Will Unwound

I loved yesterday’s discussion about the Big Ben Roethlisberger READ poster issue.  All the comments were well reasoned, compelling, and quite varied.  When you get a diversity of viewpoints on a controversial subject you have struck blogger’s gold.  I am proud of all of you guys for a great job yesterday.  Your responses were both logical and creative, and that’s a hard combination to achieve. This is not an easy issue to noodle through.

It was such a good discussion (if you missed it scroll down to Will Unwound #96) that I would like to continue it today with the emphasis being shifted from public libraries in the Pittsburgh metropolitan area to the American Library Association.   In short, what should ALA do …pull the poster off the market or keep selling it through its online store?

 Let me very briefly summarize the issue.  Big Ben Roethlisberger is a football celebrity who is featured on an ALA READ poster.  Click on http://www.alastore.ala.org/detail.aspx?ID=1252 to see the poster.

Here are Big Ben’s vital statistics: two Super Bowl rings and accusations from two different women for sexual assault.  The last incident happened last month and involved a Georgia college student.  Although, Ben was not arrested, charged, or prosecuted for any of his behaviors, the Georgia police report contained enough evidence of inappropriate actions on Ben’s part to compel the commissioner of the NFL to levy the very stiff punishment of suspending Ben without pay for 6 games. 

Now that the NFL has acted, the ball is in the court of the ALA.  Before we get into the options, let me emphasize that there is much that I really like about ALA beginning with its publications, one of which is the famous series of READ posters.  I love the READ posters (with one “Big” exception). Therefore, let me stress   that this is not a bash ALA exercise! 

This is simply an airing out of a very dicey issue, and I greatly hope that someone from ALA will weigh in on the questions posed below.  If you know someone on the Executive Board, the ALA Council, the Social Responsibilities Round Table, the Intellectual Freedom Round Table, or the Association for Library Service to Children send them this blog and urge them to comment.  I would love to get them involved, although my guess is that this issue may be too hot for them to handle.  Political correctness tends to rule the ALA roost.  I just wish that once in a while the members would exercise the intellectual freedom that they so eloquently preach.  One can only hope.  To me there is no politically correct side in this debate so maybe we can pull a few ALAers  in.

Here are the issues I want you to comment on:

1. My guess is that the ALA membership is at least 75% female. Should an overwhelmingly female profession be promoting a man who is developing a reputation as a sexual predator against women?  While it is true that the library profession benefits from the advocacy of celebrities, it is also true that the celebrities derive huge image benefits by being associated with libraries and books.
2. The ALA READ posters are supposed to promote reading.  When a poster ceases to do that isn’t it an accepted business practice to pull it off the market.  In other words, Big Ben is no longer doing what he was “posed” to do.  Maybe it’s time to get a new sports figure in his place.
3. By pulling a poster off the market will the ALA be weakening its traditionally strong stand against censorship?
4. Should the ALA simply ignore the discredit that Big Ben has brought to himself and to his professional league and simply let the consumers decide for themselves if they want to purchase a Big Ben poster?
5. By pulling the poster won’t ALA be making a strong and important stand on behalf of women’s rights and issues?  I bring this up because in the past the ALA, particularly the Social Responsibilities Round Table, has been an outspoken and courageous advocate on behalf of women’s rights and women’s issues.
6. Not only has the ALA taken stands on behalf of women’s rights, it has passed resolutions on any number of issues including international wars and U.S. foreign policy.  Before running the world, shouldn’t the ALA put its own house in order on vital issues?
7. In view of the fact that Big Ben was never charged with any wrong doing, does that give him a pass?  Note:  Most of Eldrick (I refuse to call him Tiger) Woods’ sponsors dropped him even though he was never charged.
8. Should the ALA stop using athletes to promote libraries and reading?
9. What do you think the ALA will decide to do about this issue? 

Those are the questions.  To be honest….I have not made up my mind.  I keep flip flopping.  Have at it, ‘o merry band of bloggers.    Don’t forget to send this to any ALA people that you might know.  Thanks.

REMEMBER …THIS BLOG IS A GROUP EFFORT.  THANKS FOR YOUR HELP.

Today’s dilemma comes to us directly from a public librarian in the Pittsburgh metropolitan area.  Let’s help her out, shall we?

