Are some forms of reading inherently "better" than others?

When people start talking about an e-reader such as the Amazon Kindle2 or the Sony Reader, reaction seems to fall into two camps: "I want" versus "but that's not reading!"

I admit that I have techno-lust for an e-reader: they are so sleek! So shiny! So small! Think of how uncluttered my house would be if the books were all in this one small reader!

The other camp points to the physical aspects of the book: the feel of the pages, the weight of the book, the durability and lendability of an actual print book.

And I agree… I'd still want some of my books around. Books have memories; it’s not just owning The Dark is Rising by Susan Cooper, it's owning the one I read as a kid. It's being able to take it off my shelf, reread, lend it to someone with an "OMG you'll love this" that just cannot happen with an e-book.

Or can it happen? I don't have an e-reader; so I cannot say, firsthand, the differences in reading an e-book. But, wow….the size appeals to my desire to simplify my life by decluttering my living space. And then there are the trees that would be saved. Did I mention how cool they look?

A similar conversation about reading is going on concerning review copies for book review blogs; if you had a choice, would you review from an Advance Reader's Copy or a PDF? If you think bloggers are new and techy, think again. A surprising number say, "reading on the computer isn't the same. I want the book." Bloggers spend enough time on the computer; a book is a break from that.

The Kindle2's text-to-speech function has brought another issue into the "what is a book" argument. A synthetic, computer voice can read aloud the e-book. Understandably, the Author's Guild got a little worked up about this feature, fearing that it may negatively impact audiobooks.

I love audiobooks; I'm a "listen while I drive" person. While a bad narrator may make me stop the book, I don't abandon the book. Rather, I go back to the traditional print book. A good narrator, on the other hand, can make a book come alive. It also forces me to really listen to the words, rather than skim or skip a descriptive paragraph or two.

Because I'm an audiobook listener, I personally think the Author's Guild fears of a computer voice are unfounded. Honestly, audiobooks are superior; when readers have a choice, they will go for the book that is recorded, narrated, directed, and edited by professionals. Not all books are available in audiobook. The Kindle2 provides a nice option for those books, magazines, and blogs that don't have an audio version.

You know what would be cool for the next e-reader? Being able to download audiobooks to it. All my audiobooks and e-books on one device? Sweet!

So what does "reading" mean?

I want to say, "read any way!" People have different preferences; and what works for one person doesn't work for another. To say "listening to an audiobook doesn't count" (as I've heard teachers and book club members say) is a disservice to those who get more out of an audiobook than a print book. (It also is insulting to those whose only choice is an audiobook, in that it says their reading experiences will never count, but that, dear reader, is another topic). "It doesn't count" shows a surprisingly narrow world view; "if something doesn't work for me, it doesn't work for anyone." Ditto for e-books and reading, with people who believe, "I wouldn't want to read on a screen, so no one would."

It's good to stretch our ways of reading. I want to say, "read any way." I do say it. I listen to audiobooks during my commute; and find that sometimes I pay more attention to the story than if I was reading a book. I prefer children's books that I can finish in less than a week.  I've found that sometimes reading on a computer, where I can play with font size, is easier on my eyes than the small print of books. I'm open to an e-reader, and just found out that my iPod Touch has an e-book application that I'm going to try out. To truly respect the different ways people read, we should try them out.

And yet… I have to confess; I was recently asked to do the foreword for You Don’t Look Like a Librarian: Shattering Stereotypes and Creating Positive New Images in the Internet Age by Ruth Kneale. When asked, "do you want a galley or a PDF"—dear reader, I said a galley. I knew, to give the book a good reading, I needed the physical pages.

When it comes down to it—despite using other ways of reading—my own, personal preference is the old-fashioned book.  

