In between researching and researching

I am of that lovely age of remembering what it was like before computers were in every home (I was 8 when my family got one) and the Internet was not accessible (or not easily accessible). What did I ever do in order to research? Old school- went to the library and pulled out that card catalog and searched for what I was looking for. For those of you who do not know or remember what a card catalog is, let me refresh your memory:

That is an actual card catalog that I used over the summer. There was no way to electronically to look up books in this library, it was all in that cabinet, and that monstrous piece of furniture taught me how to research. As I said, when I was in grade school, in order to do any kind of research I had 2 options. 1. Go to the outdated encyclopedia I had at my house and look up the subject and hope there was at least a small paragraph about it, or 2. Go to the library and look it up in the card catalog and find a plethora of information on the subject. More often than not I went to the library.
Now, this taught me how to phrase search strategies in my mind. I had to narrow down what I was looking for, think of alternate terms in case there was more out there to be found. I learned how to differentiate between a good, let's say "scholarly" source, and a not so good source.
I hear the phrase "Well, just Google it" quite a bit. I like Google. I don't really have a problem using the word "Google" as a verb, except for one thing. There is a difference between "Googling" something and "searching" for something. Using Google is great for phone numbers, directions, reviews...however, if you are trying to find good, reliable information, Google is good for that, too, you just have to know how to use it. Herein lies the difference between my generation and the generation that has come after me (and some of my generation have become complacent and have forgotten what it was like to actually search for something). Searching now takes little to no time. You want to know something, type it and hit enter and BAM there you go. However, how good is that information? Is it as good as going to the library of 10-15 years ago and looking it up in the card catalog? I'm going to guess, no. Did typing and hitting that enter button get you the information quickly? Yes. Would looking for that information in the library of time gone by be quick? No, but it's fast.
When I was working in a library, when someone would ask me a reference question, more times than not, if i didn't rattle the answer off the top of my head as soon as they asked the question, they would walk away. Yes, I could have given you the quick answer, but would it have been right? Same thing with the Internet. Yeah, it can give you a quick answer, but is it a right answer? If you spent a little more time looking around and digging into the material, would you have found a better answer? Probably.
I recently finished my comprehensive exam for my MLIS degree. I had to answer several questions about librarianship, one of which was about the reference interview. I see both sides to the reference interview. Yes, it is necessary in getting information out of the library user in order to properly ask the question, but most of the time, at least when I conducted reference interviews, it was like pulling teeth to get the actual question out of the user. For example, a question I got a lot of was "Do you have any books about nursing?" Now, I had to ask the first question: The profession or the act of breast feeding?" Most of the time it was the profession. Then, "What are you looking for, text books, overview, career guides...." then "What type of nursing are you interested in, pediatric, practical, registered, specialist...." Most of the time you know what the answers were? "I just want a book on nursing". Yes, that is all well and good, but I can't get you what you need until you tell me what it is you want. I usually end up handing them about a dozen books and then ask them what it is they're looking for. That usually startles and answer out of them. People think in generalizations, not in specifics. Librarians need specifics so we are trained to get them out of the user, but if the user isn't knowledgeable or doesn't know how to express themselves beyond the generalities, then perhaps Google is a good place for them to start. We can all work together to find good, reliable information, and we may be able to use Google to find it.

The 10 Most Wanted (off the shelf) for 2010

And it's here! The list is here! And Undesirable #1 is...that gay penguin!
Yes, folks, the list of the top ten challenged books is here for last year and once again And Tango Makes Three is at the top.
Rounding off the list is a title (or two) you may find familiar from previous posts on this very blog.
2. The Absolutely True Diary of a Part Time Indian
3. Brave New World
4. Crank
5. The Hunger Games
6. Lush
7. What My Mother Doesn't Know
8. Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America
9. Revolutionary Voices
10. Twilight

The reasons go from violence to homosexuality to sexually explicit back to violence and homosexuality. Occasionally there is some racism and offensive language.

I bet you remember my post on Sherman Alexie's book? Yes, we have gone to the clip show.

I haven't seen too much on the radar for the other books. In fact, aside from the gay penguins, the only other books I have read on the list are Brave New World, The Hunger Games, and...Twilight. I kind of hate myself for reading the last one, but it wasn't because of the violence or religious viewpoints...it was just a bad story (IMO, don't hate).