Pittsburgh has a long history of mediocre sports teams.  That’s why the Steelers of the National Football League are so revered in the city.  They have a proud tradition of winning.  In the past five years they have captured two Super Bowls.  The quarterback who engineered both of these Super Bowl triumphs is the man whom the city of Pittsburgh has affectionately nicknamed “Big Ben.”  His real name is Ben Roethlisberger.

Click on http://www.alastore.ala.org/detail.aspx?ID=1252 and you will see that Big Ben is not just a big name football player, he is also a big name library supporter.  That’s right, Ben is on that most treasured of all posters , the ALA READ poster.   As a result Ben is probably on the wall of every children’s library in the entire Pittsburgh metropolitan area. As such, he is a role model.  What little football fan in all of Western Pennsylvania doesn’t idolize Big Ben?

The problem, however, is that Big Ben has a big penchant for getting into big trouble.  Two years ago he recklessly crashed his motorcycle and almost died.  Last year he was the defendant in a civil lawsuit initiated by a woman in Colorado who alleged that Ben sexually assaulted her.  And just last month Ben was accused of sexual assault by a college student in Georgia. 

It’s important to note that these were allegations not indictments.  Ben was never arrested, charged, or prosecuted for these accusations.  It is also just as important to note however, that there was enough evidence in the Georgia police report of inappropriate behavior on Big Ben’s part that the Commissioner of the National Football League felt compelled to suspend him for six games, a very harsh punishment considering the hundreds of thousands of dollars Ben makes per game.

In short Ben’s image has gone from the kind of inspirational role model that the American Library Association likes to honor on its READ posters to a disgraceful thug.  Pure and simple, the people of Pittsburgh would appear to be fed up and outraged by Big Ben’s behavior.

One of those people who has turned against Big Ben is a library patron who has demanded that his READ poster be taken down from the wall of the children’s library in one of the suburban libraries in the Pittsburgh area.  The librarian e-mailed me this morning and asked me to blog about this issue.  She follows our blog and loves to read the many daily comments from all of you.  Quite simply, she would like your advice.

Should she take Big Ben’s poster down in deference to the demands of the outraged patron?  Or would that be an act of censorship.  You make the call.

QUESTIONS FOR OUR MERRY BAND OF BLOGGERS TO COMMENT ON:

1.        Should the librarian in question take down the poster or would this be an act of censorship initiated by a disgruntled patron?  Keep in mind that Big Ben has been neither arrested nor indicted.  Keep in mind also that he has been severely disciplined by the NFL.

2.       Would taking down Big Ben’s poster send an important message to the young people of the library’s community?

3.       Should the American Library Association stop marketing the Big Ben READ poster because of his behavior?

4.       Is the American Library Association making too big a risk when it highlights highly paid professional athletes in view of their proclivity to get into trouble?

5.       The book that Big Ben is holding in the READ poster is The Giving Tree.  Does the irony of this selection bear on your decision for questions 1 and 2 in that it invites ridicule.

6.       Is it misguided for adults to hold up athletes in general as role models?   Remember what basketball star Charles Barkley said, “I’m not paid to be a role model.  I’m paid to wreak havoc on the basketball court.”

7.       Should the American Library Association thank its lucky stars that it does not have Eldrick (I refuse to call him Tiger) Woods on a READ poster?

8.       Anything else you’d like to bring up on this topic?

REMEMBER THIS BLOG IS A GROUP EFFORT.  THANKS FOR YOUR HELP.  YOU GUYS ARE GREAT. 

Today’s post may get me into a lot of hot water with you guys because I’m taking on one of the library profession’s most sacred cows, but what the heck, this subject has been bugging me for 35 years.

In the past few weeks I have received two different comments on this blog about the importance of using staff potlucks as a morale booster.  I have just one question:  exactly whose morale are these potlucks supposed to raise?  Certainly not mine!   One of the reasons I took early retirement was to get away from staff potlucks forever. 

I am convinced that if potlucks are not an invention of librarians, at least librarians can take credit for having perfected them.  In one library where I worked we had four potlucks a year, four occasions for misusing my allotted sick leave.  That’s right.  I would call in sick the morning of the pot luck.    I hated  lying about being sick but darn it,  if I had gone to the potluck there’s a good chance I would have gotten sick anyway.