Posted by: Elizabeth Burns

Is it possible to critique (and disparage) the production and consumption of contemporary youth pop culture without sounding like a crank, a grandfatherly gadfly, a curmudgeon, a technophobe dandy fop contenting herself with a blank room and a Victrola, who speaks only from a perspective of just-not-getting-it and the power of a certain age and class? Does it matter—does my crankiness distort my meaning and message? There are sharp distinctions among the owners, the creators, and the consumers. Many teens create their own media and meanings, which are sometimes owned by corporations. I think there is more of a perception of democratic production than a reality. Throughout, my voice will be lamenting, rambling, nostalgic, self-righteous, aged, I know. I come to this as a not-quite-recovered teenager and someone who spends my workday with young people. The dangers of “those kids today” conversations are well documented. Every generation distrusts and despises the one after it, they say; either we are on a treacherous path of cultural deterioration or we are unable to lucidly view youth culture from the distance of our old age. Is there cultural superiority of my—or anyone’s— youth? Does my ownership of time and experience invest the past with unearned personal meaning?

However, my disdain is well-worn attire, not a new pose. I had disdain for ‘90s mainstream culture as a teen, and craved weird subcultural corners. This seemed to me a rebellion against conformist oppressive middle class status. I didn’t realize at the time the oppressions by punks, radicals, indie rockers—that culture jamming was enacted by the sons and daughters of the system, the recipients of all kinds of privilege. Counterculture teens weren’t interested in ending the game—they just wanted to upend it and assert their dominance and superiority of the underclasses. I place myself here, hidden by a black wing and not being smart enough to end the hierarchy but to win the subcultural version.

Through the passage of time, even mainstream culture in its obsolescence adopts a patina of cool (see the obsession with “old school” and “vintage” everything). There’s the shambling clutch of cassette tapes and pay phones and water fountains—these things that have been taken from us. I recently saw Liz Phair play her “Exile in Guyville” show, an objective failure that was really meaningful to me because of how her music sparked feelings of feminism and pale defiance of nose thumbing (no rock in a cop’s face) in my high school years. Is this narcissism? “Everything in my own immediate experience supports my deep belief that I am the absolute center of the universe; the realest, most vivid and important person in existence”? http://www.marginalia.org/dfw_kenyon_commencement.html.

Listening to “Exile in Guyville,” reading eBayed Sassy Magazines, watching My So-Called Life—even as I now realize their poor little white girl failings—still resonates adolescently with my eternal internal outsiderness, unrealized ambitions and my ineffable hopefulness about the future. Megan judged people’s worthiness by their shoes and we all judged people by their music taste. Growing up among mostly white middle class suburban Christians, we separated out by stylistic minutiae. Where it wasn’t always safe to proclaim your political beliefs, we asserted them with hair color and safety pins, which carried their own risks. Remember, this was in the late 1990s when students wearing trench coats (the former uniform of the 1950s white collar worker) were suspended for their subversive murderous dress.

I’ve killed my TV and home Internet access and I listen to music mostly on a blue Hello Kitty walkman or record player (hoping this doesn’t sound annoying even though it’s true...) and therefore have a tenuous grasp of what mainstream teens like. It’s weird to be personally uninterested in mainstream culture and yet work a job that requires this knowledge. Countercultural aesthetics that once signified ideals, values, identities, and affiliations have been commodified. We live in shallow vagueness and shadows. How to know what people really mean when irony and gossip rules? David Foster Wallace wrote precisely about the problem with irony: "Irony has only emergency use. Carried over time, it is the voice of the trapped who have come to enjoy the cage. This is because irony, entertaining as it is, serves an almost exclusively negative function. It’s critical and destructive, a ground-clearing.”

Earnestness, enthusiasm, reverence, and seriousness are obscured by irony, gossip, and the pose of rebellion. I remember in the '90s people took selling out a look more seriously. The Internet has further commodified countercultures. Finding information on Riot Grrrl and buying green nail polish were challenging. Zines were traded like samizdat (perhaps a risky hyperbole) and while the underground was lively, it wasn’t as accessible as it is now, in its weakened state. The democratization of the underground opens up subcultural expression to disadvantaged socioeconomic classes but also to poseurs.

Intersections among politics, interests, affiliations, identities, and aesthetics have faded until they simply reinforce social hierarchy and class superiority. Fashion does not offer many points of resistance in the US. While I fondly remember late ‘80s and early ‘90s music and fashion, this era represents the beginning of the end, when youth counterculture for the first time was sold simultaneous with its production, where the hype became mediated by products and not substance, as Naomi Klein points out. Our postures and styles are now substitutes for meaningful action. We can’t wear our activism or correctly identify our politics with our aesthetics. Everything has been sold.

