Articles for 4 Mar

Readings for 04 March

Wiegand
One of the most striking aspects of Wiegand’s article was the dramatic shift in the library’s role – or at least perceived role. While their overall purpose as an institution remained the same (to provide the public with resources and information), other changes and shifts that occurred in the World War I era seem too dramatic to go unnoticed. No longer was the library a passive place where people went when they felt like finding information or a good book – now it was an active participant in American culture, society, and daily life… a sharp contrast from the stereotypical view (both historically and today) of the public library.
Once neutrality was broken by entering the war, the public library became a beacon of patriotism and aligned with the government in every way it could. Wiegand explains that they “relied upon the sentiment of the American public to carry forward their self-perceived war activities.” Another interesting point – in many of our readings it seems the public library has grand ideals and impressions of itself and its role in society, when in reality its true impact was far less (like being the saviors of society by educating the common man and allowing him to pull himself up). But I digress. This new “makeover” of the public library closely associated the library with the American government, becoming almost a branch agency of the government. It served as a place to inform citizens of where and how to enlist in the army, distributed patriotic propaganda (like bookmarks with national hymns), informed the government of suspicious patrons, and served as a center of knowledge for the community. The library took an active role in promoting and teaching about food conservation and its patriotic implications. The library enthusiastic to help out in any way it could, even if that meant diverging from its traditional values – like censorship. While I personally don’t agree with Wiegand that it was such an “ugly scar” on library history, it certainly didn’t align with typical library practices, emphasizing the large influence of government and patriotism on the library in WWI. Activism in the library was a central theme during the WWI era.

Becker
While the library’s reactions, role, and goals after Pearl Harbor and during World War II were not a total contrast to those during World War I, ample differences are clearly notable. Reactions to WWII involved more hysteria than WWI (like Pasadena’s blackout room), but that seems understandable since the circumstances were also very different – America was attacked on its own soil. Without a doubt, though, libraries remained important centers for information to the community – even as access to traveling libraries dwindled. The ALA hoped to serve a “vital social purpose” as a “war information center” as citizens began flooding the library with very diverse inquiries about war concerns. The librarian had to become a walking center of knowledge within the library, able to answer this wide variety of questions and promote a “civilian morale.”
Nevertheless, the library’s role was much less active than passive when compared with WWI. While WWI boosted librarian professionalism and overall importance, after Pearl Harbor librarians struggled for recognition of the library’s purpose. ALA leadership realized the advantage in establishing a “concrete tie to the war effort,” otherwise recognition and an appropriate budget looked dim. Government agencies like OFF continuously denied library funding and attempts to link up to the war effort. Unlike WWI, though, librarians seemed to be trying to exploit the war crisis for their own advantage, as referenced by Duke librarian John Lund. Still, other librarians criticized the rush to the war bandwagon, insisting that the library should instead stick to their traditional purposes. Viewing the library hysteria as an overreaction, Stanley Kunitz advised keeping cool and calm and simply attending to the job. In Becker’s article, such disconnect in librarian attitudes contrasts sharply with Wiegand’s portrayal of WWI Wisconsin librarians as a united front along with the government.

Becker 2
In the beginning Becker points out that when a country is at war, “new rules apply.” Thinking back to this week’s first article by Wayne Wiegand, the library definitely underwent a change in function, but moreover broke one of the “key” tenets of library ideology – a disdain for censorship. The circumstances of war brought what Wiegand calls a “tumultuous chapter” in library history. Similarly, Becker points out the extra burdens placed on libraries during WWII. Hit with new requests about military and naval science, for example, the library was often unable to meet these demands. In contrast, though, the government – particularly under conservative enemies of President Roosevelt – would not increase most library budget to meet the needs of libraries. However, the spread of information regarding the war was a key priority of the government.
Still, the library trudged on and did what it could. I found it really interesting that the Chicago Public Library helped non-English speakers with letters to their sons overseas, showing the wide range of activity the library took on during the era. In the more symbolic sense, I think the libraries were actually at the forefront of the war, especially with consideration to Germany and the Nazi party. Becker includes propaganda about books being “weapons in the war of ideas.” In essence, the caption notes, the war as an ideological one between fascism and democracy. Perhaps the library was not recognized for its importance in this aspect, but the power of books and information in public opinion formation was key. As noted by Becker in more recent times, libraries adapt to the national situation to provide visible sections on areas of recent interest – using her local library’s display of books on Islam and foreign policy as an example. Despite deserved recognition, Becker asserts that “thousands of wartime public libraries were important – even essential – to the millions of Americans of all ages who visited their facilities…”

Knuth
I had a very hard time reading this article due to the blatant political messages and accusation throughout the piece, and I think a lot of Knuth’s arguments/statements are a political overreach that procure unsound conclusions. When she first claims that the United States’ failure to “provide security for Iraq’s institutions was not outright libricide” then later asserts “the powerful messages of angst” are sent through library destruction, I think this fails to provide connection. Certainly there may be some overlap in her claims, but by no means an outright, direct correlation. An interesting opposition of ideas between Knuth and Becker’s second article relates to biblioclasm, more specifically the burning of books. Knuth claims that without documented knowledge tied to a specific place and group, one can strangle a civilization. Becker, on the other hand, found an important piece of wartime propaganda to be “Books cannot be killed by fire.” While I think both authors are correct in one sense, culture lives through the people, and cannot be so easily destroyed.
I do not want to dwell on political issues though, as I don’t think that is the focus of our class. Regardless, the preservation of cultural artifacts – documents, books, etc. – is a very important aspect not only of a culture and civilization, but for world humanity. As different cultures adapt to changing times and circumstances, the ability to reflect and look back on it historically is an important foundation. Primary sources are vital in the academic realm, and preservation of such has always been of central significance. Moreover, these preserved artifacts – books included – facilitate the understanding of lengthy textual works and historical data/events that cannot be tapped into electronically from anywhere, at any time, by anyone. They are a rare glimpse back into the true natures of times long gone, and it is essential we continue to recognize their significance.