That’s reason number one for hating potlucks: food poisoning.  The average library refrigerator is no bigger than the fridge in your kitchen.  Try putting 20 or 30 or more casseroles in your refrigerator.  There’s no way.  So what happens?  These casseroles sit around on tables for hours.  Can you say spoilage?

Reason number two:  My experience is that you librarians are not as skillful at cooking and baking as you think you are.  Sure, your families tell you that your culinary creations are delicious, but that may be just to keep the peace.  Note to all the amateur library chefs out there in library world: just because you have access to the best cookbooks available…Julia Child you are not!

Reason number three: When you work with people 40 hours a week you notice their personal hygiene habits.  You know that Bette sneezes uncontrollably during pollen season, you know that Melvin never washes his hands in the men’s room,   you know that Frieda calls in sick a lot, you know that Edwina the children’s librarian never seems to be able to get the glitter off her hands, and you know that Hedda’s husband seems to be plagued with chronic gastro intestinal issues.  Question: do you really want to be eating their food?

Reason number four: Potlucks create absurd competitions.  Oh, it’s never stated, but it exists right below the surface.  Rosemary’s vegetarian lasagna has become an all time staff favorite.  Its legendary status makes everyone hate Rosemary just a little.  No one will ever admit to something this dastardly, but I swear in my 30 year career as an administrator, I had to deal with two potluck sabotages.  In one a jealous reference librarian secretly sprinkled copious amounts of salt on a cataloger’s three bean salad, and in another a circ clerk poured hot sauce into Rosemary’s famous lasagna.  Oh I forgot, we have these potlucks to create staff togetherness.  Yeah right.

Reason number five:  Speaking of being an administrator, if you are a director don’t eat for a couple of days before the potluck because every person on staff expects you to sample every dish and compliment it profusely even if it tastes rancid and moldy.   If you forget to try even one dish you will have ruined someone’s day.  You didn’t know being a human lab rat was part of the director’s  job description, did you?

Reason number six: Staying with the administrative thing, did you ever stop to calculate the number of lost staff hours?  Time is wasted a) planning the big event, b) announcing and publicizing the big event, c) setting the date, time, and location, d) coordinating the sign-up sheet so that dishes are evenly distributed between sides, main entrees, desserts, and beverages,  e) mediating the absurd conflicts that take place when John and Joanne both sign up for marshmallow fluff,  g) warming up dishes, h) setting up the buffet table, i) hauling in the food, j) gossiping about who brought what, k) taking a two hour lunch break to enjoy everyone’s company, l) cleaning up, and m) mediating the finger pointing that takes place when a bunch of people get food poisoning and try to pinpoint which dish was the cause and which staff member was the cook. 

Reason number seven: There are people like me who have no interest in and talent for cooking for other people.  We are looked down upon when we sign up for napkins, plates, cups, utensils, and paper tablecloths.  I still bear the scars from a potluck of 33 years ago when I signed up to bring the so-called  dry goods.  I got everything at Kmart, and it was all white.  I will never forget how Betty the Head Circ Clerk and the Czar of Potlucks ripped into me in front of my co-workers: “WILL, DON’T YOU KNOW THE THEME FOR THIS POTLUCK IS AUTUMN LEAVES ARE FALLING?  YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO BRING CUPS AND PLATES AND TABLE CLOTHS WITH LEAVES, CORN HUSKS, HAY STACKS, GEESE AND DUCKS, SCARECROWS, AND FARM HOUSES.  EVERYTHING YOU BROUGHT IS BLANK WHITE.  THIS WILL RUIN OUR ATMOSPHERE. YOU ARE A PARTY POOPER.  YOU INTENTIONALLY DID THIS BECAUSE EVERYONE KNOWS YOU HATE POTLUCKS!!!”

Okay, you’re probably getting the point that I’m carrying around a lot of baggage here.  But eventually I did get my revenge.  When I became the top man, I made a high level executive decision and ushered in a new era in themed potlucks.  Every Christmas I mandated that the Winter Holiday potluck would be a fruitcake party.  Everyone was to bring in a fruitcake that they had received the previous Christmas.  These weren’t particularly well attended events, but there wasn’t any spoilage, and the fruitcakes that weren’t eaten made great bookends.

