>From Mark Field.
My apologies to the list for cross-posting, and also for using the lists
to address a matter that was published elsewhere, but I believe this is
the best way to resolve an unfortunate misunderstanding. Usual offers of
self-punishment extended.
In a letter to the Library Association Record, November, p576, Jonathan
Gordon-Till writes that I asserted that, regarding the LA-IIS
Unification talks, "there has been debate through the Record". This is
not strictly true. I made passing mention of some reporting in the
Record, thinking, like Jonathan, of Bob Usherwood's piece and a few
'minuscule' references: I do not dispute Jonathan's estimate of Record
coverage.
However, the main part of my response to Sheila Webber's concern that
there was little debate about the unification, indeed, almost the
entirety of my response, was that the debate was happening, that I have
participated in many discussions about the issue as I travel around the
profession, but these discussions are *not* finding their way into a
widely disseminated professional forum. This is not because the debate
is being squashed in any sense, but simply because people have not been
writing to the Record (for example): Jonathan's letter was very welcome
in that respect. Inform, the newsletter of the IIS, has reported on the
unification, but the debate needs to be widened and I would echo the
exhortation by the editor of the Record for members to respond to the
publication of the Unification Planning Group's paper in the December
issue of the Record. For my own part, I would define the word 'members'
as broadly as possible, there are so many stakeholders in this critical
moment in our profession's history.
Unfortunately, I was particularly peripatetic in the period between the
receipt of Jonathan's letter and putting the Record 'to bed', otherwise
I would have responded to Jonathan myself.
Ironically, immediately after the IIS AGM debate on unification, I was
engaged in a very robust discussion with a senior member of both
organisations about Record coverage, in which I very robustly deplored
the apparent lack of interest in unification, and very robustly made
these points:
- the debate is happening, particularly in the special interest groups
- correspondence and reporting has been patchy
- people should use all their professional fora to create a healthy
debate about the unification of the LA and the IIS. In the heat of the
moment I may have said something about 'arses', I apologise for this.
I hope this clears up an unfortunate misunderstanding.
Forward to the future, Mark Field
Mark Field
Professional Adviser
The Library Association
[log in to unmask]
0171 636 7543
0171 436 7218 fax
|