Collection Development for My Random Life.

What we call ourselves is important. The words we use to describe what we are and do possess a resonance which can connect with patrons. The greater the connection, the greater understanding patrons have of our services and perhaps more importantly our place within the larger picture community/society/culture. Our words provide us with potential and direction. Indeed, there has been much written about ‘library jargon’ such as reference, stacks, circulation, etc. which patrons have little intuitive clue as to their meaning. But greater concepts like “Information Commons”, “Information Literacy, “Library 2.0″ have little resonance with patrons also. I dare you to ask a patron what Library 2.0 means see what reaction you get? Or for that matter ask a patron what an “Information Commons is…

I have a great interest in the metaphors and words we use in librarianship. One metaphor we hear a lot in academic libraries is: “the library is the heart of campus”. Interestingly, Deborah Grimes in her book Academic Library Centrality: User Success Through Service, Access, and Tradition argues against using this metaphor to describe the library because she sees it as not well defined. She suggests replacing the metaphor with “community crossroads” which she sees as being a more central and unifying metaphor. I personally am not sure that “heart of campus” metaphor still does not have some value to patrons and libraries. But I like that Grimes is starting a discussion about the words we use and how they help define what we are.

The metaphor I like to frame libraries with is the “open work” (obviously). While, I can agree that this may need further explanation to patrons and librarians alike, it uses plain words which at a basic level have some understanding. The library is “open” and ready to be defined, filled up, interacted with, etc. What our words provide is with a starting point to engage both patrons and librarians in the overarching discussion about what our libraries are, can be, and should be. Choosing metaphors and descriptions which are understood by both parties (I would argue perhaps more so by patrons), is important to begin this conversation.