And if you are going to hate on vampires, why is this not on the list?


They look so happy. Too bad the vampire is trying to suck out their intellectual freedom.

So go forth and check these titles out at your library...you can look for the Dick and Jane book, too. It's there...lurking.

A post where I disagree with both sides...

Nonfiction film series? Check.
Focusing in on controversial films? Check.

So what is the problem with this library in Connecticut showing a movie by Michael Moore by the title of Sicko? Apparently everything. The city council and the mayor told the library that if they showed that movie all funding would be cut from the library...and that they're ugly and they don't want to play with them anymore. Ok. I made the last part up.
The mayor stated: “I don’t even know why people make these decisions to go down those paths. It’s stupid. It’s like, it just blows my mind that people try to push the envelope with the public dime,” Kaupin said. “Do nice stuff. Do uncontroversial, or if you want to step in the mode of being controversial, make sure it’s fair on both sides and it becomes a discussion.”
The underlying problem here? Health care. It is a hot topic.

However......yeah, I know, just wait for it....
I have been sitting on this blog post for some time trying to figure it out in my own little head.
The library set up a controversial nonfiction movie screening of a well known controversial movie, Sicko. We have established that.
From the article I quote "the Moore film was the second in an occasional series of nonfiction films chosen by his staff featuring subject matter ranging from health care to education and the environment. The first film, A PBS “Frontline” documentary about health care called “Sick Around the World,” was screened on Jan. 7.

Upcoming films in the series include “An Inconvenient Truth,” former Vice President Al Gore’s film about climate change, and “Trouble the Waters,” a documentary about the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina."

Does anyone else see something in those movies? I see, and I am a little off from time to time, but I see movies that are a little to the left. I'll give you a moment.

Yes, movies the "liberal media" would call "liberal" are on the agenda. Hey, that crazy guy had a point...why not show both sides? Or have a time for talking points and some friendly debate of "let's agree to disagree". That would be interesting and fun.

Now, I'm not saying things are only left and right with no middle ground and I'm not saying one side is better than another and I'm not even saying that I lean more one way or another. I'm just saying let everyone have a say. If the city council and mayor are crazy about this thing, invite them to speak and get involved in the community. Hell, I'd be lucky to live in a community where the city officials cared enough about the library to threaten funding because of some movie being shown there. I think everyone is going about this thing the wrong way.
You guys don't like it over there, well we would love for you to come to the community room and discuss why. Please bring your talking points and let's make this a community event. Health care is just one of many, many things that needs to be talked about. Who knows? It could lead to people working together.

Hahahahahahahahaha! Had ya there for a second, didn't I?

Wiki-Wiki-Wiki-Woo!

ALA had quite a bit to talk about at their midwinter conference in San Diego. One of the points I was looking forward to was the talks about WIkiLeaks. I have been casually following WikiLeaks, as I'm sure most people have, through the news and the talk around the proverbial water cooler. WikiLeaks is an interesting beast.

As a librarian and information advocate I say, "Yay! Transparency! Information! Freedom!" As an American citizen that loves her country and supports those who fight for it I say, "Uh, couldn't people's lives be at risk because of this information?" So there's that dilemma again. Really, we should stop meeting like this. The ALA council unanimously passes a WikiLeaks resolution at Midwinter. Basically ALA thinks the US government is too ready to classify items that really don't need to be classified and thinks that the classification system needs to be looked at and revised. Probably not a bad idea. Also, ALA thinks that the government needs to treat whistle blowers a little nicer. Yeah, they may be bringing down the people that lace that nice wallet of yours, but it's the right thing to do, not the easy thing to do. ALA "urges the U.S. President, Congress, the federal courts, and executive and legislative agencies to defend the inalienable right of the press and citizens to disseminate information to the public about national security issues and to refrain from initiatives that impair these rights" and "government information made public within the boundaries of U.S. law should be available through libraries and the press without restriction." Bingo. I like that. The first part rings of getting rid of fear. The more people know, the less likely they are to fear things. After 9/11 the nation clammed up, got scared, and got kind of dumb with that color coded threat level chart. Not only do we need to know what is going on, we need to be able to find out what's going on easily and be given the ability to judge things for ourselves and not let MSNBC, CNN, FOX, ABC, NBC, CBS, ESPN, or whoever else feed it to us with a spoon. Go information and go libraries! And if you didn't like this post, go here!

