Author says Libraries "have had their day."

[Harmon]

Originally Posted by crich70

I don't think that it's a matter of parent's not caring Harmon. More like it's a matter of not having the time because it takes two incomes coming in to keep food on the table and a roof over the families head. Government is supposed to be 'of the people, by the people and for the people' but it seems more and more like it's 'of the rich, by the rich and for the rich' instead. That mentality filters down in many different ways. I think that's why so many go for a TV rather than books too. It's a one time expense to buy the actual TV set and you get 100's of hrs of entertainment in return (or at least you used to) and books only have the one thing in them and pbooks don't come in a big package of several 100 for one low price. That's one way ebooks are better. You can find free or low priced ebooks all around. Anyway there is also stress in not knowing if you will have a roof over your head next month or not, or a filling dinner as well, which can inhibit being able to sit down long enough to read even if you have access to books. And what about all those private libraries that rich men used to put together and then not even cut the pages of a single book in order to read it? They had the $$ and presumably the time to read, but didn't. Meanwhile poor men (and women) did read and they went on to invent the tools that led to our modern world today.

I think that your description of the situation is pretty accurate.

But I don't accept the implication that parents just can't do anything about it. I think that they have a choice, and the choice is to let the schools and teachers take care of it all. Nobody forces them to buy televisions rather than books.

I read an article recently in which the writer described how his mother, who did not know how to read, made sure her kids did learn to read. And she did this without their ever finding out that she was illiterate. If an illiterate mother can make sure her kids can read, I don't want to hear any excuses from or for anyone else.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by Harmon

What I'm suggesting is that libraries, as we have known them, are obsolete.

Originally Posted by meeera

I've realised that you've said that, I've just seen no convincing evidence. Libraries, around here at least, remain very busy indeed.

This may be a difference of observation based on location. Libraries in large cities in the U.S. are part of a different social and political dynamic than libraries in Australia. Libraries in rural areas in the U.S. are also serving a different purpose than inner-city libraries.

Originally Posted by Harmon

Lack of school libraries? Why is that? We spend tons of money on schools - but there's no money for libraries?

Both of my kids attended middle and high schools with no libraries. This is in large cities in California; school libraries are often just not part of the budget for grades above the "learn to read" level, especially with smaller schools and charter schools.

Serious readers who read 30 books a month? Let them fund it themselves. Anyone with that kind of habit should be willing to get a second job to support it. Why should we provide such people with libraries?

Because they grow up to be well-educated and driven to understand all aspects of their careers, if their inclination toward absorbing knowledge isn't stifled by lack of resources.

By that logic, anyone who wants an education can pay for it; why should the public support all those slackers in high school who're never going to have jobs more complex than janitor or barrista?

The U.S. educational system--and libraries are part of that--is built on the premise that we all benefit from open access to knowledge. If libraries aren't being used enough to justify their costs, they need to be adjusted to provide access to the knowledge that most people need now. They may have more computers and fewer books in the future, but that doesn't mean libraries are meaningless in the 21st century.

How do I expect schools to teach reading? Phonics. How come that stopped working? Worked fine when I was a kid. Maria Montessori could teach retarded children to read - so what's the problem?
http://www.montessoriworld.org/Readi.../overview.html

The Montessori method--which I love--requires a lot more funding that US public schools allow. It hinges on, among other details, small enough class sizes that each child can get individual attention. While I'd love to see it or something like it become the standard for early education, that would require a lot more funding than libraries.

Libraries are obsolete. I can tell you when that dawned on me - way back in the 90s. In 1991, the Chicago Public Library system built a huge, dysfunctional central library downtown.

Chicago may not need a(nother) public library; Mt. Ida, Arkansas, does. Not every public library is a huge showy affair, meant to declare bureaucrats' support of "education" more than actually provide access to knowledge to the public.

