I’ve seen the link to this passed around the web in the last week and thought I would include it here as well.   The website Dark Roasted Blend has compiled a number of old bookplates for our enjoyment.  Such as shame that we see less and less of them in today’s world.

Nina Katchadourian--Sorted Books

I came across a couple of artists in the past few weeks that are creating wonderful artwork using books as props.  The first is Nina Katchadourian, an artist I discovered through Brain Pickings.  In her Sorted Books series, Katchadourian goes to various libraries and uses books in the stacks to create intriguing and amusing phrases.  You can check out more of her work on her website, http://www.ninakatchadourian.com

Lissy Laricchia--Get Back in Your Book Alice

Through the Today and Tomorrow blog, I was introduced to the photographer, Lissy Laricchia.  Her series, Get Back in Your Book, depicts various characters of books being pulled quite literally back into their respective books.  So far, the set includes Alice in Wonderland, Harry Potter, Beauty and the Beast, Peter Pan, and Sleeping Beauty.  You can find all of the photographs in the series on her Flickr page.

Finally, while this leans towards commerce as opposed to traditional art, the bookmarks created by Jack Spade are both something to visually enjoy and use.  The perforated bookmark paper can be purchased here.

]]> http://www.dawnbilyeu.com/blog/2010/05/25/and-now-for-some-art/feed/ 0 http://www.dawnbilyeu.com/blog/2010/05/24/let-amazon-take-care-of-it/ http://www.dawnbilyeu.com/blog/2010/05/24/let-amazon-take-care-of-it/#comments Mon, 24 May 2010 22:19:40 +0000 admin http://www.dawnbilyeu.com/blog/?p=1100

Photo by Quinn Dombrowski on Flickr

Last week, Donald Barclay posted a much lauded article on the American Libraries website discussing the need in academic libraries to move part of their collections off-site because of space issues.   Those that resist this move (faculty, students, and alumni) often point to the importance of browsing as a facilitator of exploratory learning.  Barclay postulates that the importance of browsing is a myth, that browsing limits information to what is currently on the shelf (excluding checked-out, lost, stolen, or damaged items) and that those who find information through browsing are unlikely to browse the upper and lower shelves.  I cannot fault Barclay’s basic premise, but the following sentences jumped out at me, in an unfortunate way:

Using the advanced search tools incorporated into the web sites of major online bookstores, you can not only use keyword searching to overcome the limits of classification, you can also read abstracts and reviews on the spot and, in some cases, sample sections of a book.  Because amazon.com and its competitors offer such a rich browsing experience, it is no surprise that so many of today’s academic library users routinely start by looking up books via bookstore websites and employ the campus library catalog only for determining how to get access to the physical book or, increasingly, the book’s contents in digital form.

Pointing to Amazon.com as the go-to tool for browsing says a lot about the weaknesses of many of today’s online catalogs.   But perhaps the better approach for libraries to take, if they really want or need to remove items to off-site locations, is to invest time and money into catalogs that are just as good (or better) than what Amazon can provide.  While browsing is not really an effective form of information gathering, it is a form of information retrieval used by many and should be enhanced in our online retrieval systems.

image: xotoko on flickr

Twitter and I didn’t used to get along.  I wanted to use it.  I wanted to like it.  But it just didn’t work for me.  At first…  While brevity was good, I yearned for substance found more in blogs than in 140 character tweets.  I also found it unnecessarily difficult to follow a conversation–something Facebook did much better.  Additionally, I know few people on Twitter, so tweets by me tend to be a conversation with myself.  But lately, I have started to see some of its benefits.  I suppose it all started with the Computers in Libraries conference.  Following the tweets via the #cil2010 hashtag, made it relatively easy to follow the proceedings and feel part of the conference even though I was not there.  The tool that helped with this was Tweetdeck–something I kept meaning to try but didn’t get around to until the Computers in Libraries conference.  Since downloading Tweetdeck, I now follow a number of librarians, tech gurus, travel and craft bloggers…oh, and Conan O’Brien.  It has enabled me to create searches to follow trends on Twitter and keep up with other conferences and discussions by following hashtags.  I have started tweeting some myself (@bibliotechnolib), but still mostly lurk.  But if I can come this far with Twitter, perhaps there is hope for me yet.

