This post is part of a set of three I will posting in the next few days discussing some articles I read out of the Library Trends issue for Spring 2005. The citation for this article is as follows:
Walker, Jill. "Links and Power: The Political Economy of Linking on the Web." Library Trends 53.4 (Spring 2005): 524-529.
The topic of linking is another topic that has plenty of steam in the blogosphere. A search on a tool like Technorati will likely yield a variety of results. These results may range from people looking at the economic implications of linking to just casual bloggers discussing how to use links to enhance their posts. The article argues that "links are seen as objective, democratic, and machine-readable signs of value" (525). While the article is not just for bloggers, it is of interest to them since links are seen as currency in the blogosphere.
The article discusses how Google uses not only keywords but also links to rank websites in search results. It explains that the presence of links on websites is seen by the search engines as endorsements of a particular site. The key idea is that "links between Web sites are assumed to provide an objective measure of value and to be a sign of peer endorsement" (526). This is the assumption the article seeks to examine, and it does so by looking at linking as an economy. Basically, the principle is the more links you get from other people, the higher your value in the currency scheme. If people link to you, your value goes up in terms of reputation and authority, and for those making money with a blog, it has economic potential as well. Overall, this little article provides a basic overview of how the linking economy works. For very experienced bloggers and webmasters, this is likely common knowledge, a given. For more casual readers and web surfers, it makes a basic reading with a clear explanation of how the process works as a currency not only to increase commerce but also to enhance the cultural capital and reputation of the one getting the links.
Friday, September 30, 2005
Thursday, September 29, 2005
I learned the meaning of chronemics, and other things today
Marcel Danesis's Encyclopedic Dictionary of Semiotics, Media, and Communications (ISBN 0-8020-4783-1) defines chronemics as the "study of how cultures 1. divide time into regular periods, 2. arrange events in the order of their occurrence, 3. assign dates to events" (48). I had a student today come to the Information Desk asking for articles that presented empirical studies about chronemics. It was for a Communication Studies class. She barely knew what it was, but we both knew it had to deal with how cultures and groups perceive time. Based on that, we embarked together to locate some answers. The term itself was rare in the databases we used (Communication and Mass Media Complete, the Sage Communication Collection). However, doing searches on concepts like chronobiology (yes, that term, which would include the concept of the biological clock), time, social interactions, and cultures, we managed to find a couple of article dealing with how groups of people look at time or arrange time. For instance, we found an article on perceptions of time for workers, having to do with that old idea of time going faster when busy. We also found at least one article with time as perceived across generations (older versus younger people). These gave her a small start. As soon as I was done with that reference transaction, I rushed to look up a more official definition for myself, which is the one readers see at the opening of the post. It is one of those definitions I will not forget anytime soon.
What else did I learn today? I learned to a little about empirical studies on sexual orientation. Same student as above, different class. A good search in PsychInfo and PsychArticles helped with that since it allows for narrowing by empirical studies. Based on what she wanted, which was studies done with groups of people, samples and such, empirical studies seemed a better choice than the case study report option that usually covers accounts of how a particular patient was treated for a condition or evaluated. We were looking more for articles about determining or discovering orientation, at least that is what the patron requested.
I also met a new faculty member teaching organic chemistry. I will be providing library instruction for his two sections later in October.
Additionally, I learned that sometimes we can have wonderful technology, but that the personal touch can work better. I had another faculty member call me on the phone for some assistance with a database. I was trying to walk her through the process of using Academic Search Premier to locate articles on her topic. She is not technologically impaired, but she often needs a little guidance in narrowing topics, choosing keywords, and then accessing the articles whether full-text or not. My library is considering adding a Jybe toolbar to our library page (I may write about this later as things move along), but in this case, I don't think even the ability to co-browse would have helped. So, what did I do? I made sure she was in her office and told her I would be there as soon as my Information Desk shift ended, which was about ten minutes from the end of the call. The nice thing about a small campus where most of the rooms are in one building is that most everyone is only an elevator ride away. I went upstairs, sat down with her, had a pleasant time talking over her needs and giving her some ideas on searching. The small communication problem came with the use of TDNet, which we use for linking to full-text and identifying what we carry as full-text. Once I showed her what TDNet meant (in that case, that we did not have it full-text) and that she needed to do an ILL request, which can be done also online, she was more than happy. True, I could have showed her this with a tool like Jybe or other virtual reference tool, but I think the small effort of going to her office and showing her was well worth it. For me, it was also worth it on another level. When I got to her office, she told me, "remember the last time you helped me out? I went on to write a proposal for it, and it has been accepted for publication." It does not get better than that. Another day, another buck.
