Search results

WE have to announce with deep regret the death of Mr. I. Chalkley Gould, founder and director of the Library World since its establishment in 1898. Mr. Gould was a member of an old Essex family associated with Loughton and its neighbourhood, and was born in 1844, his father being the late George Gould, of Traps Hill House, Loughton. His connection with the firm of Marlborough, Gould & Co. and other stationery and printing concerns led him many years ago to give some attention to library and museum work, towards which he had always been attracted because of his personal interest in archaeology and literature. In this way he became associated with many museums, libraries and antiquarian societies, and identified himself more particularly with the movement for the preservation of ancient British earthworks. He was a Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries, vice‐president of the Essex Archaeological Society, the Essex Field Club, and the British Archaeological Association. Within recent years he acted as hon. secretary of the Committee for Recording Ancient Earthworks and Fortified Enclosures—a committee for the formation of which he was largely responsible and in the work of which he took a very deep interest. He was chairman of the Committee for the Exploration of the Red Hills of Essex—an important undertaking which is not yet completed. He also contributed several valuable papers to the Victoria History of Essex, and assisted the editor of that publication in revising the earthworks sections of other counties.

AT last Mr. Baker's long announced “Descriptive Guide to the Best Fiction” is in our hands, and proves to be a bulky volume of over 600 pages, which must have cost its author many hours of arduous labour. Descriptive guides to literature of any sort are unfortunately too rare on this side of the world not to ensure for any decent attempt to compare with what the Americans are doing in this direction, the support of all librarians and bibliographers—at least we hope so—and Mr. Baker's book is a great advance on anything that has hitherto been attempted, here or elsewhere, to provide an annotated handbook to fiction. When the series of guides to literature, science, the arts, &c., announced by Messrs. Scott, Greenwood & Co., are published—which it is to be hoped will be soon—England will not be so desperately and humiliatingly “out of it,” as is the case at present, in the great task of selecting from and annotating the literature of the world.

The Carnegie United Kingdom Trust was formed by Andrew Carnegie under a Trust Deed, replaced later by a Royal Charter, to continue his benefactions for public library facilities and for encouraging the appreciation of music. In the Deed the Trustees were bidden to be pioneers and were reminded by the donor that “new needs are constantly arising as the masses advance”. The following is an account of how the Trustees fulfilled their charge, so far as libraries are concerned, during the early years of the Trust.

Funding, first from foundations and later also from government agencies, has been a factor in shaping the development of education for library (and information) science in the U.S. for more than 80 years. Educational programs experienced substantial investments in three periods: (1) from the Carnegie Corporation in the 1920s and 1930s; (2) from the U.S. Office of Education in the 1960s and 1970s; and (3) from the Institute of Museum and Library Services in the first decade of the 21st century. This chapter documents the impacts of the first two and argues for the need to analyze the impact of the third. Other, more modest, investments from both foundations and government agencies have had less lasting impact. This chapter identifies the major sources of funding and projects funded, assesses the level and type of impact, and concludes with implications for the future. The focus is on funding for research, development, and resource enhancement in library (and information) science education, not research conducted by library and information science (LIS) faculty on other topics (e.g., as funded by the OCLC/ALISE library and information science research grant program) (Connaway, 2005).

This exploratory study, a Ph.D. dissertation completed at the University of Western Ontario in 2013, examines the materially embedded relations of power between library users and staff in public libraries and how building design regulates spatial behavior according to organizational objectives. It considers three public library buildings as organization spaces (Dale & Burrell, 2008) and determines the extent to which their spatial organizations reproduce the relations of power between the library and its public that originated with the modern public library building type ca. 1900. Adopting a multicase study design, I conducted site visits to three, purposefully selected public library buildings of similar size but various ages. Site visits included: blueprint analysis; organizational document analysis; in-depth, semi-structured interviews with library users and library staff; cognitive mapping exercises; observations; and photography.

Despite newer approaches to designing public library buildings, the use of newer information technologies, and the emergence of newer paradigms of library service delivery (e.g., the user-centered model), findings strongly suggest that the library as an organization still relies on many of the same socio-spatial models of control as it did one century ago when public library design first became standardized. The three public libraries examined show spatial organizations that were designed primarily with the librarian, library materials, and library operations in mind far more than the library user or the user’s many needs. This not only calls into question the public library’s progressiveness over the last century but also hints at its ability to survive in the new century.