**Through the Computers in Libraries conference I became acquainted with Twatter Keeper–a way to archive tweets.  While I do not  foresee a need to keep track of my personal tweets, it seems like a great tool for conferences or hash-tagged discussions.

Along with the wonderful video of all the paintings in the MoMA, The Centered Librarian also directed me towards an interesting book recommendation tool, The Book Seer.  I was initially drawn to the site because of its striking design, but became curious about the method used to obtain these suggested titles.   Apparently, The Book Seer draws its recommendations from both Amazon and LibraryThing.  A search for books similar to Margaret Atwood’s, The Handmaid’s Tale, led to a number of recommendations from Amazon, but none from LibraryThing.  Their connection to LibraryThing seems to be problematic, producting only a couple suggestions for some titles, but more often, no recommendations.  However, going directly to LibraryThing yields a large number of recommendations by LibraryThing and other members.  Amazon’s suggestions for books similar to The Handmaid’s Tale, highlights the limitation of recommendations based on other items purchased by a buyer.  If I liked The Handmaid’s Tale, Amazon suggested that I might also like The Handmaid’s Tale Cliff Notes or York Notes on Margaret Atwood’s ‘Handmaid’s Tale’.  While there were a couple of other options available, this was not helpful to me in determining what to read next.

So instead I turned to What Should I Read Next.  This site lets users enter books by either title, author, or ISBN number.  Recommendations are centered around users registering what books they like.  As people begin to add to their book lists, associations are created based upon the number of times a book appears on the same list with other books, supposedly leading to valid recommendations.  The database is enhanced as more and more people add to it, but without a strong reason to do so, will readers really participate?  And if they do not participate, then the database is rendered rather ineffective.  In my example of The Handmaid’s Tale, the books recommended to me ranged from Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince by J.K Rowling to Judy Blume’s Blubber to Anderson Cooper’s Dispatches from the Edge: A Memoir of War, Disasters, and Survival.  I had the most hope for this recommendation tool, but it looks like it is not quite there yet.

Finally, I decided to explore Whichbook.  (It should be noted that all three of these book recommendation tools are U.K. based.  I’m not sure why that is.  Perhaps all of the U.S. computer engineers are busy creating similar tools within commercial sites such as Amazon, LibraryThing, Goodreads, etc.?  But for sites set up solely as book recommendation portals, the U.K. seems to have us beat.)  Whichbook is quite different from the others.  Instead of entering a title or author, Whichbook bases recommendations off of a book’s characteristics or qualities.  Users are allowed to choose four characteristics and find books that most relate based upon patron ratings from libraries in the U.K.  Next to each book listing is a “borrow” tab that allows users to link up with their local library to check for book availability.  Though the site seems to have some slight technical issues, the premise is an interesting twist on a book recommendation site.

Librarians often pride themselves as being masters of reader’s advisory, but compiling a comprehensive list of recommended books takes time and resources–something that is rapidly dwindling in public libraries today. Additionally, most suggested reading lists created by libraries tend to be just, well…lists.  Lists are created for the “best” or “most popular” books along with specific lists for children, teens, or adults.  There are also a number of lists that focus on specific subjects such as mystery, historical fiction, or humorous paranormal fiction.  Lists can be very helpful in determining what to read, they just lack the preciseness of recommendations based off a user’s interest in a particular book.  Although “further reading” suggestions similar to those found on Amazon or LibraryThing are showing up more and more within library OPACs, many libraries currently do not have the capability to provide these focused recommendations.  Yes, libraries will sometimes work with patrons to help develop specific recommendations based on their preferences.  While these personalized recommendations are certainly better than anything a database could provide, with depleted resources, they have become less feasible than ever before.  But the better question is: do our users really want to invest their time and a librarian’s time developing these personalized recommendations? Do the benefits of this service outweigh the convenience of instant recommendations from Amazon, LibraryThing, or some of these other book recommendation databases? With focused recommendations proliferating across the web, library patrons may come to expect these type of services from our libraries.  I hope, eventually, libraries can meet them there.

