I have been interested in the way the debate on the need for libraries has changed. It started as largely a defence but then became the need for libraries and CILIP. Similarly Amanda Minns proposed the professional journal should have one issue on this question "and not just articles from us on the front line but from those who have a negative point of view as well." This has become "an opinion piece ... which can be used as a platform for a number of articles in this area."
I have some sympathy for the initial positions but little for what the debate changed into. "Do we still need libraries?" is not the same as "Do we still need CILIP?"
Do we need libraries? Well, in my opinion, yes and no. No if they just stay the same, yes if they are allowed to evolve without the dictates of knowledge officers, bureaucrats and their like. (Perhaps I could note here that if we don't need libraries because of Google, why do we need knowledge officers, etc? On that point I shall let you go figure, as I believe the jargon is).
Do we need CILIP? Well, in my opinion, yes and no. No as it is presently constituted, yes if it becomes an organisation that really cares about the views and aspirations of all professionals, however unpalatable. I suppose that counts as Negative.
I favour articles from the front line and negative ones at that. But in CILIP Update ? I am not surprised that the opinion piece will be a platform for a number of articles, but who will be on the platform? I suspect it will be those who are perceived as holding safe Positive opinions.
Sorry, Amanda, please count me out.
Gordon.
Gordon Smith
The Sally Howell Library
Epsom General Hospital
Dorking Road
Epsom, Surrey, KT18 7EG
Tel. 01372-735688, Fax 01372-735687
NULJ=HOWE, HLN=EP
"Genuine knowledge is egalitarian
in that it allows no privileged source,
testers, messengers of Truth.
It tolerates no privileged or circumscribed data.
The autonomy of knowledge is a leveller."
- Ernest Gellner, "Plough, Sword and Book".
|