{"id":1084,"date":"2015-06-13T13:52:49","date_gmt":"2015-06-13T20:52:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/galencharlton.com\/blog\/?p=1084"},"modified":"2015-06-13T13:52:49","modified_gmt":"2015-06-13T20:52:49","slug":"desiderata-for-the-next-librarian-of-congress","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/galencharlton.com\/blog\/2015\/06\/desiderata-for-the-next-librarian-of-congress\/","title":{"rendered":"Desiderata for the next Librarian of Congress"},"content":{"rendered":"

The current Librarian of Congress, James Billington, has announced that he will retire on 1 January 2016. \u00a0I wish him well \u2013 but I also think it’s past time<\/a> for a change at LC. \u00a0Here are my\u00a0thoughts on how that change should\u00a0be embodied by Billington’s successor.<\/p>\n

The next Librarian of Congress should embrace a vision of LC as the general national library of the United States and advocate for it being funded accordingly. \u00a0At present LC’s mission is expressed<\/a> as:<\/p>\n

The Library’s mission is to support the Congress in fulfilling its constitutional duties and to further the progress of knowledge and creativity for the benefit of the American people.<\/em><\/p>\n

Of course, Congress should continue to have access to the best research resources available, and I think it important that LC qua research library remain grounded by serving that unique patron population\u00a0\u2013 but LC’s mission should emphasize its services to everybody who find themselves in the U.S.:<\/p>\n

The Library’s mission is to\u00a0further the progress of knowledge and creativity for the benefit of the American people, present and future, and to<\/em>\u00a0support the Congress in fulfilling its constitutional duties.<\/em><\/p>\n

Having LC be unapologetically and completely committed to being a national library first is risky. \u00a0For one thing, it means asking for more funding in a political climate that does not encourage such requests. By removing the fallback excuse of “LC is ultimately just Congress’ research library”, it also means that LC perforce cannot\u00a0not evade\u00a0its leadership responsibilities in\u00a0the national and international library communities.<\/p>\n

However, there are opportunities for a\u00a0Library of Congress that sees its patron base\u00a0as consisting of all who find themselves on U.S soil: even broader support than it enjoys now and\u00a0the ability to act as a library of last resort when other institutions fail our memory.<\/p>\n

The next Librarian of Congress should be willing and able to put LC’s technology programs back on track.\u00a0This does not require that the next Librarian\u00a0be a technologist. It certainly\u00a0doesn’t require that\u00a0they be\u00a0uncritically enthusiastic about technology \u2013 but they must be informed, able to pick a good CIO, and able to see past puffery to envision where and how technology can support LC’s mission.<\/p>\n

In particular, research and development in library and information technology is an area where the Library of Congress is uniquely able to marshal federal government resources, both to support its own collections and to\u00a0provide tools that other libraries can use and build upon.<\/p>\n

I wonder what the past 20\u00a0years or so would have been like if LC had considered technology\u00a0and R&D worthy of strong leadership and investment. Would Linked Open Data \u2013 or even something better \u2013 have taken off ten years ago? Would there be more clarity in library software? What would have things been like had LC technologists been more free to experiment and take risks?<\/p>\n

I hope that LC under Billington’s successor will give us a taste of what could have been, then surpass it.<\/p>\n

The next Librarian of Congress should be a trained librarian or archivist. This isn’t about credentials per se \u2013 see\u00a0Daniel Ransom piece on the “Real Librarians” of Congress<\/a>\u00a0\u2013\u00a0although\u00a0possession of an MLS or an archivists’ certificate\u00a0wouldn’t hurt. \u00a0Rather,\u00a0I’d like to see candidates who are already participating in the professional discourse and who have informed opinions on library technology and libraries as\u00a0community nuclei (and let’s shoot for the moon: who can speak intelligently on\u00a0metadata issues!).<\/p>\n

Of possibly more import: I hope to see candidates who embody library values, and who will help LC to resist the enclosure of the information commons.<\/p>\n

What I would prefer not to see is the appointment of\u00a0somebody whose sole professional credential is an MBA: the Library of Congress is not just another business to be run by a creature of the cult of the gormless general-purpose manager. \u00a0I\u00a0think it would also be a mistake to appoint\u00a0somebody who is\u00a0only<\/em> a scholar, no matter how distinguished: unlike the Poet Laureate, the Librarian of Congress has to see to the running of a large organization.<\/p>\n

Finally, the next Librarian of Congress should\u00a0not attain that position via the glass elevator. \u00a0There are plenty of\u00a0folks who are not white men\u00a0who can meet all of my desiderata \u2013 or any other reasonable set of desiderata short of walking on water \u2013 and I hope that the President will keep the demographics of the library profession (and those we serve!) in mind when making a choice.<\/p>\n

Share this:<\/h3>