Photo by Kandinski

On the day after the big ipad release what the world doesn’t need now is another post about current e-book trends and what the ipad will do to revolutionize the medium.  But I’m still going to do it.  Why?  Back in July, I gave a big “thanks, but no thanks” to e-books.  While I continue to be concerned over the longevity of e-books and their accessibility by libraries, I have since been swept up in the “sliced bread” euphoria surrounding e-books.

What made this happen?  I traveled.  I traveled for a few weeks, outside of the country, and to places without immediate access to an English language bookstore.  While I don’t own a Kindle or any other e-reader, I do own an iPod touch and downloaded both the Kindle app and the Stanza app prior to departing.  I also downloaded a couple of books for something to do on the plane or during downtime on my journey.  Two 12 hour flights later (plus a 10 hour layover) quickly depleted my downloads (not to mention my battery–but that is another story).  Luckily, with the discovery of the hotel’s wi-fi, I was able to connect to the Kindle store and download a few more books to satisfy my appetite for reading on the rest of my journey.  While the small screen and constant flipping of pages was not ideal, once lost in a book, I barely noticed.

Photo by Wesley Freyer

But that was just the beginning.  On the return trip, I stopped in London for a few days.  Never having been there before, I bought a few travel books to get myself acquainted with it’s sights and neighborhoods.  I had planned on bringing 3 or 4 travel books, but they wouldn’t all fit in my small backpack.  I noticed previously that Lonely Planet had some travel apps for various cities and countries so I looked for one on London.  The content was the same as what was in my book only I was able to fit it all in the palm of my hand.  While the app was most powerful with an internet connection (for searches or geolocation info), I was using an ipod touch, often without wireless.  Luckily, knowing that many travelers would not be using data roaming while on vacation overseas, the app was also set up to work offline.  I could therefore access city maps and suggested restaurants, museums and pubs all while offline.

Rethinking the design of books on electronic devices

The thought of books as apps has made a lot of people excited.  E-books, on devices such as the ipad, will be changing.  It is unlikely that they will remain static entities, filled only with simple text on readable ink.  There has been talk that they will become the new DVD, with multimedia extras for readers to explore at their leisure. Choose Your Own Adventure has been referenced many times already by those speaking of this future for e-books.  Yet, while the thought of endless possibilities are enticing, the plethora of choices could also be overwhelming to some people.

Photo by Juhansonin

The European design group, Bonnier, put out a video back in January illustrating the possible interactive future of magazine publishing on e-reader devices.  They illustrate how magazines of the near future could allow readers to manipulate text and photo content as well as access multimedia content.  This is just one version of how the overall design of magazines could be manipulated to address the new possibilities of e-readers such as the iPad.  American Libraries also recently posted videos from a couple of different magazines (Wired, Sports Illustrated, and VIVmag) showing how their content will work on the iPad.  Things are about to get interesting.

But it isn’t only magazines that will be changing their function and design to match this new technology.  Books are also likely to change, and perhaps they should.  Craig Mod put out a recent article that got a lot of press titled, “Books in the Age of the iPad“.  While many readers were upset with Craig’s desire to move past the bound and printed book, his article resonated with many others because of his premise that books in the age of the iPad should morph to fit the container of the device.  Because the container is so versatile, book layout and composition can be much more flexible than it could be on the printed page or on devices like the Kindle.  We no longer have to pretend that books on e-reader devices are like printed books and can move past page flips and other devices meant to simulate the bound book experience.

A book is a book is a book?

But, should we still be calling these things books?  The CEO of Peguin Books, John Makinson, recently revealed a number of e-books the company plans to release in conjunction with the new ipad release. Among the books shown were a children’s book with an interactive coloring book, a human anatomy book where the reader could zoom in for more information on a particular part of the body or an organ, a teen-age vampire book with the ability to join a chat room as you read, an interactive travel guide, and a star finder book that uses GPS to point out constellations in the night sky.

