Quote:
Originally Posted by Laridae
I beg to differ: I would submit that, around here at least, libraries do both.
|
I can see a claim for both; I don't see a good case for "it's fine if libraries just don't have the option to keep books around for the future unless they keep paying--AND the publisher keeps offering that book."
Quote:
|
Recognizing the demand for bestsellers our libraries now stock extra copies of pbooks as Quick Reads - which you can only borrow for a week or 2 and there are heavy fines if you're late.
|
And I expect there's a high turnover with those books, as most of the extra copies get sold used after a few months or a couple of years. But the library has the option to keep those books as long as they want; if it continues to be popular with the local readership long after it's dropped off the bestseller list, they don't have to get rid of them.
Quote:
|
And let's face it, like it or not, bestselling writers like John Grisham eventually *do* become the Culture of the times as we know it!
|
Not if the library stock has to be purged on a 2-year cycle. "Enduring books" become, not the ones people love and share with their friends and want to reread, but the ones that publishers don't pull from the digital shelves.
I don't mind rental options for books; I mind that the *only* option is rental.