QUESTIONS FOR OUR MERRY BAND OF BLOGGERS TO COMMENT ON:

1.       Be honest.  Do you enjoy potlucks? 

2.       Are potlucks effective in enhancing staff morale and creating a warm and wholesome atmosphere of togetherness.

3.       Do you resent the time that the “staff social butterflies” spend organizing special food events like potlucks?

4.       Wouldn’t a group happy hour be a healthier and happier staff bonding experience?

5.       Do you think my 7 reasons for hating potlucks are legitimate or so much hot air from a guy who has had a series of really bad potluck experiences. Feel free to rip me apart on this issue if you think I deserve it because I’m not changing my mind.  I hate potlucks.

6.       What’s wrong with just hiring a catering service and having everyone chip in to pay for it?

7.       Is there anything else you want to say about potlucks?

REMEMBER THIS BLOG IS A GROUP EFFORT.  THANKS FOR YOUR HELP. YOU GUYS ARE GREAT.

My favorite politician by far is Vice President Joe Biden.  The big knock on Joe is that he is a loose cannon.  That’s precisely why I love the man.  God forbid that a politician would actually say something plain spoken with no varnish on it.  I thought that honest dialogue was the very foundation of democracy, but Joe is always getting himself in trouble for being politically incorrect.

The latest instance of this occurred at the signing of the health care bill.  He leaned over to President Obama and whispered into his ear “This is a big fucking deal.”  Joe’s problem is that the cameras and microphones picked up the f bomb, and almost instantly poor Joe was sucked into the maelstrom of yet another controversy. 

Interestingly enough,  however, now that a few weeks have gone by, I think that you would have to say that Joe seems to have gained political capital rather than lost it from his injudicious use of the f bomb.  For one thing, many people thought it was darned funny, and for another thing, the f bomb has become pretty commonplace.  What’s the big deal?  Kudos to a plain spoken politician who talks like the rest of us. 

On the golf course yesterday I played with a man named Lester.  Lester did not have a good day.  If there was a sand trap that Lester didn’t hit his ball into I didn’t see it.  Lester had an odd way of talking to himself.   In fact he held a running dialogue with himself.  It was if I didn’t exist.  Here’s a verbatim example.  “Damnit, Lester,  you fucking asshole, if you would keep your fucking head down, you might be able to hit the fucking ball someplace other than the fucking sand trap.”  This stream of dialogue went on for a good two hours. Was I offended?  No.  It was all I could do to keep a straight face.  It was funny to watch a man call himself by his first name.  

But here’s a serious question: are you blog readers offended that I quoted Lester verbatim?  Should I have used more politically correct substitutes for the f word like effing or freaking or fricking or flippin’ or fugging or f**king or bleeping?  Had I used the substitute f words would some of you have been offended because you thought that I thought that you couldn’t handle the real thing?

Language is complicated isn’t it?  Swear words have become so commonplace that you almost need to use them at times to get your point across.  A few years ago I had fallen in the bad habit of swearing too much.  To fix my problem I researched substitutes.  But people laughed at me.  Instead of saying, “This is bullshit,” I would say “This is balderdash.”  It wasn’t effective.  People didn’t take me seriously.  Sometimes there is no substitute for the real thing. 

The effective use of swear words is truly an art form.  35 years ago we got a new boss at my library.  He got everyone together at a staff meeting and said, “The board has brought me in here to whip you pissants into shape.”  I think this man thought he was projecting an image of strength.  In those days intimidation was a viable management tactic (today it is basically forbidden).  Were we intimidated?  Absolutely not.  We were more confused than anything else. 

No one really knew what a pissant was.  The first thing we librarians did after the meeting was go directly to the reference books.  Here’s what we found out: The pissant is an ant that makes a mounded nest.  It derives its name from the urine-like odor produced by its nesting material—needles and straw from pine trees—and the formic acid that constitutes its venom.  This made us even more confused.  None of us had bedwetting issues. 

A colleague named Sandra suggested we consult the slang dictionaries.  This made more sense because we learned that a pissant is a worthless or inconsequential human being.  This director clearly was looking after our best interests because he wanted to make something worthwhile out of us. 

Too bad he never had a chance.  He was history within a year, and all the pissants celebrated. 

QUESTIONS FOR OUR MERRY BAND OF BLOGGERS TO COMMENT ON:

1.       Do you think American discourse has gotten too coarse? Explain.

2.       Are you offended that I quoted Lester verbatim?

3.       Would you be more offended had I used “f” substitutes?

4.       Let’s say you’re in a library staff meeting and you accidentally drop an f bomb.  Should you be reprimanded?  Disciplined?  Why?