There are many who view these new multimedia enhanced books as simply a extension of a website or modified television. The Penguin demonstration, in particular, upset many true book lovers.  If a book is allowed to be an app such as the ones shown by Penguin, asks Dan Nosowitz of Fast Company, will that devalue what we currently know as the book?  How much text does an item need to constitute a book, a Kindle lover asks? Will reading suffer with the addition of all of these bells and whistles? These are some questions we need to ask ourselves before we allow the lines to become too blurred.

What does any of this mean for libraries?

While this future looks great for producers and (some) consumers, it does not look so great for libraries.  Book as apps are not so easily borrowed.  As it is now, only certain devices will upload e-books checked out from a library.  While I recently enjoyed Julia Child’s “My Life in France” on my iPod via Overdrive’s audiobook downloads, I would have loved to be able to read it on my iPod instead.

Lack of format consistency among e-book distributors makes reading difficult for all of us without the right reader.  Changing technology could mean that books downloaded now in one format will not be accessible in the future.  While many have been pushing for standard formats for e-books, change is not likely unless failing to do so affects publisher bottom lines.

Publishers have not been shy in expressing their desire to change the payment structure between themselves and libraries.  Eric Hellman documented a talk by Macmillan’s CEO, John Sargent, where Sargent indicated that his company would prefer to move towards a pay-per-use model as opposed to the pay-per-product model that currently exists for books.  His reasoning was that e-books would not suffer the same wear and tear (and thus replacement) as print books and the lack of inconvenience of traveling to a library would mean books would be downloaded at a higher rate.

While all of the recent developments in e-books have finally got me excited, the lack of consideration for libraries by publishers continues to make me concerned.  All parties are standing their ground to gain the best advantage in the days to come (Amazon vs. Macmillan?)  It is clear to me that if libraries don’t begin to define e-books and the library’s place in the e-book world, someone else will do it for them.

A couple of weeks ago, the Internet Archive’s, Open Library, rolled out a soft launch of their new web design.  I checked out the Open Library website awhile back and found it to be an interesting project, but the design of the site did not really pull me in.  Although I liked the idea of a wiki devoted to cataloging all the world’s books, I did not see how this resource could be more useful than Worldcat, LibraryThing, or Google Books when it came to locating books in libraries, for sale, or in electronic form.

While I’m still slightly unclear why another resource of this type is needed, I can now see the benefits of an open-source database as opposed to a proprietary source such as Google Books or Worldcat.  Open Library also attempts to locate various electronic formats of a book–another advantage over a scanned copy obtained through Google Books.  Where the old site only allowed a subject, author, title search, etc., the new site has added the ability to browse by subject, places, people, and time.

But it might be the new design that really makes the site work for me.  Search results used to be displayed much like they are on Worldcat, with areas to refine the search in the left-hand column.  While this was not a bad layout, their new design more boldly displays options for search refinement.  Information on the new “soft launch” site is clearly displayed, with a variety of discovery tools and graphics.  Open Library is actively looking for developers to find new ways to use their book data and transform it into other useful tools.  I can’t wait to see what they come up with.

photo by florian.b on flickr

As we approach the beginning of Banned Books Week, I am astounded to hear Mitchell Muncy, former editor of Spence Publishing and current operating officer for the Institute of American Values, trying to “shush” the American Library Association.   According to Muncy in his opinion piece for the Wall Street Journal, the ALA is making too big a deal over nothing, exaggerating numbers of banned and challenged books by a parental force that is merely attempting to “guide their children’s education.”  Muncy further asserts that censorship cannot originate from non-governmental parties, that censorship is not really censorship if interested parties can still obtain the book through Amazon.com, and that librarians are the true censors for stifling  the demands of concerned parents who are just trying to do what is best for children.

It is evident that Mr. Muncy finds Banned Books Week irrelevant–at best.  He also seems to find the week’s activities to be confrontational and antagonistic.  He’s not the only one.  A number of groups have recently been speaking out against the ideas set forth in the ALA’s and AAP’s “Freedom to Read” statement.  This statement, originally written in 1953 in the midst of the McCarthy era, asserts that an individual’s freedom to determine what he or she reads is essential to our democracy.  It continues by stating that the individual is the best determinant of what reading material is right for them, and that this personal liberty should not be usurped by others claiming to know what is best for the population at large.