What else did I learn today? I learned to a little about empirical studies on sexual orientation. Same student as above, different class. A good search in PsychInfo and PsychArticles helped with that since it allows for narrowing by empirical studies. Based on what she wanted, which was studies done with groups of people, samples and such, empirical studies seemed a better choice than the case study report option that usually covers accounts of how a particular patient was treated for a condition or evaluated. We were looking more for articles about determining or discovering orientation, at least that is what the patron requested.
I also met a new faculty member teaching organic chemistry. I will be providing library instruction for his two sections later in October.
Additionally, I learned that sometimes we can have wonderful technology, but that the personal touch can work better. I had another faculty member call me on the phone for some assistance with a database. I was trying to walk her through the process of using Academic Search Premier to locate articles on her topic. She is not technologically impaired, but she often needs a little guidance in narrowing topics, choosing keywords, and then accessing the articles whether full-text or not. My library is considering adding a Jybe toolbar to our library page (I may write about this later as things move along), but in this case, I don't think even the ability to co-browse would have helped. So, what did I do? I made sure she was in her office and told her I would be there as soon as my Information Desk shift ended, which was about ten minutes from the end of the call. The nice thing about a small campus where most of the rooms are in one building is that most everyone is only an elevator ride away. I went upstairs, sat down with her, had a pleasant time talking over her needs and giving her some ideas on searching. The small communication problem came with the use of TDNet, which we use for linking to full-text and identifying what we carry as full-text. Once I showed her what TDNet meant (in that case, that we did not have it full-text) and that she needed to do an ILL request, which can be done also online, she was more than happy. True, I could have showed her this with a tool like Jybe or other virtual reference tool, but I think the small effort of going to her office and showing her was well worth it. For me, it was also worth it on another level. When I got to her office, she told me, "remember the last time you helped me out? I went on to write a proposal for it, and it has been accepted for publication." It does not get better than that. Another day, another buck.
The "Old Rule of 1965"
My director recently pointed out the following article to the librarians:
Hyman, Karen. "Customer Service and the 'Rule of 1965.'" American Libraries. (October 1999): 54-58.
From the article's opening discussing how technology is used to actually provide poor service (54), I can only hope that we have progressed since then and that libraries enjoy a better reputation for using technology to provide service. Before we go on, the article defines the Rule of 1965 as dictating the following: "anything the library did prior to 1965 is basic, and everything else is extra; any new service must be offered begrudgingly--for decades; patrons must jump through hoops to get it" (54).
While I think that there is still work to be done in libraries, the fact that libraries provide blogs, rss, good internet access (with support), reference in virtual ways from use of IM to tools provided by companies like Docutek is evidence that libraries are moving to provide services and actually make the users jump less hoops.
The article has this little section on "what's wrong with this picture" that I found, well, condescending to say the least. Now back in 1999, I was back in graduate school working on my other graduate degree, so who knows, maybe libraries were as bad as Hyman describes. Though, I will say I was a user of both the academic library and the local public library, which, while it could have used more funds, overall provided good service. Somehow these little vignettes Hyman provides seem to be more nitpicking that ignores or misunderstands the realities libraries face in terms of funding and/or resources. For example, the author points to libraries having limits on access to the internet, "such as up to one hour if people are waiting or two hours maximum" (56). Actually, given some places I have been to, that seems generous. While the author does this with a little exaggeration to illustrate that the rules can be excessive at times, it does miss the fact at times you do need to have rules. A free-for-all is not the answer to providing good library service. In an ideal world, there would be a computer for every patron that wanted one at their moment of need. In the real world, libraries usually have more demand on computers than actual computers and funding to acquire more. A rule on time would serve as a measure of fairness to provide access to as many patrons as possible. The author also looks down on libraries that ban internet use for chat or other personal communication (57). Actually, more public libraries seem to be following this trend. One example comes from a report in LISNews about the Hawaii Public Libraries banning such activities. In that case, the decision was actually made in part due to complaints from patrons that access was slow. While I personally have mixed feelings about it (I think e-mail is fine, but like the patron in the article, you want games, get a PlayStation), I do tend to be fairly laissez faire with what patrons do with their internet access during their alloted time. I can however see the argument for such decisions.