Libraries are not for "free access to books." Libraries are curated repositories of culture; they're a way for communities to share knowledge and the framework of assumptions that make *this* knowledge more important and interesting than *that* knowledge. Libraries have never been about "we shall provide all books everywhere forever;" they're "these books are of interest to our local community," with "local" defined broadly.

If "books" are no longer the way most information is shared, then libraries should shift media focus;there's still plenty of need--more, perhaps, than in the past, when community identity was stronger--for the libraries themselves.

[Sregener]

Originally Posted by Harmon

Let the kids tell their own stories, and kids who can already read write them down. The world is FULL of words to read. Books contain some of them.

You do realize that most learners have three levels: auditory, reading, and writing? The writing vocabulary (speaking too, for that matter) of a 3rd grader is about 25% of their auditory vocabulary. It's much harder to think of the right word than it is to understand it when someone else says it.

Books aren't just words, any more than words are just letters. The reductionism here boggles the mind.

[Fluribus]

Originally Posted by Sregener

Okay, let's put it this way: In order for children to realize their maximum intellectual potential, they need to be read multiple books every day in their preschool years.

Read "The Read Aloud Handbook" by Jim Trelease and open your eyes.

I support cramming more reading in. I have to wonder, however, how many books were read, on a daily basis, to toddlers like Socrates, Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, and a whole host of others. Are the products of our more child-centered culture more impressive than those of the past? If some of the reports about the rise of narcissism amongst today's youth are accurate, they probably think so.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by Fluribus

I support cramming more reading in. I have to wonder, however, how many books were read, on a daily basis, to toddlers like Socrates, Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, and a whole host of others. Are the products of our more child-centered culture more impressive than those of the past? If some of the reports about the rise of narcissism amongst today's youth are accurate, they probably think so.

Ah but people back then didn't know what childhoodwas. It's only been the last 100 yrs or so that children got to have the chance to be kids.

[Sregener]

Originally Posted by Fluribus

Are the products of our more child-centered culture more impressive than those of the past? If some of the reports about the rise of narcissism amongst today's youth are accurate, they probably think so.

Oh, I suppose we could just sit our kids in front of televisions for 6 hours a day (oh, wait, most people already do that!) and we'll see the obvious effects television has on social behaviors (almost none of it good.) And then we can blame it all on children's books and libraries, because that's so obviously where the problems lie.

[QuantumIguana]

“The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.” -- Plato

[Crunner]

As a former Public Library Director and a Children's Librarian all I have to say is that the author of the article "Libraries have had their day" is sadly mistaken and shows his ignorance of the purpose of the Public Library.

Andrew Carnegie once famously stated that "The Public Library is the poor man's university" and IMO truer words have never been spoken. Public Libraries exist because not everyone is financially solvent enough to be able to afford to purchase every book that catches their fancy whether it be for the simple pleasure of being transported by the written word or having access to reading material to further their own education. As a poster on the wall of my office states "Libraries will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no Libraries!"

So what if the author only gets 6p every time one of his precious books is borrowed - that is 6p more than he otherwise would have received as it's highly likely that the folks who borrowed his books in the first place most likely wouldn't spend the 30p he gets retail to buy his book. Another factor this shortsighted individual neglects to consider are the number of his books that are sold because an individual was first exposed to his body of work via the Library. Libraries have suffered far greater attacks than the rantings of this fellow and will be around long after his remains have returned to dust!

[SteveEisenberg]

Re #142, Plato didn't write that, nor, as far as I can tell, did any other ancient.

See:

http://quotationsbook.com/quote/44998/

and

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Youth_nowadays

The link above says the quote is a "paraphrase of a quote from Aristophanes' Clouds." However, when I follow the link to the passage from Aristophanes, well, each can judge for themselves, but I think Aristophanes was joking, and his meaning is arguably rather different.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

“The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.” -- Plato

It does sound like what we have today doesn't it. Part of that is parents fault and part is the fault of society I think. If you remove a good moral background from a society and let everyone do whatever they please to do you can't expect anything else. When I was a kid you called adults sir or ma'am or Mr, Mrs, or Miss. You didn't address them by 1st name or other ways. And when you did something wrong you were corrected via corporal punishment (i.e. spanking) as well as loss of privileges for a time. Now kids get sent to their room where they have a computer, dvd player, cell phone etc. and we can't give them a well earned swat on the bottom without risking getting into trouble.