The “Freedom to Read” statement has been revised a number of times since the initial draft, and other publishing and anti-censorship organizations have also endorsed it.  It would seem, after the McCarthy era, that the need for this statement would have dwindled somewhat.  Not so.  While the government may not be leading recent attacks on books, a sudden surge of challenges to books in schools, libraries and bookstores led to the creation of Banned Books week back in 1982.

So what happens during Banned Books Week that makes it so controversial?  Well–authors and others read from these banned books.  They also talk about why some of these books were challenged in our schools, libraries and bookstores.  And participants restate their belief in the freedom to read. That’s it.  But this is too much for Muncy and others including the Family Friendly Libraries organization and Parents Against Bad Books In Schools (PABBIS).

Family Friendly Libraries is a national organization formed to address what they see as the growing problem of pornography and age-inappropriate materials found in our school and public libraries.  They provide lists and resources for individuals to use in their fight to remove offensive practices and/or offensive items from libraries.  They are also against Banned Book Week, stating in a 1998 press release,

“It is and has always been a negative event. The ALA uses that campaign to attack concerned parents and other citizens for exercising their First Amendment rights in behalf of their children and community. The ALA says it wants parental involvement, but negative opinions about library materials send member librarians into absurd public claims of ‘censorship,’ intimidating many parents from expressing their honest opinions” (Gounaud, 1998).

Were parents simply trying to regulate what their child reads, there may not be an issue.  More often, when challenges to books arise at a school or in a public library, parents and other concerned citizens are asking that the item be removed for all readers.  With different individuals having different interpretations of what is objectionable, how can one know if a book should truly be removed from circulation?  Parents Against Bad Books In Schools believes they have the answer.  They state on their website that,

“Bad is not for us to determine. Bad is what you determine is bad. Bad is what you think is bad for your child. What each parent considers bad varies and depends on their unique situation, family and values. The main purpose of this webpage is to identify some books that might be considered bad and why someone might consider them bad. Another purpose of this webpage is to provide information related to bad books in schools.”

FFL and PABBIS supposedly believe that libraries should be governed by community standards, yet they are national organizations that encourage others to question books within their libraries.  PABBIS evens goes so far as to list possibly offensive books along with offensive excerpts.  Muncy, in his Wall Street Journal article, claims that the ALA is “reacting so zealously against a few unorganized, law-abiding parents whose efforts, by any sensible standard, are hopelessly ineffective.”  Ineffective or not, there is often a larger national presence at work in many of these cases, making the push to remove items from library shelves a bit more sinister.  A recent move by a San Jose city councilman to impose filters on library computers was backed by the financing and legal department of the Alliance Defense Fund, an Arizona based organization that states on its website it is “fighting for religious freedom, the sanctity of human life, and marriage and the family.” While the Alliance Defense Fund, Family Friendly Libraries, and Parents Against Bad Books in Schools are certainly within their rights to enter the debate, it is no longer only a community issue.

Mitchell Muncy asserts that if a book is banned in a public library or in a school, and not banned by the government as a whole, it is not censorship.  He feels that if a person could obtain the book from an online bookseller, then it is still accessible.  Many patrons who are turning to the library for their reading material are doing so because they cannot afford to purchase items themselves.  If an item is removed from the library, it is inaccessible for them and therefore amounts to censorship.  But Muncy’s main point in his attack against Banned Books Week seems to be that most of the books were not really banned, just challenged.  If Banned Books Week did not exist and if the American Library Association did not believe in the freedom to read, many of those challenges might have been more successful.  It is only through continued vigilance that these challenges to books in our libraries can be defeated before they become, in Muncy’s definition, truly banned.

Were Muncy and others to have their way, they would do away with ALA involvement in any library.  In a statement titled “What FFL Truly IS and IS NOT“, Family Friendly Libraries exclaims that they “support libraries in their efforts to sever financial ties with the ALA and remove documents such as the “ALA Bill of Rights” from their local library policies.”  If the first step for these groups is the removal of the Library Bill of Rights, will the next target be the First Amendment?