SHOOT!

I am a fan of writer Warren Ellis. He writes fun, intriguing, messed up and sometimes out right disgusting stuff, and makes no apologies for it. It's one of the main reasons I respect him as a writer. This past summer something interesting happened to one of his stories. He has written many comics of his own creation and penned those of others. He wrote for a while for the HELLBLAZER series. His stint there was cut short by one story he wrote called SHOOT about school yard shootings. This story was written well before the Columbine shooting, but was scheduled to come out not long after. At the time, DC said no, it could not be released unless Ellis changed the story. Ellis said no, he was not backing down and he quit, the story was buried and forgotten, until last July. You have to respect a writer for not backing down and editing their own story, no matter how closely it matches with something horrible that happened. As I have mentioned before we shouldn't censor events because they aren't happy and shiny. Perhaps this story would have shed a little light on the horrible subject of school shootings. Why do kids decide to borrow their grandfather's arsenal and shoot up their schools? It's not a pretty scenario, but it is something that needs to be looked at so it isn't repeated. It takes a mind of someone like Warren Ellis to get us to think about things like this.

Why do current events make us censor ourselves? Why, after something happens do we react rather and pro-act? Think about it next time your talking to someone about current events. How do you tell the story? Are you censoring yourself without knowing your doing it? It's an automatic thing for humans, to protect ourselves from harm.

The N-Word

No one likes the N-Word.
I can't help but think of comedian Louis C.K. talking about people using the phrase "N-word". You can't replace it with that phrase. You know what is being said. It was just put in your head. The word is ugly and controversial when written down (and when it's said for that matter). It is the main, if not only reason, the book The Adventures of Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn is banned in schools and libraries across the country. People don't like the word, it offends them and it frightens them. I recently came across an column through the Banned Books Week fan page on Facebook that talks about the across the board fear and loathing of this book. It also mentioned a book that is out now that tries to remedy the "problem". Take a look at this book:

Looks harmless, right? Just another copy of Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn. Not so. This just happens to be the NewSouth edition of the book that takes the word "nigger" and replaces it with "slave". The person that is doing it is a Twain scholar by the name of Alan Gribben. He has good intentions. He did this revision in the hopes that teachers and readers who either can't teach the book or don't want to read the book because of the language will now be able to.
Now, I am writing this as a person who has not read this book.
Yes, I said it. I haven't read this book. Now, that doesn't mean that you shouldn't read it (the original or the revised), or maybe you've already made up your mind on the matter. Not my place to say, but there are two sides to this story that I would like to point out. The column I mentioned before is aghast at the prospect of a national treasure being revised, edited and the big "C" word, censored.
I tend to lean this way. Why should we change something that was written in a way on purpose? The story isn't about pleasant country living. It's about the South, which was not, and in places still is not, a very nice place for African American people. This book gives us a look into a time, place and situation that isn't pretty, isn't nice and is not politically correct with the names of people who are not white. However, I also see this guy's intentions. He sees that people are afraid of this word, that some teachers can't even teach the book because of this word and is trying to take the fear out of it so that more people can read and be exposed to the book. However, is the word "slave" really more positive or less ugly than the word "nigger"? I guess that is in the eye of the beholder. In the column mentioned above a Harvard Law professor who wrote a book titled "Nigger" was quoted as saying "I am addressing the contention that the presence of nigger alone is sufficient to taint Huckleberry Finn or any other text. I am addressing those who contend that nigger has no proper place in American culture and who thus desire to erase the N-word totally, without qualification, from the cultural landscape. I am addressing parents who, in numerous locales, have demanded the removal of Huckleberry Finn from syllabi solely on the basis of the presence of the N-word--without having read the novel themselves, without having investigated the way in which it is being explored in class, and without considering the possibilities opened up by the close study of a text that confronts so dramatically the ugliness of slavery and racism." In other words, why not study this word and the history that made it, and a good place to start is Huck Finn. Explore it, get to know its origins, learn about history, not just about the shiny, happy parts, and don't be afraid of something, even if it is ugly and controversial.