[xg4bx]

Originally Posted by crich70

It does sound like what we have today doesn't it. Part of that is parents fault and part is the fault of society I think. If you remove a good moral background from a society and let everyone do whatever they please to do you can't expect anything else. When I was a kid you called adults sir or ma'am or Mr, Mrs, or Miss. You didn't address them by 1st name or other ways. And when you did something wrong you were corrected via corporal punishment (i.e. spanking) as well as loss of privileges for a time. Now kids get sent to their room where they have a computer, dvd player, cell phone etc. and we can't give them a well earned swat on the bottom without risking getting into trouble.

And when did pajamas become acceptable going-out attire? My parents would have shat a brick if I went to a store in pajama bottoms and slippers. I'm jealous of the days when men wore a suit and a gentleman's hat to a baseball game and ladies dressed like ladies. Kids don't have any respect for anything, not even their own appearance. Have some bloody pride and dress like a human being.

I really should be shaking my fist and yelling to stay off my lawn....and I'm only 35. *facepalm*

[meeera]

Originally Posted by crich70

It does sound like what we have today doesn't it. Part of that is parents fault and part is the fault of society I think.

I think you missed the meaning of the post.

[xg4bx]

Originally Posted by teh603

That is low-income. Most of the "poor" kids I've seen at work all have expensive designer and athletic label clothes and iPhones, even if it means coming with no school supplies.

And when I suggest they buy school supplies first, they act like I'm suggesting they go to school naked.

I'm starting to think that half the "poor" families in the US are that way because they just don't know how to shop.

Let's face it, being ''poor'' in America today means you don't have an iphone and an Xbox. I think those that are simply utterly stupid with money infinitely outnumber true, dirt poor people in this country.

I think many of us see it in our own personal lives, I know I do, people who cry poverty, can't/won't pay their bills but they've always got nice ''stuff''. The person I know personally couldn't be bothered to pay car insurance, was always late on rent, still has their mom paying the cell phone bill, even blew off payments to a debt consolidation company but her and her ''baby daddy'' had Xboxes, cable, internet, Hulu, this and that out the bloody wazoo.

Like I said, I think there's far more absolute irresponsibility than true poverty in America.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by meeera

I think you missed the meaning of the post.

No. The post was about how kids have no respect for elders and show contempt for authority now days. If that isn't the fault of the decline of society due to loss of moral background (being taught right from wrong) and inability to give punishment to the kids when they do misbehave then whose fault is it? Granted its connection to reading is tenuous but it ties in with kids being taught to read by involved parents as well I think.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by xg4bx

Let's face it, being ''poor'' in America today means you don't have an iphone and an Xbox. I think those that are simply utterly stupid with money infinitely outnumber true, dirt poor people in this country.

I think many of us see it in our own personal lives, I know I do, people who cry poverty, can't/won't pay their bills but they've always got nice ''stuff''. The person I know personally couldn't be bothered to pay car insurance, was always late on rent, still has their mom paying the cell phone bill, even blew off payments to a debt consolidation company but her and her ''baby daddy'' had Xboxes, cable, internet, Hulu, this and that out the bloody wazoo.

Like I said, I think there's far more absolute irresponsibility than true poverty in America.

Part of it goes back to the Government seeming to sponsor inequality as well I think. When the rich pay a pittance in taxes and expect the many to foot the bill for the remainder what can a society expect? Granted there are some people who misuse services that are meant to be for the needy there are a lot of really needy people who can't get help when they need it. And then other services like libraries suffer as well I'm sure.