B rb r n t th t f th P bl L br r : HP t d rn n r p t l Thr t n D r ,v l d t n, nd th P bl d (r v

J J n

Libraries & the Cultural Record, Volume 43, Number 2, 2008, pp. 232-234(Review)

P bl h d b n v r t f T x PrDOI: 10.1353/lac.0.0007

For additional information about this article

Access provided by University of Stirling (31 Oct 2015 02:03 GMT)

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/lac/summary/v043/43.2.jesson.html

232 L&CR/Book Reviews

construedasskeptical,atheist,sexual,moral,aesthetic,political,and,evidently,erudite.SinceBoeufdoesnotdirectlybroachthisissue,sheisunabletosuggestwhereonthisspectrumNaudémightberanged,exceptbyfleetingreferencestothesuggestivebutcrypticlabelfoundinhersubtitle.Inasimilarshortcoming,BoeufneversituatesNaudé’splaceinthehistoryoflibraryscienceordiscusseswhatimportancehasbeenattributedtohim.Itappearsthatinbothcasesshehasgenerouslyassumedthatresearcherswhocometothisbookwillalreadyknowallthis,buttheadditionofafewexplanatoryparagraphsinordertosituateNaudémoreclearlyforthelessinitiatedwouldonlyhaveaddedtothework. Yetitwouldbeunjusttodwellontheseminorshortcomings,forwhatshehasaccomplishedhereismuchmorearduousand,inthelongrun,offarmoreusetothemanyandvariedresearcherswhowillcometothisfinelyproducedbookasaresource.

Brett B. Bodemer, University of Hawai’i at Manoa

Barbarians at the Gates of the Public Library: How Postmodern Consumer Capitalism Threat-ens Democracy, Civil Education, and the Public Good.ByEdD’Angelo.Duluth,Minn.:LibraryJuicePress,2006.xiv,127pp.$18.00(paper).ISBN978-0-9778617-1-2.

ManyreadersofEdD’Angelo’sthought-provokingandveryreadablebook,Barbarians at the Gates of the Public Library,willcomeawaywithanewfoundcom-mitmenttosavingtheailingAmericanpubliclibrary.Somewilldisagreewiththebook’scritiquesofpopularculture.Andmostwillwishformoreinformationfromthisbook,whichassertsthepubliclibrary’sfundamentalimportancetodemocracybutdiscussestheinstitutionsurprisinglylittle,albeitwhilediscussingmanyotherimportantandrelatedissues:education,informationtechnology,globalization,free-marketeconomics,andthedivisionbetweenhighandlowculture. Ashissubtitleindicates,D’Angelo’stargetispostmodernconsumercapitalismtogetherwiththephilosophythatThomasFrankseesasitspublic-relationsarm:“marketpopulism”(75).Thisphilosophyproposesconsumerchoiceasthenewagentofworldwidedemocracy,replacingthetraditionalgovernmentalformthatiswitheringunderthedecentralizingforcesoftechnologicaldevelopmentandglobalization.Consumerscan“vote”instantlywiththeirwallets.D’Angelolamentsthatlibrarieshavebecomeinfluencedbythisphilosophy,cateringtopopularde-mandsforentertainmentandabandoningtheirroleinpromotingandfacilitatingtherationaldebatesnecessaryforavitaldemocracy. Thisroleisparticularlyimportanttoday,D’Angelowrites.Aswehaveenteredan information economy, the new citizen-consumers have been trapped in adownwardspiral:theyoptfortheinstantgratificationofmindlessentertainmentorwatchnewsprogramsproducedbytheentertainmentconglomerates,bothofwhichreinforceconsumerism’sprimacy.Giventhisviciouscycle,Americansocietyneedsaninstitutionindependentofthiscyclethatrepresentsthepublicgood. America needs strong public libraries and, more specifically, qualified li-brarians. D’Angelo argues that librarians’ appropriate function is as cultural“gatekeepers”(5), trainedtoguidepeopletomoreedifyingandenlighteningsourcesofinformationandtodistinguishbetween“’good’literatureand‘bad’