5.       Do you feel as I do that sometimes only a well chosen swear word can get your point across (assuming children are not present)?

6.       How about the word “suck.”  This word has become very commonplace and is no longer considered a swear word.  This bothers me.  Does it bother you?

7.       Is there anything else that you pissants want to comment on?

REMEMBER THIS BLOG IS A GROUP EFFORT.  THANKS FOR YOUR HELP.

Has it really been forty years?  Was that young guy sitting in the back row and cracking jokes about the alien origin of catalogers really me?  It seems impossible but here I am four decades later a retired librarian. 

I love it when people ask me, “What do you do for a living?”  With a big smile I tell them that I am retired.  They look at me with surprise and say any number of things: “Oh, I didn’t know people retired anymore” or “You look too young to be put out to pasture” or “What do you do all day; it must be boring” or “You’ll get tired of that” or “Do you realize that 50% of the people who retire die within 5 years?”  Well, yeah! Of course they die within five years.  That’s because most Americans don’t retire until health issues force them to retire.

Sometimes when we start discussing generational issues on this blog, I sense a lot of resentment toward retired people and a lot of resistance to retirement.  I realize a lot of that has to do with you younger librarians being stuck with our Social Security payments and Medicare premiums.  I can understand that.  But there may be other factors at play like those older librarians who have given their lives to the profession and are imbued  with a very strong American work ethic that disapproves of too much leisure time…the old “an idle mind is the devil’s workshop” argument. 

Let’s look at retired guy.  He doesn’t need to set an alarm clock. He doesn’t have to kowtow to a boss or a board.  He doesn’t have to waste time commuting to work. He no longer has to search for excellence, join a quality circle, shift paradigms, plan strategically, manage by objectives, find out where the cheese has been moved, avoid a tipping point, or be evaluated by a quantifiable assessment component.  Best of all, he can wear pajamas all day long and pretend that they are an exercise outfit.  Or he can wear an exercise outfit all day and pretend that it is a pair of pajamas. 

Let’s look at unretired guy.  He gets an upset stomach every time his boss walks by his work station.  He hates the stress of the rush hour commute.  He worries about the rumors of an impending downsizing. He constantly has to adapt to new technologies, new managers, and new management theories.  He has to be nice to toxic co-workers or risk being labeled as a “non team player.”  He has to tolerate bad bosses.  Basically he has to live the life of a puppet on a string. 

Isn’t it natural that working guy resents retired guy?  The whole concept of some people being able to retire and others having to work until they get terminally ill becomes one more depressing sign of an unfair and unfriendly universe. To put some moral structure to this sagging universe, working guy grasps on to the very American notion that work is good for the soul and that leisure is self indulgent and can lead to sloth, which we all know is one of the seven cardinal sins. 

In America work is how we define ourselves.  When someone asks you what you “do,” they are looking for an occupation, not a life’s calling.  They want to know if you are a butcher, a baker, or a candlestick maker; not a husband, father, or grandfather.  The American work ethic is solidly engrained in us at an early age.  In fact it is firmly rooted in the puritanical notion that a hard worker who derives a visible material gain from his labor is seen as being blessed by God.  If productive work is intrinsically good, then it stands to reason that the concept of non-productive leisure is intrinsically bad.   It’s just too self indulgent.

Consider the various slang terms for retirement:

                Being put out to pasture.

                Being sent to the glue factory.

                Hanging up the spikes.

                Riding into the sunset.

                Being put on the shelf.

                Moving to the raisin ranch.

                Getting the golden watch.

                 Joining the “Over the Hill” gang.

All of these images involve the concept of uselessness.  A person who was once a productive worker is now being warehoused to a storage facility of spare and obsolete parts.  The underlying sentiment here seems to be more of pity than scorn. 

The retiree is not necessarily a bad person for abandoning the American workaday world, he’s more a victim of the aging process in a culture that glorifies youth.  If a person’s worth is defined by work, a permanently non working person is, well, worthless.   That’s not exactly a concept that builds good self esteem. 

Better to keep working, working, working until you die, die, die.