Posted by: Kati Nolfi

We've all been asked some form of the question, "why did you become a librarian," and with my 30th high school reunion looming I expect I'll be asked at least once by an old classmate. I have different answers depending upon whom I'm speaking to, but I think the best answer is simply because I'm curious about stuff. I just find it fun to look things up, help people and in the process learn something new.

Most of the stuff that I've learned about computers and technology was more by accident than by intent. I was simply curious enough to go poking around trying to figure things out. Lifelong learning is often used to describe this process, but it's a phrase that has never resonated with me. To me it sounds way too formal and planned for anything I've ever actually learned on my own. My process of learning is more like what Dorothea Salo calls the six magic words, than anything as stuffed shirt sounding as Lifelong Learning.

What are the magic words?

Ready? Okay the magic words are, "hmmm I wonder how that works."

When I first heard about the Learning 2.0 program, based upon the idea of learning about 2.0 tools through guided exploration (which I’m sure is trainerspeak for the magic words), I became an evangelist for the Learning 2.0 program.

A year has gone by since that day and now my library is in the midst of a Learning 2.0 program, for which I'm proud to be an administrator. When our program started I was naïve enough to be surprised at the negative feelings that some staff would have about it. I had been so involved in developing proposals; finding funding for incentives; determining tools for measuring progress; that I forgot that not everyone wants to learn this stuff. The magic words for these people are like the bell in the picture book The Polar Express; they have lost their power to enchant.

For these staff our 2.0 program is something that is added onto their workday, which makes their regular job harder. Most of these people are busy, and they feel that if they take time to play with these tools they’re letting their coworkers down because the regular work may not get done. As Kathryn Greenhill points out these people aren’t dumb grumps they’re merely expressing some very legitimate concerns. They’d like to know how these tools relate to their jobs, which ones are the most important, and they want a traditional training structure.

A Learning 2.0 program, I would argue, is as much about building a culture of dare I say it, lifelong learning amongst staff, as it is about any of the tools and applications we play with. Since technology is changing quickly and 2.0 applications are developing rapidly and then morphing into something new, the question of which tool is more important than another becomes rather moot. Knowing about these tools can improve the ability of staff to provide excellent customer service. One librarian in our system quickly located close captioned television shows on the internet, for a hearing impaired customer, because she had learned about Hulu the week before. These “aha!” moments are important to share with everyone in the program, because they enhance the power of the magic words.

It’s been a pleasure speaking to you this month, but now I’m going to go play with this thing called 280 Slides which seems like it could be helpful for my next presentation. 280 Slides, hmmm I wonder how that works?

Posted by: Jim McCluskey

Have you Googled your library recently? If you haven’t, what you find may surprise you. That man you saw earlier today picking up his holds may be thinking about writing a review that mentions how much he likes dropping by the library to grab his books and go. The fact is our patrons, both the satisfied and dissatisfied, are talking about us in their blogs on review sites like Yelp. These sites enable our customers to reach larger audiences than ever before, and to share what they like and dislike about the service provided. This is something libraries should be thinking about and preparing for.

Once you’re aware of these review sites the library has some questions to answer. Should the library join these sites and add reviews or other content? Should the library respond to negative reviews, correct inaccurate information, and so on? Who’ll be responsible for periodically checking these sites and what guidelines should they be working with.

I’d encourage libraries to consider adding content to review sites, especially in cases where the library hasn’t yet been reviewed. These first reviews represent an opportunity to share services the library offers such as Wi-Fi, and virtual reference service. Be up front about identifying yourself as the library and keep it brief. Be factual and focus on services, let your customers be the ones to offer praise.

Libraries should consider carefully how or if they’ll respond to reviews. My advice would be to let the community police itself and to have faith that the good service you provide will balance out the occasional poor review. Yelp offers some good advice for business owners that also applies to libraries.