233

literature”(2).Brieflysketchingthehistoryofpubliclibraries,D’Angelorecountsthedemocraticimpetusbehindtheearliestones,drivenbyEnlightenmentidealsabouteachcitizen’sfitnessfordemocraticparticipation,givenapropereducation.Theforceofcapitalism,hostiletodemocracyinitspostmodernphase,wasnotalwaysopposedtogovernment-baseddemocracy,D’Angelowrites.Despitesomearguablyantidemocraticattitudesamongmajornineteenth-centurylibrarygiantslikeMelvilDewey(5–6)andAndrewCarnegie(6–7),thegeneralphilosophyintheageoftherobberbaronssupportedthepublicgood.InthiscontextD’AngelocitesBritishphilosopherJohnStuartMill,whoseutilitarianthinkinghelpedjustifypubliclibraryfundingthroughtheideathateconomicliberalismwouldsucceedonly if citizens were educated to make rational choices that served their bestinterests—and,byextension,theinterestsofsocietyasawhole.D’Angelowritesthat thecapitalismofMill’s time“bothpresupposedcertainmoralvaluesandproducedapublicgoodwhichtranscendedprivateeconomicinterests.Educa-tionalinstitutionssuchaslibrarieswereexpectedtoinstillthesemoralvaluesinthepublicandtherebypromoteliberalcapitalistdemocracy”(16).AroundWorldWarIIAmericanlibrariesmovedclosertoanactivepromotionofdemocracywithtwonationalreportsfromtheAmericanLibraryAssociationemphasizingtheim-portanceof“democracyandenlightenedcitizenship”(8)inthepubliclibrary’smission.Thelatterhalfofthetwentiethcentury,however,sawamovementawayfromthesenationalstandardsandtowardalocalizationofpracticesthathaveleftlibrarieswithoutacoherentmissiontoadheretoinresistingmarketpopulism. AsonemaynoticefromhisadmirationofMill’sethicalliberalism,D’Angeloisnotthestereotypicalleftistthatafirstglanceathisbookmightsuggest.Indeed,insteadofcitinganantiglobalizationactivistlikeNaomiKleinoratheoristlikeSaskiaSassen,D’Angelobasesmuchofhisargumentonclassicalphilosophers.D’Angeloreceivedadoctorateinphilosophy,andheisathisbestwhenarguingthemeritsofdemocracyandpubliceducationbasedontheteachingsandwritingsofSocrates,Mill,Hobbes,andotherphilosophers,whichhesummarizesconciselyandclearly. D’Angelo’s evidential supportbecomes less satisfyingwhenhewrites aboutmoretimelyconcerns.Hedepends,forexample,largelyonFrank’sOne Market under GodforhisdiscussionofpostmodernconsumerismandalmostexclusivelyonJamesB.Twitchell’sCarnival Culture: The Trashing of Taste in Americafortrendsinattitudestowardmassculture.1Asaresult,D’Angelooftenseemstoreproducetheseauthors’argumentswithoutcritiqueorsynthesis.Thisisespeciallyproblem-atic inhiscitationsofTwitchell todecryAmericansociety’sdevaluingof“highculture.”D’Angelo’scontentionthatlibrariesshouldactivelypromotethe“good”literatureoverthe“bad”isawelcomeone,andhiswillingnesstoblameacadem-ics—specificallythoseinculturalstudies—forhelpingtodiscredithierarchiesoftaste introduces an importantdebate.Unfortunately,D’Angelodoesnotdelvedeeplyenoughintothesehighlycontroversialwaters,neglectingtoaddressoppos-ingargumentsraisedbypostcolonialandfeministtheorists,amongothers,whohavequestionedthehigh/lowculturaldivide.Thebook’sdiscussionoflibrariesalsocouldhavebenefitedfrommoreresearch.Whendemonstratingpostmodernconsumercapitalism’sdamagingimpactuponlibraries,D’Angelopresentslittleevidencebeyondtheanecdotal.D’Angelo,asupervisinglibrarianataBensonhurstbranchlibraryinBrooklyn,NewYork,since2003,haslikelyseensomeofthedam-agefirsthand.Butnostatisticalevidencesupportshisclaimsthatstafftrainingin

234 L&CR/Book Reviews

collectionsdevelopmenthasdecreasedinthefaceofagreateremphasisoncustomerserviceorthatthisshiftintraininghaschangedthenatureoflibraries’holdings. Barbarians at the Gates of the Public Libraryis,nonetheless,astimulatingcalltoaction,andD’Angeloconcludesbyquotingaclearplan(proposedbyBrooklynPublicLibrarydirectorMartinGomez)forimprovinglibrarystaffeducationbyexpandingundergraduateprogramsinlibraryscience(122).D’Angelo’sreadable,sweepingcoverageoflibraryhistory,economictheory,andpoliticalphilosophyprovidesaninformativestartforreadersinterestedinorconcernedaboutthepubliclibrary’sroleinourrapidlychangingculture.Manyofthesereaderswillwanttodigdeeperafterreadingthisbook.D’Angelo’sbibliographyprovidesastartingpoint.Beyondthat,thecuriouscanconsult(onewouldhope)theirlocallibrarians.

James Jesson, University of Texas at Austin

Note

1.ThomasFrank,One Market under God: Extreme Capitalism, Market Populism, and the End of Economic Democracy (New York: Doubleday, 2000); James B.Twitchell,Carnival Culture: The Trashing of Taste in America(NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress,1992).

Library Juice Concentrate.EditedbyRoryLitwin.Duluth,Minn.:LibraryJuicePress,2006.xix,238pp.$25.00(paper).ISBN978-0-9778617-3-6.

RoryLitwin’sLibrary Juice Concentrateembodiesthecontradictionsinherentinthecurrenttensionbetweenpaperanddigitalmaterialsinlibraries.TheessaysincludedinthisbookwereallwrittenforandoriginallypublishedonLitwin’s“Li-braryJuice”webzinefrom1998to2005;thusthisworkturns“borndigital”materialsintobookform.Litwin,likehisbook,isabitofahybrid.Heisaself-confessed“bridgebetweenthetwogenerationalculturesinlibrarianship,”specifically,thebabyboomgeneration,ofwhichheisamember,perceivedasmoretraditionalintheirlibrarianship,andwhathecallsthe“younger,web-centricgenerationoflibrarians,”presumablyGenerations“X”and“Y,”withwhomheseemstoidentifypolitically(71).Thebook,andthezinethatprecededit,areopenlyandunabash-edlyfromaleft-wingperspective.Thefirstlineofhis“LibraryJuiceManifesto”states:“Librariesarespecialbecausetheyareatoncecommunitarian,libertarian,andmodelsforsustainability”(3).MuchofLitwin’swritingispredicateduponacalltosocialaction,whichhepositsisintrinsictotheprofession(orshouldbe).Thisphilosophypermeateshisessaysinthebook. ThesheerbreadthoftopicstreatedinLibrary Juice Concentrateisatestamenttoitsformerlifeasawebzineanditscurrentincarnationasablog.Litwinexaminestherapidlydisappearingalternativepress;anarchistlibrarianship,includinganinterviewwithJessamynWest;Library2.0anddifferingperceptionsofwhatistruly“private”;MitchFreedman’sBetterSalariesInitiative;theweb-centric“techie”revolution;andthe“OntologyoftheBo-ring”whilesimultaneouslyarguingthatitisimportanttonotdiscardknowledgeinfavorofinformationjustbecauseitispossibletodoso.