Another example from Hyman's article I had an issue with was the example of a policy: "internet access is a privilege, not a right, which may be revoked at any time for inappropriate conduct" (57). The author suggests replacing "internet access" with "checking out books" to see how ridiculous it would sound. And it would indeed sound ridiculous. The problem is the author is comparing apples to oranges. For one, there are already inappropriate behaviors that are illegal, such as seeking child porn. It is a given that doing so will not only likely result in loss of access privileges, but it will also lead to the patron's arrest. Libraries make this type of decisions all the time. In fact, I think at times simply saying access should be fully free is the sort of thing that gets people thinking that librarians favor things like perverts looking at kiddie porn in a public terminal. And no, I am not saying I want to become the internet "police," but if a patron comes over to my reference desk complaining he or she is being subjected to someone else's porn surfing, I want more than to say "sorry, but that is his or her right to do so." Now I know some libraries use special screens to darken the screens so onlookers can look over a shoulder with ease. Maybe that is one solution. I know filters are not. And I don't pretend to have all the answers, but I do believe a little common sense goes a long way. Maybe in this regard, academic institutions have it a little easier because their mission of serving an academic purpose is clear. Academic libraries, and the campus computer labs, usually have very strict rules of appropriate and inappropriate use of resources in an academic setting. Consequences usually mean loss of access, and for students who need the access to do classwork and so on, that loss can be a disaster. So, they tend to take the rules pretty seriously. I suppose this is something that librarians will struggle with long after I am done writing this post, and longer after anyone out there reads it. I believe the truth is somewhere between privilege and right. Do I believe everyone should have access to the internet? Sure. Do I think they should have some measure of responsibility when they do so? Absolutely, and it goes twice for parents who should be supervising their children. That's their job, not mine. I bet we would need less filters, or none at all, if parents did their job. Just an extended thought.
The article, bad examples aside, does provide some excellent questions to reflect on and suggestions to move towards better service. The basic notion seems to be leadership: moving forward in spite of obstacles and inspiring others along the way. I had some thoughts on leadership that readers can look over later. For now, this is how I read the article. I did like a particular reminder Hyman gave: "treat every customer like a person. When we categorize people--problem patron, angry mother, deadbeat borrower, greedy computer user--we feel free to ignore their feelings and their messages and transform ourselves into hall monitors or victims" (58). My hall monitor days were left back in my high school teaching days, and I am not about to be anybody's victim. However, I will clarify something. I am not a believer of "the customer is always right." My father taught me that, and he was pretty successful with the businesses he ran over time. I think people can be wrong, but they still deserve to be treated as a person. However, this also means that you give respect and expect the same in return. This I think is a little detail that many "service advocates" as I label them tend to forget. I treat people as I expect to be treated, and I always strive to behave in a professional manner. But, threats and abuse, verbal or otherwise, are things I will not tolerate. Now, some readers may say that is common sense, others may say I should take whatever a patron dishes out. Well, that is my boundary. To me, that is common sense; it is a matter of basic courtesy and civility. And it is something that should be made clear to students in library school. I don't think they really address this. Often in classes they tell you about how to serve a patron in spite of themselves (having to figure out exactly what they want in a reference interview for example), but they never tell you about knowing when a difficult patron has gone too far. And I don't think saying there is such a thing as a difficult patron falls under the labeling Hyman has in mind. Ask any librarian in any library, and no matter how charitable they are, they will have their stories. My two cents? It is not unlike teaching where an educator needs to discover his or her boundaries and stick to them. For me at least, such limits are part of the values I was raised on. For the rest of the readers, I leave this as a bit more food for thought.