YOU have asked me to address you on the subject of The Public Library Service of To‐day and the Carnegie Trust Policy in relation thereto. The subject of libraries is large and important, but it is one which people refrain from studying because they are apt to think of a library as a room containing a collection of rather musty old books, and we have to dismiss that idea from our minds before we can actually appreciate what a library is, and what the library service means. I find that in 1692 a work was published under the title of “The Compleat Library or News for the Ingenious, containing several Original Pieces, Notes on Memorable Passages Happening in May, as also the State of Learning in the World, to be Published Monthly.” That was a description in the year 1692.

ONE of the chief elements of success in Public Library work is suitable accommodation for books and readers, and it is interesting to note that Mr. Andrew Carnegie has recognised this by granting his money, in most cases, for buildings only. This means that many new libraries will commence with the best conditions as regards accommodation, and so escape the disabilities attaching to some of the older libraries through being housed in adapted buildings. Adapted buildings are rarely a success from an administrative point of view, as I can testify from personal experience.

THE old trouble caused by local authorities levying rates on Public Libraries has been coming to the fore in several places lately. There is usually a great deal of discussion, but little is done to clear the ground. It has been decided that Public Libraries are liable to be assessed for local rates, and no amount of talking will alter that position at present. But something can be done to try to induce the local authorities to abandon their present endeavour to “bring everything into line” (as some of them have it) by making Public Libraries pay full rates. While it is perfectly legal to make Public Libraries pay these rates, yet it does not seem to be understood clearly that the local assessment committees have full discretion in the application of this legal power. They have the power to assess fully, nominally, or not at all. We put this emphatically because some of the statements we have seen indicate that there is a belief in certain districts that the rates must be levied. Now the payment of full or any large proportion of local rates is a serious item in the limited expenditure of a Public Library; and at the same time it is a negligible addition to the general income of a locality. In other words, this sum of money is a mere drop in the bucket to the locality as a whole, while it may mean all the difference between efficiency and stagnation to the Public Library. From a purely business point of view it seems somewhat futile to levy a certain limited amount of money for the maintenance of a Public Library, and then to cripple that institution by diverting a portion of that money in the direction of sewers, roads, or any of the other departments of municipal activity, none of which is similarly limited in its expenditure. What has to be done therefore, is to emphasize the permissive nature of powers of the local assessment committees, and to try and obtain either exemption from rates, or at most a nominal assessment.

IN the April number of Public Libraries, Mr. Andrew Keogh, sometime of Newcastle‐on‐Tyne, now Professor of Bibliography at Yale University, comes forward in defence of American libraries from the aspersions alleged to be cast on them in this periodical. Other journalistic comments have also appeared, which we may have occasion to mention at another time; and altogether some pother has been caused in America over our very straightforward and simple remarks. Mr. Keogh assumes, quite erroneously, that the first Library World editorial was based on the one or two instances of American reference to European libraries which he quotes. He knows, however, just as well as ourselves, that the American pose in library work is to adopt an attitude akin to contempt for anything outside the boundaries of the United States, and this is shown in nearly every publication dealing with library work. The Nation example was only one which happened to come along at the moment, and it is direct confirmation of what was stated in these columns in April, namely, that even in secular journals the writers were, as Mr. Keogh now certifies, prominent members of the A.L.A. Our attitude is, therefore, not that of defence simply, against certain outsiders writing in non‐professional journals, but against American professional librarians lending themselves to the poor work of trying to belittle the efforts of European librarians on every possible occasion. The mere fact that, as Mr. Keogh affirms, the great research libraries of Germany were attacked in the Nation, does not justify the publication of such ungenerous articles, especially coming from librarians who profess so much friendliness and high feeling.

OUR readers do not need the reminder that 1952 is the 75th year of Library Association history. Some opportunity may be found at the Bournemouth Conference to celebrate this fact, in however modest a manner. The American Library Association, older by a year, celebrated its anniversary at Philadelphia last October, on which occasion Mr. F. G. B. Hutchings represented this country and spoke at a luncheon meeting to three hundred of the guests with acceptance. That celebration, however, appears to us to have been most significant for the comment on the Carnegie library gifts which was made by Mr. Ralph Munn, librarian of Pittsburgh Carnegie Library, in some ways the most spectacular one founded by the great Scot. Munn said:—