Questions for our Merry Band of Bloggers to Comment On:

1.        What is your view of retirement: dead end or new beginning?

2.       Are you more resentful of a) the people who are retired and living a life of leisure or b) the people in your library who refuse to retire and open up jobs for new MLS graduates.

3.       Would you like to see a mandatory retirement age (62 or 65) to keep the workforce more fluid?

4.       Do you think that retirees who are supported from state or federal pension plans and/or Social Security payments should be required to “give back” to society through volunteerism.

5.       This is a personal question: Do you largely define yourself by your job or by other roles.  For instance, when a stranger asks you “What do you do?” how do you answer?

6.       Are you looking forward to retirement or do you dread it because you will be old and “over the hill?”

7.       Is there anything else you want to chime in on with regards to retirement?

REMEMBER, THIS BLOG IS A GROUP EFFORT.  YOU GUYS ARE GREAT.  THANKS.

Dinosaurs, dinosaurs, dinosaurs…preschoolers just can’t get enough dinosaurs into their lives. 

There are dinosaur  t.v. shows, videogames, tee shirts, napkins, party plates, drinking cups, baseball bats, soccer balls…the list goes on and on.  Did I mention books?  Good grief, if your children’s department doesn’t have at least 50 dinosaur books for kids of all ages, you’d better think about selling off a few computers and buying  some.  That’s right, dinosaurs are more popular than computers.  What’s the most popular part of the library story hours that our kids attend?  You got it…the dinosaur march.

Personally I don’t get it.  Dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago, but kids just don’t seem to get that whole extinction concept, especially the preschoolers.  Take one to the zoo, and the first thing you hear is “Grandpa, I don’t care about the otter tank, I want to see the dinosaurs.”  Hint: if you want to be a really cool Grandpa you might want to hold off on that zoo excursion until the concept of extinction firms up a bit.  Otherwise you’re in for a day of frustration.  “Tigers…who cares about tigers?  I want to see a T Rex!” 

Yesterday while I was keeping an eye on Sophia (2) and Connor (4) as they were riding their bikes around the driveway, I was trying to pick up some random abandoned toys and tidy things up a bit (the cataloger in me).  Inside Connor’s firefighter’s helmet was a lizard.  I figured it was a plastic lizard from the sand box, so I reached down to pick it up but realized instantly that it was a real lizard.  I held it tightly in my right hand, went over to my car, opened up the trunk (which is a veritable toy box) and pulled out a bug jar, into which I deposited the lizard.

Connor watched the whole thing and came running over.  He peered into the bug jar and screamed, “GRANDPA, YOU ARE SO COOL.  YOU’VE CAPTURED A BABY DINOSAUR!!!”  The thought occurred to me that I should explain to Connor that lizards are very, very, very distant relatives of dinosaurs, but then I thought what the heck, it’s downright satisfying to finally be considered a cool grandpa.  I’m going to bask in the glory that accrues to all successful dinosaur hunters.

That night I saw my son Stephen at swimming lessons.  Stephen is Connor’s Dad.  While Connor was in the pool, I said to Stephen, “Did Connor tell you I captured a baby dinosaur?”

Stephen looked me in the eye and said, “Sorry to burst your bubble, old man, but you caught a dead lizard.”

“Hmm.  No wonder it didn’t squirm when I grabbed it.”

“Does Connor know it’s dead?”

“Not yet.”

“Well when you explain to him that it’s dead, you might want to work in that whole extinction thing.”

“Thanks.”

NOTE TO THE MANY LIBRARIANS WHO CLICKED ON TO WILL UNWOUND THIS WEEK FOR THE FIRST TIME: Each weekend we noodle through a hypothetical reader’s advisory challenge.  It’s fun, it’s a group effort, and it’s a great way to stay in touch with a part of our craft that you might not practice very much on your job.  Welcome aboard and don’t be shy. Reader’s advisory work is an art and a craft, not a science.  No one has all the “right” answers.

The most important person in the Obama White House might very well be a 72 year old woman named Mrs. Marian Robinson, and I’ll bet that most of you have no idea who she is.  Marian Robinson is our nation’s “First Granny.”   She is the mother of First Lady, Michelle Obama, and she is the full time live-in caregiver of Michelle and Barack’s two young daughters.