But this took me away from the focus of the article, which is technology. The author says that technology can be a two-edged sword (58). The idea as I see it is to be a leader without falling for technolust. Sometimes, just because you can do something, it does not follow you should be doing it. Don't be afraid of new challenges, embrace them, welcome them, learn from them, and use what you learn to serve others well. But there lies the key: you have to be able to serve others well. You have to make sure that if you implement this or that technology, that you can support it and that you are ready to show others how to best make use of it if need be. So, bring on the rss, the blogs, the podcasting, and the many other wonderful toys, but do make sure they serve the patrons and their needs. And keep on learning and growing.
Hyman, Karen. "Customer Service and the 'Rule of 1965.'" American Libraries. (October 1999): 54-58.
From the article's opening discussing how technology is used to actually provide poor service (54), I can only hope that we have progressed since then and that libraries enjoy a better reputation for using technology to provide service. Before we go on, the article defines the Rule of 1965 as dictating the following: "anything the library did prior to 1965 is basic, and everything else is extra; any new service must be offered begrudgingly--for decades; patrons must jump through hoops to get it" (54).
While I think that there is still work to be done in libraries, the fact that libraries provide blogs, rss, good internet access (with support), reference in virtual ways from use of IM to tools provided by companies like Docutek is evidence that libraries are moving to provide services and actually make the users jump less hoops.
The article has this little section on "what's wrong with this picture" that I found, well, condescending to say the least. Now back in 1999, I was back in graduate school working on my other graduate degree, so who knows, maybe libraries were as bad as Hyman describes. Though, I will say I was a user of both the academic library and the local public library, which, while it could have used more funds, overall provided good service. Somehow these little vignettes Hyman provides seem to be more nitpicking that ignores or misunderstands the realities libraries face in terms of funding and/or resources. For example, the author points to libraries having limits on access to the internet, "such as up to one hour if people are waiting or two hours maximum" (56). Actually, given some places I have been to, that seems generous. While the author does this with a little exaggeration to illustrate that the rules can be excessive at times, it does miss the fact at times you do need to have rules. A free-for-all is not the answer to providing good library service. In an ideal world, there would be a computer for every patron that wanted one at their moment of need. In the real world, libraries usually have more demand on computers than actual computers and funding to acquire more. A rule on time would serve as a measure of fairness to provide access to as many patrons as possible. The author also looks down on libraries that ban internet use for chat or other personal communication (57). Actually, more public libraries seem to be following this trend. One example comes from a report in LISNews about the Hawaii Public Libraries banning such activities. In that case, the decision was actually made in part due to complaints from patrons that access was slow. While I personally have mixed feelings about it (I think e-mail is fine, but like the patron in the article, you want games, get a PlayStation), I do tend to be fairly laissez faire with what patrons do with their internet access during their alloted time. I can however see the argument for such decisions.
Another example from Hyman's article I had an issue with was the example of a policy: "internet access is a privilege, not a right, which may be revoked at any time for inappropriate conduct" (57). The author suggests replacing "internet access" with "checking out books" to see how ridiculous it would sound. And it would indeed sound ridiculous. The problem is the author is comparing apples to oranges. For one, there are already inappropriate behaviors that are illegal, such as seeking child porn. It is a given that doing so will not only likely result in loss of access privileges, but it will also lead to the patron's arrest. Libraries make this type of decisions all the time. In fact, I think at times simply saying access should be fully free is the sort of thing that gets people thinking that librarians favor things like perverts looking at kiddie porn in a public terminal. And no, I am not saying I want to become the internet "police," but if a patron comes over to my reference desk complaining he or she is being subjected to someone else's porn surfing, I want more than to say "sorry, but that is his or her right to do so." Now I know some libraries use special screens to darken the screens so onlookers can look over a shoulder with ease. Maybe that is one solution. I know filters are not. And I don't pretend to have all the answers, but I do believe a little common sense goes a long way. Maybe in this regard, academic institutions have it a little easier because their mission of serving an academic purpose is clear. Academic libraries, and the campus computer labs, usually have very strict rules of appropriate and inappropriate use of resources in an academic setting. Consequences usually mean loss of access, and for students who need the access to do classwork and so on, that loss can be a disaster. So, they tend to take the rules pretty seriously. I suppose this is something that librarians will struggle with long after I am done writing this post, and longer after anyone out there reads it. I believe the truth is somewhere between privilege and right. Do I believe everyone should have access to the internet? Sure. Do I think they should have some measure of responsibility when they do so? Absolutely, and it goes twice for parents who should be supervising their children. That's their job, not mine. I bet we would need less filters, or none at all, if parents did their job. Just an extended thought.
