Last week The Telegraph boldly printed the ‘ultimate reading list’. Billed as ‘the perfect library’, it featured a collection of 110 books ‘that changed the world’. Reading through the list made me think about a recent opinion piece from Bob Usherwood in the Gazette and my own experiences of stock in public libraries.
Many of the libraries I’ve visited have adopted elements of the bookshop model to attract more visitors and make the service more relevant to 21st century users. Some have even rebranded the service entirely.
The thing that sticks in my mind most about visiting these ‘libraries’ is the massive collections of mass market paperbacks on display. Not that there’s anything wrong with pleasing the masses, but where was the rest of the collection? Tucked away, out of sight perhaps? Why were other books not enjoying the same exposure as Richard & Judy Bookclub titles? Why were users being forced to actively seek out books that weren’t lucky enough to make it into last month’s bestsellers lists? It was easy enough to grab a copy of Jordan’s biography but not quite as easy to retrieve Murakami’s ‘Wind Up Bird Chronicle’ or Orwell’s ‘1984’.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for popular / contemporary fiction; if truth be told, I’ve never really been a fan of the classics (I know, I know, bad librarian)! But the problem, as I see it, is in striking the right balance. All too often, it seems that popular fiction takes precedence over everything else. Given that performance indicators and evaluations (external and internal) are still mainly quantitative, I can see why many services are stocking up on titles that will deliver higher issue figures. But what’s the long term impact of such a strategy? Usherwood suggests that:
“If the public library is not going to provide a superior selection of novels than that to be found in the local supermarket, or more accurate sources of information than the tabloid press, how can it justify public funding?” (Usherwood, 2007, p. 73)
Yes, the future, it’s certainly worth thinking about, don’t you agree?
The Library of Digress 
The popularity of Richard and Judy books shows to me that people need guidance or some sort of quality assurance.
There are so many books published these days that it is become harder and harder for the public to sort the wheat from the chaff.
Similar mass media book programmes in Ireland such as The Ryan Tubridy show have had a similar impact on book sales and visibility of the chosen titles.
I think this shows that there is a greater need for librarians and library staff to bring together more of their own collections and to make them very visible in branches. Often these collections are given lower priority than R+J titles but they should be thrust into the public’s gaze and given a greater significance in displays.
Librarians should not be fearful of promoting challenging or literary titles either. The inclusion of titles such as Cloud Atlas and The Testament of Gideon Mack in R+J Choices shows that the public will respond well to literary fiction if they know in advance that is of a certain quality and is worth the perceived “extra effort”.
There is of course the argument that many of the people who read Jordan’s book perhaps have never read a book before and this could be the entry point into the wonderful world of literature, let’s hope this is the case and also hope this transition / conversion can be made easier with the guiding hand of proactive library staff and good library stock.
Both this blog and Anthony’s comment make good points. I agree that the public do need guidance on reading materials – I’m an English Literature graduate with a Library MSc and even I rely heavily on recommendations! I think it’s all too easy for people (myself included) to be swayed either by R&J for an ‘easy’ and modern read, or to go right back to the classics, Dickens, Austen etc for something meatier – but this cuts out realms of good quality literature that is just being overlooked.
As pointed out in this blog, it’s a definite niche that librarians can fill – sections/displays in the library with librarians’ reading lists or books around a theme etc would be a great way of addressing this. Many do already create displays, but these often seem to lack planning and have nothing to recommend them to browsers – it just looks like a random selection picked from the shelves.
As you rightly point out, it’s no surprise libraries are focussing on the blockbusters when their performance is measured by quantitative measures – a more qualitative approach may allow public libraries more flexibility with the books they stock.
A quick glance at this list show some fabulous books – and a great selection of contemporary and classic. 🙂
Hey there!
I was looking through the books and I spotted one that interested me. “A la recherche du temps perdu.” Being somebody who loves the French language, I can see why it caught my eye. But, I wonder, is it all in French? I’m not that advanced, but I’m moderately fluent.
I agree with you Anthony that books by celebrities, such as Jordan, Jade Goody or even Coleen McLoughlin can act as entry points for people who wouldn’t normally read books. So I don’t think that libraries should stop stocking mass market paperbacks but I do I think that they should offer a better, more representative range to users. As pointed out by Dust Monkey, we do seem to give more promotional space to commercially driven initiatives than we do to any collections created by our own library staff.
I know that libraries can’t please everyone all of the time but we have to bear in mind that public libraries are not bookshops and it is not our mission to compete with the likes of Waterstone’s or Borders. We’re never going to win that battle. Like Dust Monkey suggests, we need to create a niche and promote it; offer the public a range of services that they’re not likely to get from a bookshop!