Now here’s another trivia question for you: Do you know the names and ages of the two Obama girls?  I have to admit that I had to look up that info: Malia is 12 and Sasha is 9.  The Obamas have done such a wonderful job of sheltering these children from the media that we don’t even know their names. Contrast this approach with the way the Clintons hung poor Chelsea out to dry with one photo op after another to create an image of the perfect American family. 

Kudos to Mrs. Robinson.  She seems to be the rare Presidential relative who has no agenda other than to care for two children.  Remember Jimmy Carter’s mother, Lillian?  She couldn’t seem to get enough publicity, and how about brother Billy?  He certainly created his own pile of embarrassments for the Carter White House. Speaking of grandmothers, it always seemed that Clinton’s mother, Virginia, managed to get herself into the tabs whenever she was feeling neglected.

No, you really don’t fully appreciate Mrs. Robinson until you think back to the family member fiascos in other Presidential administrations. She carries herself with pride, dignity, and modesty.  For her it really is “all about the kids,” and that is why she is standing at the Reader’s Advisory Desk and asking for help from all of you.  She wants books for her granddaughters that will capture their interest and increase their love of great literature.  I realize that quality is a quaint and sometimes controversial concept in the modern library profession because many feel that the very term itself is elitist, but Mrs. Robinson is insistent.  She wants quality for her grandgirls.  

Before you adult services librarians abandon this little hypothetical exercise to the children’s librarians, stick with me.  There is an important role for you to play because we will be discussing the books that we read in our childhood that meant the most to us.  So…hang in there. Your perspective is valuable.

As always, I will take the first shot at this challenge.  Because the Obama girls have been so well protected from media scrutiny, I don’t know a lot about them.  I know they have a dog and I know that their father has read all the Harry Potter books to them.  I also know that Mrs. Robinson is insisting on quality.  With that in mind I hazard forth my choices.  Since, I am not a children’s literature specialist , I am going to rely a lot on what books shaped my childhood and turned me on to a love of literature.  These are the books that I have wonderful memories of from 45 to 50 years ago.  I thank the Lord everyday for the Mother I was blessed with.  She either read these books to me or nudged me to read them:

1.       The Freddy the Pig Books by Walter Brooks – Freddy is the pig for all problems.

2.       The Pooh books by A.A. Milne – Too bad Disney had to hijack Milne’s wonderful characters.

3.       Charlotte’s Web and Stuart Little by E.B. White – Who can argue with these two?

4.       Rabbit Hill and The Tough Winter by Robert Lawson – More relevant today than ever before.

5.       Anne of Green Gables by Lucy Maud Montgomery – Anne is a great role model.

This is my list.  Children’s librarians may want to dissect it a bit, but these are books I cherish after 50 or so years. I figure they have stood the test of time and the Obama girls will enjoy them as much as I did.

QUESTIONS FOR ALL OF YOU BOOK LOVERS TO COMMENT ON:

1. What books would you recommend to Mrs. Robinson?
2. Would you give her a list of all Newbery Award winners as representing the best of the best in children’s literature?
3. Is the concept of quality outmoded?
4. What books from your childhood do you still cherish?
5. Was there one author or book more than any others that led you to a love of literature?
6. Did you have a clue when you were young that you might want to be a librarian?

Thanks for your help on these questions.  You guys are great. Now have some fun with this!

From all the interviews I have done this week on the infamous 18 year old unscientific “Librarians and Sex Survey” (see Will Unwound #78,# 79, and #87), I offer the following observations:

