/Hispanic community, children, seniors,
environmentalists, history buffs, teens, literacy advocates,  people with
disabilities, and countless others, including corporations, who came 
together
to support this library. San Francisco Public Library is proud of and
thankful
for each one of these donors.

Mr. Baker asserts that the library punishes its internal critics. This is
patently false. This library has a particularly outstanding history of
supporting intellectual freedom. Staff members who are critical of
administration policies regularly speak out at Library Commission 
meetings,
and are not unknown to write articles for newspapers and speak out on 
matters
they disagree with on radio and even television. A small group of 
librarians
even sponsored a talk by Mr. Baker in the library's own auditorium, in 
which
Mr. Baker indulged in highly critical  rhetoric against this library
administration. For months, a small and vocal group of his supporters has
subjected those in disagreement with him to verbal abuse and harassment 
at
Library Commission meetings. And Mr. Baker wonders why he heard only from
staff who agreed with his ideas.

Mr. Baker insults not only this library and all its staff when he writes 
of
the library's collection development plan and book discard practices, but 
all
libraries across the country. San Francisco employs highly trained and
skilled
professional librarians, all of whom hold post graduate degrees in 
library
science, and many of whom have worked in their field of subject specialty 
for
decades. Library staff apply the same professional standards to weeding 
as
they do to materials selection. Nothing is discarded without serious
evaluation based on established criteria, such as outdated information,
multiple copies, poor condition, or lack of demand.

It should be noted that in the year and a half prior to the move to the 
new
Main Library, this library added more than five times as many books to 
its
collection as it withdrew. Over the past decade, on average the library
system
has discarded approximately one percent annually from its collections, a
figure far lower than standard library practice.

Prior to the current library administration, 90% of whom assumed their
positions after 1989, all library discards routinely were sent to 
landfill.
It
was only due to the concerted efforts of this administration that two 
pieces
of legislation were passed that enabled the library to offer books to the
Friends for resale and to other community groups and individuals serving 
the
public good. It is disingenuous of Mr. Baker to imply otherwise.

Nicholson Baker has done a great disservice to the San Francisco Public
Library and the people of San Francisco. He has insisted that the new 
library
is smaller than the old one. To prove his point, he and others broke into 
the
old Main Library to measure the shelves and subsequently published their
erroneous results on the front page of a San Francisco daily newspaper.  
In
fact, the new Main Library has over nine miles more shelf space than  the 
old
building. Only when the library extended an invitation to the local press 
to
measure the shelves for themselves did Baker admit that his figures were
wrong
(they were off by 25 miles).

All things considered, the San Francisco Public Library is pleased that 
our
new building was designed and built by architects, engineers, library
professionals, and space planning and library moving specialists, rather 
than
writers of fiction.

Mr. Baker has implied that the librarians of the San Francisco Public 
Library
have shown poor judgment in selecting and discarding books. A group of 
six
SFPL librarians, with a combined experience of 130 years of selecting and
maintaining library collections, disagreed, and took it upon themselves 
to
respond, writing to a San Francisco newspaper: "Withdrawing material is a
professional responsibility and an essential part of maintaining a viable
collection. Unfortunately, it is a responsibility that is often shirked,
partly because librarians love books. Furthermore, because San Francisco
Public Library was perennially understaffed, first priority was given to
direct service, not to old books.

'During the closure before our move, it was both natural and responsible 
for
Main Library administration to encourage subject librarians to examine 
their
collections and withdraw appropriate materials rather than paying to have
them
moved. Almost all of the volumes withdrawn from the collection prior to 
our
move were either duplicates or volumes so old and worn out that they were 
no
longer useable. In the latter case, replacements may be on order.

'There is a small group of library staff whose aim seems to be to foment
dissension, whether it be over withdrawals, corporate donations, or the 
card
catalog (which, by the way, is only rarely asked for by the public.)"

Despite its overwhelming popularity, the new San Francisco Main Library 
is
going through growing pains. It is dealing with an unprecedented and
extraordinarily high volume of traffic. Budget problems have resulted 
from a
previous Library Commission's decision to implement more extended hours 
than
recommended by Library Administration. Union intransigence has prevented
implementation of a recommended new classification of library workers to
shelve the books in a timely fashion.

The San Francisco Public Library now has in place a plan to deal 
immediately
with the issues most frustrating to delivery of good public service,
including
long lines at service desks and the shelving backlog. The library is 
adapting
to its budget limitations and anticipates closing this fiscal year with a
balanced budget.

In the meantime, patrons continue to flock to the library, proving that
computers and books can co-exist, and they do at the new San Francisco 
Main
Library.


# # #
-- 
Bob Teeter (rteeter@netcom.com)	|	"Write me a few of your lines"
http://www.wco.com/~rteeter/	|	-- Mississippi Fred McDowell
"You might say that, but I couldn't possibly comment." -- Francis Urquhart
		"Only connect" -- E. M. Forster