Thursday, May 10, 2001

LOGGING IN WITH . . . Nicholson Baker Author Says Libraries Shouldn't Abandon Paper By JEFFREY R. YOUNG Nicholson Baker -- best known for his popular novels that explore the minutiae of everyday life -- has recently ALSO SEE: Colloquy Live: Join a live, online discussion with Nicholson Baker about technology and the future of academic libraries, on Tuesday, May 15, at 2:15 p.m., U.S. Eastern time. become a self-described "library activist," on a crusade to preserve dusty books, newspapers, and other old-fashioned printed materials. In his latest book, Double Fold: Libraries and the Assault on Paper (Random House), Mr. Baker argues that librarians have too often thrown out books and newspapers once they have obtained microfilmed or digitized copies. Mr. Baker is not opposed to digital libraries or e-books -- in fact, he says he uses online materials in his own research. But he cautions against moving forward too quickly with technologies that could destroy original library materials. Q. A growing number of textbook companies and universities are experimenting with new e-book formats. What are your thoughts on the notion that there might someday be a bookless college campus? A. I believe the technology of representing characters against a background hasn't quite reached the level of crispness that would allow for a kind of easy reading experience, and that's why when I have a lot of reading to do -- like most people -- I tend to print it out. My attitude isn't simple-mindedly horrified at the idea of electronic books. ... You can't predict what will catch on. Q. What do you think of companies like netLibrary and Questia, which are aggressively selling collections of electronic books to university libraries? A. We don't know whether or how many people will read books this way, and I'm curious to find out. But I'm not going to start pounding the table and start saying, "Books must be read a certain way." Because that's exactly what the libraries did in a way with microfilm. They said, "No, no, no, you can't read the newspaper the way the newspaper actually was read, you must read it the way we tell you to read it, which is on the microfilm-reading screen." And that has harmed our ability to do historical research. So I don't want to do the same thing. I think netLibrary or those other places will do very well. The temptation always is for a library to say, "We have something that we have paid a lot of money for, and it's kind of new and exciting and electronic -- or it's plastic, in the case of microfilm -- and therefore we can disburden ourselves of the original holding." And I don't think it should be substitutional; I think it should be supplemental. Q. One benefit that is cited with e-textbooks is that students could carry around entire archives in a small electronic device. A. There's a history of wanting everything in a little place. There's a long history of it. There were these things called ultrafiche cards that were superhigh-reduction microfilm pages, and you'd get lots and lots of books on one sheet of plastic. And there were people from the RAND Corporation that predicted that there would be a billion books and every library would have this core collection [on microfiche]. And in fact, you wouldn't need the book because you could just simply buy out of a little dispenser -- a microfiche dispenser. You'd just buy the book and take it home, and it would be a piece of plastic, you know. And it was really exciting to people, this idea that everything would be light, portable, clean, you know. But then you go to Borders [and other bookstores], and what are people doing? They're wandering around, looking way down near the floor or up near the ceiling, and all the books are different sizes, different colors. There's some basic appeal of heterogeneity that books satisfy -- that they all look different. And something about that is really pleasing to people. I mean I wouldn't want all my textbooks to be the exact same size and color and design. The design of things is so important. Q. Part of your argument in "Double Fold" is that libraries should leave books alone and simply store them. What do you think should be the role of a university research library, especially at a time when digital materials are becoming increasingly important? A. The job of the research library is to keep the stuff that people read. And that's a very simple task, and it allows for any sort of revolution in publishing that might or might not happen. If next Tuesday everything was published electronically, the research library would have the job of keeping the stuff that people read, because people are always going to read. And it contains in it the corollary obligation to keep the stuff that people have read. We're always going to have shelves full of books because it would be monumentally expensive to scan those things. Background article from The Chronicle: A Novelist's New Book About Libraries and Technology Outrages Librarians (5/1/2001) Easy-to-print version E-mail this article

Book on America's gun culture has its author watching his back Graduates of Mount Holyoke scrap with college for control of alumnae fund Niger blocks protests calling for reopening of country's only university Irish students criticize low pay in summer work program Spring commencement speakers are announced by 20 colleges A new report details options for paying colleges' technology expenses Digital-library company lays off half its staff and slows conversion effort Author says libraries shouldn't abandon paper Brenau U. offers automatic scholarships to some of its online students