Search results

OUR readers begin this month a year which we hope has many library possibilities. The growing recognition of libraries and of the calling of the librarian gives one reason to believe that progress will continue, gradually it is true, but surely, towards a fairer and more generous library policy than has been possible in the past. Vestiges of worn ideas Still remain, as when we hear that a library has mutilated its newspapers deliberately in the belief that this would in some way suppress the betting habit. There are libraries, too, in some towns, even in some universities—incredible as that may seem to those who do not know them—where librarianship is so bad that its natural recognition is pity or contempt. And it is curiously the nature of things that people who know bad libraries accept them as bad and do not attempt righteous criticism. But such ideas and such libraries grow fewer every year. We begin 1930 with new and high hopes.

The Report of the Royal College of Physicians (London) and the British Cardiac Society issued in April last was the product of a joint working party, whose aim was to formulate the best possible advice which can at present be given to medical practitioners towards the prevention of coronary heart disease. It caused quite a stir, particularly its dietary recommendations, and the mass media made the most of it, more from inferences drawn from the measures recommended than from the report itself. Now that the sensation of it has gone and the dust has begun to settle, we can see the Report contains nothing that is new; it tells us what we have long known. Like the Horsemen of the Apocalypse, except that there are three of them, at least for the moment, the causative factors of the rising incidence of coronary heart disease, built into our affluent society, have been working their way at the heart of man for a good many years now.

We wish our readers, especially in this war year, the Best of the Season's Good Things!

SOCIALLY, the two conferences can only be described as a huge success. The local arrangements for the entertainment of delegates were complete, and the receptions, banquets and excursions gave great pleasure to all who took part in them. To most of the English‐speaking delegates the trip to Brussels possessed the additional charm of novelty, and thus the week's proceedings assumed a holiday character. Save those who were suffering from mislaid baggage, and blistered feet caused by the trottoirs économiques de Bruxelles, a general note of gaiety prevailed, particularly among the British and Canadian representatives. Most of the American delegates were ladies, and they were all looking more or less tired, or were tormented by the thought of lost Saratoga trunks, which gave them a serious and detached appearance. The absence of attentive male librarians may also have contributed to the gloomy aspect which so many of them wore. Is it possible that the overwhelming feminine note in American librarianship is the key to the many discrepancies in library policy and work which have been observed by different writers? However that may be, it was distinctly noticeable that in comparison with their English, Dutch, Swedish and Belgian sisters, the American lady librarians were a tired and unhappy company. There were one or two noble exceptions, but the memory of these we prefer to hug in secret as a precious treasure.

THIS number of THE LIBRARY WORLD returns to the question of foreign literature in British Libraries. The insistence in recent years upon two foreign languages at least, as a qualification for a librarian, has had some good results; but they are Still inadequate in extent. Every librarian must be painfully aware of the handicap we British people suffer in our average inability to converse in any language but our own; no other race is quite so restricted. A Swiss, for example, does not ask if we can speak this or that language, but asks, “In what language shall we speak together?”—a vastly different thing. It is not because of any lack of power to learn; it is merely our unwillingness or lack of opportunity to do so. Such attitudes are anachronisms to‐day; peoples get so much closer every hour, and it must be clear to all who think that one place in a town where a foreigner should be able to ask an intelligent question and receive an answer in his own tongue is the library.

ELSEWHERE we deal with the inaugural meeting of the Association of Assistant Librarians. Those who were privileged to attend tell us that the meeting was quite without precedent in many ways. There is no doubt that this Association is virile, enthusiastic and alive to the best issues in literature. A better foundation for young librarians cannot be conceived. We doubt whether the Society is as strong on the technical side, but that may be because so much of library technique is now standard, and, therefore, only very inventive librarians can bring new views and methods. One of the obvious things in the assembly was the number of girls. At one time a girl at a L.A.A. meeting (to use its old and much better initials) was so rare an appearance that everybody's curiosity was aroused. Now the girls are in the majority. We hope that it will not always be a majority, but we do think that half‐and‐half would be very much better than too many girls or too many boys. In any case those who were present at the meeting are optimistic as to the future of the library profession.

We have from time to time suggested that librarians should pool experiences in regard to annual estimates, but there seems to be no enthusiasm for the suggestion. If library work is to develop it must be by gently progressive finance, and nothing helps one librarian more than to be able to point to another who is progressing. We all tend to wait upon one another. In such a matter as salaries, a librarian circulates his colleagues to learn what they are getting; and library authorities almost invariably ask, “What is paid at So and So ?” This is a vicious circle which cannot be broken unless librarians in consultation can reach a Standard. Perhaps the active London and Home Counties Branch of the L.A. will give a lead since the L.A. itself is too busy to do so.

OWING to the comparatively early date in the year of the Library Association Conference, this number of THE LIBRARY WORLD is published so that it may be in the hands of our readers before it begins. The official programme is not in the hands of members at the time we write, but the circumstances are such this year that delay has been inevitable. We have dwelt already on the good fortune we enjoy in going to the beautiful West‐Country Spa. At this time of year it is at its best, and, if the weather is more genial than this weather‐chequered year gives us reason to expect, the Conference should be memorable on that account alone. The Conference has always been the focus of library friendships, and this idea, now that the Association is so large, should be developed. To be a member is to be one of a freemasonry of librarians, pledged to help and forward the work of one another. It is not in the conference rooms alone, where we listen, not always completely awake, to papers not always eloquent or cleverly read, that we gain most, although no one would discount these; it is in the hotels and boarding houses and restaurants, over dinner tables and in the easy chairs of the lounges, that we draw out really useful business information. In short, shop is the subject‐matter of conference conversation, and only misanthropic curmudgeons think otherwise.

THE publication last month of the long‐anticipated Report of the Departmental Public Libraries Committee is, of course, the principal recent event. It is too long to allow us to give a full account of its arguments and conclusions, and in common with all who work for libraries we must return to it again and again in the future. It may be said, however, that it will allay the fears of those who thought that one result of the Committee's deliberations would be to support and to suggest the implementing of the Report of the Adult Education Committee of the lamented Ministry of Reconstruction, which would have handed over the public libraries of the country as a gift to the directors of education. This report does nothing of the kind; it even suggests that as public opinion is clearly opposed to such a course, the libraries should remain in the hands of those who made them an admitted success even under the adverse conditions of the limited rate. Thus the way is open to real progress, and the very confined conditions which would be a necessary result of the absorption of libraries in the official education machinery are not immediately to be dreaded.

Some misconception appears to have arisen in respect to the meaning of Section 11 of the Food and Drugs Act, 1899, owing, doubtless, to the faulty punctuation of certain copies of the Act, and the Sanitary Record has done good service by calling attention to the matter. The trouble has clearly been caused by the insertion of a comma after the word “condensed” in certain copies of the Act, and the non‐insertion of this comma in other copies. The words of the section, as printed by the Sanitary Record, are as follows: “Every tin or other receptacle containing condensed, separated or skimmed milk must bear a label clearly visible to the purchaser on which the words ‘Machine‐skimmed Milk,’ or ‘Skimmed Milk,’ as the case may require, are printed in large and legible type.”