The article, bad examples aside, does provide some excellent questions to reflect on and suggestions to move towards better service. The basic notion seems to be leadership: moving forward in spite of obstacles and inspiring others along the way. I had some thoughts on leadership that readers can look over later. For now, this is how I read the article. I did like a particular reminder Hyman gave: "treat every customer like a person. When we categorize people--problem patron, angry mother, deadbeat borrower, greedy computer user--we feel free to ignore their feelings and their messages and transform ourselves into hall monitors or victims" (58). My hall monitor days were left back in my high school teaching days, and I am not about to be anybody's victim. However, I will clarify something. I am not a believer of "the customer is always right." My father taught me that, and he was pretty successful with the businesses he ran over time. I think people can be wrong, but they still deserve to be treated as a person. However, this also means that you give respect and expect the same in return. This I think is a little detail that many "service advocates" as I label them tend to forget. I treat people as I expect to be treated, and I always strive to behave in a professional manner. But, threats and abuse, verbal or otherwise, are things I will not tolerate. Now, some readers may say that is common sense, others may say I should take whatever a patron dishes out. Well, that is my boundary. To me, that is common sense; it is a matter of basic courtesy and civility. And it is something that should be made clear to students in library school. I don't think they really address this. Often in classes they tell you about how to serve a patron in spite of themselves (having to figure out exactly what they want in a reference interview for example), but they never tell you about knowing when a difficult patron has gone too far. And I don't think saying there is such a thing as a difficult patron falls under the labeling Hyman has in mind. Ask any librarian in any library, and no matter how charitable they are, they will have their stories. My two cents? It is not unlike teaching where an educator needs to discover his or her boundaries and stick to them. For me at least, such limits are part of the values I was raised on. For the rest of the readers, I leave this as a bit more food for thought.
But this took me away from the focus of the article, which is technology. The author says that technology can be a two-edged sword (58). The idea as I see it is to be a leader without falling for technolust. Sometimes, just because you can do something, it does not follow you should be doing it. Don't be afraid of new challenges, embrace them, welcome them, learn from them, and use what you learn to serve others well. But there lies the key: you have to be able to serve others well. You have to make sure that if you implement this or that technology, that you can support it and that you are ready to show others how to best make use of it if need be. So, bring on the rss, the blogs, the podcasting, and the many other wonderful toys, but do make sure they serve the patrons and their needs. And keep on learning and growing.
Tuesday, September 27, 2005
Boldly Celebrating the Freedom to Read: Banned Books Week
I think over time, I have read a fair number of banned or challenged books. This week is Banned Books Week, which prompts me to think a little about this. Some of those books I read intentionally, much like a child does something because they are told not to do it. So, I do it anyhow and read the book anyways. A few others I have read without knowing they had been banned or challenged somewhere. There are many books and many more ideas out there waiting to be written (or expressed in other media). Some place, someone will likely find something offensive or disagree with it, and that is fine in a diverse and free society. But when they seek to deprive others of books and ideas just because they disagree, it becomes censorship. At that point, it needs to be denounced.
I proudly proclaim that I read banned books. As the saying goes, I make no bones about it. But to me at least, it is more than just trying to sound smart (or "smart-alecky"). I cannot imagine myself not being able to read what I want. I cannot imagine myself not being able to learn from books (or other media. Movies get challenged too, you know?). I cannot imagine myself not being able to explore ideas, to educate myself, to be informed, and to make up my mind through reading. Yet there are certain arrogant people who would take this and more from me. There are certain people who feel threatened by knowledge and ideas, folks who would prefer the darkness of ignorance lest their poor ideas and oppressive ways be exposed. These are the censors who think they can hold on to power by trying to suppress knowledge and ideas. I always go back to words I heard in my youth: a free person is one willing to read anything. It is not just reading anything. It is being willing to do so.
