Reflection On: The public library movement, the digital library movement, and the large-scale digitization initiative: Assumptions, intentions, and the role of the public.

Jones, E. (2017). The public library movement, the digital library movement, and the large-scale digitization initiative: Assumptions, intentions, and the role of the public. Information & Culture, 52(2), 229-263. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.7560/IC52205

Though the crux of this article was probably summed up several times over in my MLIS program, it's simplicity and direct approach sank in better than any other articles I read. Early libraries, while well-meaning and good-intentioned, sought to provide access to for all but under their own terms and to what they deemed worthy. Early digital libraries came in less interested in why they were operating at a breakneck speed and more interested in delivery systems, and the current Large-Scale Digitization Initiative libraries are combining the egalitarian nature (albeit self-serving) of Carnegie and the tech-savvy of millennials now staffing many positions in libraries.

While the authors were encouraged by the ambition of Large-Scale Digitization Initiative and the pervasive "Library Faith" (or the notion that (digital) libraries can save the day) there is the underlining suspension that librarians might still harbor some of the old assumptions that Carnegie and his early library shapers operated under. Where I would be interested most is hearing their opinion in regards to the digital influx created by libraries during our current world. Would the closed-off nature of libraries in 2020 only deepen this "only the good stuff" attitude? Is there space and opportunity to truly carry on the genuine efforts made by some libraries for the creation of digital and "real" space for the marginalized left out in everything but spirit by early library framers?

It is my assumption, that the main goal of libraries in the future will be too "right" the "wrongs" of libraries and librarians of the past. If that is truly the case, we will want to gather (digitally or otherwise) everything unlike early librarians who wanted "only the best" because we see the need for real inclusion in the process. And possibly even place an emphasis on patron input as well. As Jones points out, the Large-Scale Digitization Initiative in theory is a melding of the best ideas and ideals of the early library and the systems created in the early digital age. So the challenge is lifted. We have the intent of our forefathers, and the capabilities of the digital age. What are we as future librarians going to do with those? 

Though a matter of interpretation, there have been efforts to "capture the moment" and record marginalized voices recently that would turn heads of our early leaders in the public library movement. One is the University of North Carolina at Greensboro's Triad Black Lives Matter Protest Collection centered around the September 2020 protests. I scantly believe archivist in the early library would think a collection of protest signs and art on plywood covers for broken windows were worth a 34-page archive, but in 2020 the team at UNCG does. Such an archive that isn't patting the backs of rich, Anglo men who would have started archives in Greensboro in the "good ole" days and the people featured would be the "untamed masses" unfavorably mentioned in articles cited by Jones. 

Yet another example of creating digital contend drive by the patron is the collection of "Covid Journals" or "Covid Archives" created by many in real time during the Covid-19 crisis. These are patron driven archives that feature daily life in 2020 and probably 2021. Ideally these will be archived for future historians and students to use as they shape the feature's perception of our current times. 

It is my assumption, that the main goal of libraries in the future will be too "right" the "wrongs" of libraries and librarians of the past. If that is truly the case, we will want to gather (digitally or otherwise) everything unlike early librarians who wanted "only the best" because we see the need for real inclusion in the process. And possibly even place an emphasis on patron input as well. As Jones points out, the Large-Scale Digitization Initiative in theory is a melding of the best ideas and ideals of the early library and the systems created in the early digital age. So the challenge is lifted. We have the intent of our forefathers, and the capabilities of the digital age. What are we as future librarians going to do with those?

Yes, 21st-century libraries have a touch of the 19th, and 20th-century libraries in regards to their pulling "trash" onto the digital bandwagon (just ask a librarian where the James Patterson section is and you'll hear their eyes roll right out of the sockets) We're not definitely not going to bump a rare artifact of local import for the Harlan Coeban you bought at a Flea Market when it is time to add to the digital collection. Still, there is an impressive array of interesting archives and niche collections out there in library land. Afrika Bambaataa has his archives at Cornell, the Lilly Library at Indiana University has puzzles, and there is always an impressive collection of cookbooks at your closest PL. And deep down, your cardigan average librarian doesn't really hate David Baldacci or Janet Oke if you don't, we just wish you would branch out to try some other trash or dare I say it, some different trash.