In which we come to the end of Andreas Kluth’s special report.
Summary:
Some scholars worry that nomadic technologies are having adverse effects on language and communication. Grammar, spelling, and the ability to compose coherent thoughts appear to be on the wane, and technologies that value speed over correctness are the culprit. Others argue that the new technologies have contributed to greater creativity, and that every new technological revolution has spawned a period of alarmism that turned out to be mostly unfounded. The author declines to give his own opinion, leaving these opposing viewpoints up to the reader to reconcile him/herself.
Random Thoughts:
I find myself in a weird position here. Technically, I’m one of those people over thirty that you’re not supposed to trust. However, technology and culture move so quickly now, that I sometimes feel almost overwhelmed by these kids and their geegaws, and their Panic at the Disco, and their Snakes on a Plane. And in the time it took me to type that, all those things I mentioned are already soooo five minutes ago, and other things have taken their place.
Crikey!
But you know what? When I was younger, my parents didn’t get me and my cultural habits either. And I’m guessing you had the same struggles with your folks, to a certain extent. The difference is that the technology has evolved to the point where these phenomena are disseminated faster, and easier to observe because they are much more public.
So, what do we do? If today’s youth are breaking all of the rules we so carefully set up, and casually dismissing all the librariany standards we hold so dear, how do we respond?
The same way those with the greater wisdom and responsibility have responded for years: by continuing to uphold our highest and best standards while still attempting to understand the perspective of upcoming generations.
Face it: the fact that a tech-savvy generation doesn’t care where the facts come from, or how accurate they are, doesn’t mean that there aren’t objective standards for facts. The fact that most researchers want things quickly and easily doesn’t change the fact that some things are difficult, or that some things may always require more work and thought than a five-second sound bite can provide. The point of libraries is to be the storehouse of all human knowledge; humans can then exercise their free will as to how much of it they want, or not.
Okay, though, smarty-pants, you might be saying to yourself: what if the current generation decides, when it’s their turn to have the disposable income, that they don’t want to fund such outdated antiquities as libraries?
That’s where understanding their perspective comes in. Fiddling with Facebook, Second Life, Meebo, Twitter, and whatever cool thing is coming down the pike tomorrow is not always about finding a practical application for your library. It’s sometimes about learning a culture that may be foreign to you. The best way to understand where somebody else is coming from is to immerse yourself in their world and learn its customs. If we want to serve people, we have to understand who they are and what makes them tick. If you’re not willing to do that, it’s going to hamper your effectiveness as a librarian. And since we are the most visible face of the institutuion, people are going to make future decisions about whether or not to support us based on their interactions with us.
Every day we get a choice as to how we want to see our profession. What would be really great is if we could combine the wisdom of Prospero with the hopeful outlook of Miranada to create a truly brave new library world, one in which both an appreciation for the old and an open-mindedness about the new prevailed. We can’t go backward, so we’ve got to press on, stay flexible, and keeping trying out solutions until we get it right – whatever “it” happens to be for our particular patron population.
Well, that was fun, for me! I hope it wasn’t too tedious for you. Thanks to Don for the Washington Post link.
Next time we meet, a Meebo update.