Maybe, and bear with me here a moment, just maybe, the censor has it easy. The censor can burn and destroy anything that is unpleasant or offensive. It is easy to do this; it is easy to live in a bubble where everything is comforting and conforming. It is easy to remain in the coccoon of safe ideas, but it is also the way of the coward. It is the way of the unimaginative; it is the way of the oppressor who in the end will become stagnant. But it is an easy way.
However, those who are willing to read freely are the ones facing the challenge. True, they face the challenge of the censor that would take away their freedom if allowed. This is the challenge that we raise awareness for this week. But I suggest that free readers face another challenge. It is a challenge that is much greater than any the censor could implement. It is the challenge the reader may face when he or she opens a new book. It is the challenge of new ideas. It is the challenge of learning new things. It is the challenge of making meaning of the world. It is the challenge that a book (or other media) might persuade us to see the world differently. We may find our deeply held beliefs and values challenged and confronted. We could end up questioning ourselves. We might agree with what we read, or we might disagree. Even more, we could even decide to change our views or embrace new ideas and values based on what we read. This is why I say free readers are the ones facing the challenge of reading freely. It is clear to see that this powerful and life-affirming experience scares the living daylights out of censors. They are not up to the challenge; they take the coward's way out. Free readers are willing to face this and other possibilities when they open a book. They risk being challenged, questioned, provoked. This is not easy. It is not easy to confront new ideas and maybe decide to to change or modify your views, or leave your views as they are. That is what free readers do, and I say it should be my choice and the choice of other readers to face such challenges. Free people should not allow small cowards to take away the opportunities to learn and grow. Free people should confront such cowards, not with violence, but with better ideas. Or such cowards should be relegated to the dust heap of ignorance while the rest of us boldly move ahead.
I could post a lot of quotes about censorship and books, but folks who are more eloquent than I could ever hope to be are out there. Go and find them in books, on the internet, on other resources.
As Banned Books Week comes around one more time, I celebrate it by telling others that yes, I am free because I willing to read anything. I am affirming my commitment to learning, to discovering new ideas, and to embrace new ways of thinking if need be. As Banned Books Week comes and goes, I ask other readers, are you willing to be challenged? I ask writers and creators of ideas, are you willing to challenge us readers? Or will we allow the cowards to extinguish the lights that dispel the darkness of ignorance? How will you celebrated the freedom to read, not just this week, but every day?
Some resources for Banned Books Week and on censorship:
American Library Association's page on Banned Books Week. The ALA's Office of Intellectual Freedom also has various resources for dealing with challenges and reporting them. You can look it up from the link.
American Bookseller's Foundation for Free Expression's page for Banned Books Week.
National Council of Teachers of English page on censorship. The NCTE is also a good resource to help in facing challenges, especially for teachers.
Update note (10/04/2005): Here is another great example of a reader celebrating her freedom to read and doing her best to stamp out censorship and ignorance. Nadia, of the late blog Kinky Librarian, does a guest post over at pantiespantiespanties. She writes, for one, "in a free and democratic society we need to have free access to materials - good bad, and indifferent - so that we may all choose to read what we'd like." The usual caveats of "it may not be safe to view at your workplace" or "not for the easily offended" apply. However, if you are like me and willing to just dive in, go read some more food for thought.
Update note (11/09/2005): Here is yet another example of someone advocating the freedom to read. This one takes the form of a letter to intolerant people written by a teacher in public schools. It is a bit strong, so for readers who are sensitive, be advised. Having said that, this letter is the type I would like to write to some people at times.
I proudly proclaim that I read banned books. As the saying goes, I make no bones about it. But to me at least, it is more than just trying to sound smart (or "smart-alecky"). I cannot imagine myself not being able to read what I want. I cannot imagine myself not being able to learn from books (or other media. Movies get challenged too, you know?). I cannot imagine myself not being able to explore ideas, to educate myself, to be informed, and to make up my mind through reading. Yet there are certain arrogant people who would take this and more from me. There are certain people who feel threatened by knowledge and ideas, folks who would prefer the darkness of ignorance lest their poor ideas and oppressive ways be exposed. These are the censors who think they can hold on to power by trying to suppress knowledge and ideas. I always go back to words I heard in my youth: a free person is one willing to read anything. It is not just reading anything. It is being willing to do so.