Some highlights:
“Don’t review your own business anonymously or get your friends to do the same.
Don’t overestimate the impact of a single negative review. It happens to even the best businesses. That said if you see a trend of negative reviews, you may want to take this feedback and determine if there is a way to improve your business.
Do add photos to your business page and make sure the business information is correct.
Do review your own business, clearly stating that you are the business owner. Full disclosure is important here, and will be critical in earning the respect of the Yelp community.”

Review sites like these are expanding rapidly, building off people’s inherent desire to create and share information. Libraries that embrace these web 2.0 tools have an opportunity to open a dialog with their customers which may lead to beneficial relationships for both.

A customer, who wrote a positive review about the library, may be the person you think of when you’re looking for a person to offer a patron perspective on the library’s blog. And even a negative review offers the chance to get feedback about ways we might improve our services, practices, or policies. Our customers are talking about us. It’s time for libraries to join the conversation.

Posted by: Jim McCluskey

I spend a lot of time on Flickr and every so often I come across something that just really bothers me. No, I’m not talking about someone’s tasteless photograph; I’m referring to mean library signs. Many of the worst ones target cell phone users. Of course, if your sign can be addressed to teen use of cell phones, well then you’ve hit the daily double of nasty. One library I came across the other day even threatens you with a hundred dollar fine if you’re caught talking on a cell phone in the library. Let’s set aside for a moment the fact that bad cell phone policies and unfriendly signs send a message to these customers that we don’t want you in our libraries. These practices are also out of step with the services libraries are already offering or moving towards in the near future.

Your phone is getting smarter.

Remarkably given the state of the economy, cell phone sales are booming, especially smart phones like the iPhone, and the Blackberry pearl. Formerly the domain of techies and executives, these smart phones are now coming into the mainstream, and that represents a great opportunity for libraries. In the past several years more and more libraries have begun offering downloadable content such as audio books, music, video and eBooks all of which are compatible with many smart phones.
One of the big hurdles for widespread acceptance of this downloadable content has been the issue of incompatibility with the iPod. Now that OverDrive has announced it will later this summer be releasing DRM free audio books that will work with iPods—look for more details at ALA—can the announcement that these same materials will also be compatible with the iPhone as well, be far off? Downloads still have some issues, notably the learning curve for first time users, but soon libraries will finally offer them to the vast majority of customers who have been up to now, shut out from these materials.

Kindle the new iPod?

I want to be a fan of eBooks, but I just can’t warm up to them. But like a lot of things I buy for the library whether I personally enjoy them or not is irrelevant, I buy them because our customers expect the library to have them. And the Kindle has the potential to do for eBooks what the iPod did for digital music. Should that happen, library customers are going to expect that the library offer the latest bestseller in eBook format as well. Two of the largest selling points of the Kindle seem to be convenience and an improved experience for the reader. You can already read an eBook on your smart phone and many are, as the success of Harlequin’s eBook program has shown, so the audience for eBooks is there, it’s the experience that has to improve and perhaps only slightly.

Forget about email, texting is where it’s at.

My library is considering moving to another ILS vendor. And as part of our conversation we’ve been asking about the possibility of offering texting of holds notices to patrons. So far none of them have promised anything other than it’s in the purgatory known as development. But all of them admit that they’re hearing this request from other library systems as well.

I love the idea of text message notifications because it reflects the fact that texting is the preferred method of communicating over email, and voice calls for many tech savvy users. Why Library Elf can handle texting me my holds and overdue notices so eloquently, but ILS vendors cannot is perhaps only explicable by the commitment of their resources to adding tags and reviews which seem to be the current innovations they’re all trying to offer in one form or another.
What I find very, very strange is that we’re still talking about cell phones in such negative terms when the technological trends are all moving these devices towards a much greater integration with current and emerging library services.  Yes, cell phone conversations can be annoying, and yes, libraries need to try and offer some spaces for quiet study. But cell phones can be used in a quiet manner, texting and soft phone conversations are no more disruptive to the library than any other patron conversation.

Libraries should separate the patron behavior that is disruptive away from these devices which are now ubiquitous. To allocate resources to collections like eBooks, downloadable music, video and audio books and to move towards developing services like texting hold notifications while at the same time treating cell phone users as pariahs is ridiculous in the short term and dangerous in the long term.

Posted by: Jim McCluskey