Maybe, and bear with me here a moment, just maybe, the censor has it easy. The censor can burn and destroy anything that is unpleasant or offensive. It is easy to do this; it is easy to live in a bubble where everything is comforting and conforming. It is easy to remain in the coccoon of safe ideas, but it is also the way of the coward. It is the way of the unimaginative; it is the way of the oppressor who in the end will become stagnant. But it is an easy way.
However, those who are willing to read freely are the ones facing the challenge. True, they face the challenge of the censor that would take away their freedom if allowed. This is the challenge that we raise awareness for this week. But I suggest that free readers face another challenge. It is a challenge that is much greater than any the censor could implement. It is the challenge the reader may face when he or she opens a new book. It is the challenge of new ideas. It is the challenge of learning new things. It is the challenge of making meaning of the world. It is the challenge that a book (or other media) might persuade us to see the world differently. We may find our deeply held beliefs and values challenged and confronted. We could end up questioning ourselves. We might agree with what we read, or we might disagree. Even more, we could even decide to change our views or embrace new ideas and values based on what we read. This is why I say free readers are the ones facing the challenge of reading freely. It is clear to see that this powerful and life-affirming experience scares the living daylights out of censors. They are not up to the challenge; they take the coward's way out. Free readers are willing to face this and other possibilities when they open a book. They risk being challenged, questioned, provoked. This is not easy. It is not easy to confront new ideas and maybe decide to to change or modify your views, or leave your views as they are. That is what free readers do, and I say it should be my choice and the choice of other readers to face such challenges. Free people should not allow small cowards to take away the opportunities to learn and grow. Free people should confront such cowards, not with violence, but with better ideas. Or such cowards should be relegated to the dust heap of ignorance while the rest of us boldly move ahead.
I could post a lot of quotes about censorship and books, but folks who are more eloquent than I could ever hope to be are out there. Go and find them in books, on the internet, on other resources.
As Banned Books Week comes around one more time, I celebrate it by telling others that yes, I am free because I willing to read anything. I am affirming my commitment to learning, to discovering new ideas, and to embrace new ways of thinking if need be. As Banned Books Week comes and goes, I ask other readers, are you willing to be challenged? I ask writers and creators of ideas, are you willing to challenge us readers? Or will we allow the cowards to extinguish the lights that dispel the darkness of ignorance? How will you celebrated the freedom to read, not just this week, but every day?
Some resources for Banned Books Week and on censorship:
American Library Association's page on Banned Books Week. The ALA's Office of Intellectual Freedom also has various resources for dealing with challenges and reporting them. You can look it up from the link.
American Bookseller's Foundation for Free Expression's page for Banned Books Week.
National Council of Teachers of English page on censorship. The NCTE is also a good resource to help in facing challenges, especially for teachers.
Update note (10/04/2005): Here is another great example of a reader celebrating her freedom to read and doing her best to stamp out censorship and ignorance. Nadia, of the late blog Kinky Librarian, does a guest post over at pantiespantiespanties. She writes, for one, "in a free and democratic society we need to have free access to materials - good bad, and indifferent - so that we may all choose to read what we'd like." The usual caveats of "it may not be safe to view at your workplace" or "not for the easily offended" apply. However, if you are like me and willing to just dive in, go read some more food for thought.
Update note (11/09/2005): Here is yet another example of someone advocating the freedom to read. This one takes the form of a letter to intolerant people written by a teacher in public schools. It is a bit strong, so for readers who are sensitive, be advised. Having said that, this letter is the type I would like to write to some people at times.
Monday, September 19, 2005
Booknote: La Quinta Montaña
Title: La Quinta Montaña
Author: Paulo Coelho
Publication Information: New York: Harper Books, 1996
Genre: Fiction
Pages: 236
Note: This is the Spanish edition. It can be also found in English translation under the title The Fifth Mountain.
My mother introduced me to the works of Paulo Coelho when we were at a bookstore. She had mentioned the author before, and when there, I bought her a copy of another Coehlo novel. I don't recall the title; I think it was A Orilla del Rio Piedra Me Senté y Lloré (By the River Piedra I Sat and Wept). At any rate, the author's name stuck with me and later on I went and read EL Alquimista (The Alchemist), for which I later made a note. When I found a second hand copy of La Quinta Montaña, I just went ahead and bought it. My mother reads in Spanish; I have never seen her reading in English unless she has to. I personally prefer to read certain works in Spanish. Coelho writes in Portuguese, so I figure a Spanish translation is likely closer to his work. Call it a bias of mine.
This novel is set in biblical times. It basically tells the story of the prophet Elijah. Most of the plot takes place in the city of Akbar after Elijah flees there from Israel after Jezabel, a Phoenician princess who marries King Ahab, comes to power and begins to kill the prophets. The novel covers the three-year span Elijah spends there before returning to Israel and performing the famous miracle of the burnt offering (see 1 Kings 18). During his time in Akbar, Elijah struggles with God and himself as he learns what his true destiny is and faces difficult choices. Readers of The Alchemist will likely enjoy this tale as well.
I don't think a reader needs to be versed in the Bible to enjoy the novel. However, those readers who are closer to the Bible by faith or belief will likely see Elijah in a new or different light. The fable Coelho presents is moving at times; it is enlightening as well. In terms of pacing, the book is a very easy and light read; Coelho's works are actually known to be light on the prose. I found it inspirational and thought-provoking at times. Reader's of Coelho's other works will likely see elements from his other works here as well. I recommend the book, but I think The Alchemist is his best so far.
Additionally, readers interested in learning more about Paulo Coelho himself may want to look at the book Paulo Coehlo: Confesiones del Peregrino by Juan Arias. It is an interview that Arias did with Coelho. Very interesting and pretty light to read.
Author: Paulo Coelho
Publication Information: New York: Harper Books, 1996
Genre: Fiction
Pages: 236
Note: This is the Spanish edition. It can be also found in English translation under the title The Fifth Mountain.
My mother introduced me to the works of Paulo Coelho when we were at a bookstore. She had mentioned the author before, and when there, I bought her a copy of another Coehlo novel. I don't recall the title; I think it was A Orilla del Rio Piedra Me Senté y Lloré (By the River Piedra I Sat and Wept). At any rate, the author's name stuck with me and later on I went and read EL Alquimista (The Alchemist), for which I later made a note. When I found a second hand copy of La Quinta Montaña, I just went ahead and bought it. My mother reads in Spanish; I have never seen her reading in English unless she has to. I personally prefer to read certain works in Spanish. Coelho writes in Portuguese, so I figure a Spanish translation is likely closer to his work. Call it a bias of mine.
This novel is set in biblical times. It basically tells the story of the prophet Elijah. Most of the plot takes place in the city of Akbar after Elijah flees there from Israel after Jezabel, a Phoenician princess who marries King Ahab, comes to power and begins to kill the prophets. The novel covers the three-year span Elijah spends there before returning to Israel and performing the famous miracle of the burnt offering (see 1 Kings 18). During his time in Akbar, Elijah struggles with God and himself as he learns what his true destiny is and faces difficult choices. Readers of The Alchemist will likely enjoy this tale as well.
I don't think a reader needs to be versed in the Bible to enjoy the novel. However, those readers who are closer to the Bible by faith or belief will likely see Elijah in a new or different light. The fable Coelho presents is moving at times; it is enlightening as well. In terms of pacing, the book is a very easy and light read; Coelho's works are actually known to be light on the prose. I found it inspirational and thought-provoking at times. Reader's of Coelho's other works will likely see elements from his other works here as well. I recommend the book, but I think The Alchemist is his best so far.
Additionally, readers interested in learning more about Paulo Coelho himself may want to look at the book Paulo Coehlo: Confesiones del Peregrino by Juan Arias. It is an interview that Arias did with Coelho. Very interesting and pretty light to read.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)