1. Most of the interviewers (primarily radio jocks and bloggers as well as a few newspaper reporters) didn’t give a hoot when I told them the survey was old and unscientific.  A couple even asked me what I meant by “unscientific.”
2. The PeeWee Herman question garnered the most interest.  I was asked several times about my PeeWee Herman theories.  Weird.
3. The “finding” that 20% of the respondents have had sex in a library was widely reported as 20% of all librarians have had sex in a library and that it was on the job.  I worked very hard to say that the 20% number was from the universe of a very unscientific, non random sample.  The response I got was sort of “what universe are you from…planet library?”  I also worked real hard at explaining that most of the “intimacy between the stacks” probably occurred in the respondents’ college days and certainly not on the job.   I had to explain that in the 50s and 60s when many of the respondents came of age, that trysting opportunities in college were far more limited than they are today.  Plus the old style of library architecture provided private alcoves, nooks, and crannies not available in the modern open architecture of today.
4. The 8% participation in an intimate moment in an elevator was also highlighted.  I attributed that to two movies popular in the 1980s that featured steamy elevator scenes: Class and Fatal Attraction. Apparently, life imitates Hollywood to some extent. Although yesterday, I received a very, very weird letter from someone (postscript Dallas, Texas) claiming that in the late 80s she spread the word  in the library profession about the “pulsating, throbbing thrill” of “getting it on” in an elevator and then remorsefully described her resultant addiction to it.  I have a hunch that this anonymous person really is a librarian because she wanted me to use my blog to tell all librarian sex addicts to check out “an important and valuable” new resource on the subject, a book by Susan Cheever  (daughter of the famous novelist John Cheever) entitled Desire: Where Sex Meets Addiction (Simon and Schuster).   I suppose this woman works in reader’s advisory.
5. Most surprising was the conclusion that many interviewers took…that this “survey” validated their perception that if you in the words of one interviewer “yank off the glasses and pull the pin out of the hair bun” the female librarian becomes a Madonna.  I said that this stereotype was news to me because I had always thought the “hair in the bun” librarian was a prim and proper shusher with no redeeming warmth.   
6. For what it’s worth nothing was said or questioned about male librarians or male librarian stereotypes.
7. Our blog went international this week.  As information specialists you will want to click on these websites from France, Germany, Canada, New Zealand, and Cleveland (Cleveland is a foreign country isn’t it?) to see the truly world wide web at work.  I am very surprised that our blog has not been linked from England, Ireland, or Australia.

http://symphoniedesmots.canalblog.com/archives/2010/04/20/17637746.html

http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/blogs/moatas-blog-idle/3609786/Librarians-do-it-by-the-book

http://smartwoman.hotnews.ro/pozitia-bibliotecarilor-vis-a-vis-de-sex-la-locul-de-munca-automate-de-prezervative-in-biblioteci-si-filme-sexy-pentru-imprumut.html

http://11k2.wordpress.com/2010/04/20/sex-in-buchereien-und-fahrstuhlen/

http://www.actualitte.com/actualite/18507-sexualite-enquete-bibliotheques-sondage-pratiques.htm

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/04/19/2010-04-19_lost_librarian_survey_reveals_1in5_have_gotten_intimate_in_the_stacks.html

http://www.bookninja.com/?p=7591

http://clevelandleader.com/comment/reply/13677

QUESTIONS OF THE DAY FOR OUR MERRY BAND OF COMMENTERS:

1.  Anything surprising to you about my experience with the “media?”
2. Are you as shocked as I was about the “yank off the glasses” and “pull the pin out of the bun” and “Madonna” appears image?
3. What are your thoughts about the way librarians were pictorially portrayed in the web sites listed above from around the world?  Why hasn’t our blog been linked from England, Ireland, or Australia?
4. Do you agree with my assessment about the 20% intimacy in the stacks statistic?
5. Do you have any plausible PeeWee Herman or elevator theories?
6. Feel free to comment about anything else related to today’s post. 

REMEMBER…THIS BLOG IS A GROUP EFFORT.  YOU GUYS ARE GREAT!

You know how there is a new management theory every year?  One year you’re searching for excellence, the next year you’re forming quality circles, and then the next year you’re supposed to  forget about excellence and quality and settle for something really mediocre like the “new normal” because, hey, we’re in the middle of the Great Recession.  That management du jour stuff is basically harmless unless you take it seriously, which unfortunately a lot of managers and directors do.  It’s time and money wasted on some guru who is sipping Pinot Grigio on his yacht while you’re working through the unrealistic case studies in the 3 ring binder that he has cleverly marketed to your HR Department. 

Having said that, I will admit that in my 30 year career as a public manager, there was one seminar, in the over 50 seminars that I was forced to sit through, that I thought was any good.  I don’t even remember the name of the seminar, but it was about getting a better understanding of the members of your staff by understanding more about the generational cohorts to which they belong.

At the time of the seminar our work force was made up of the Depression Generation people (frugal, focused on job security, fearful of the future), the World War II Generation folks (patriotic, proud, and “we fought our war, now you fight yours”),  the Baby Boomers (it’s all about me),  Generation X (freedom, flexibility, job mobility, computers, slackers, and telecommuting), and finally the work force is now starting to absorb the Net Genners (iPod, iTouch, iPad).

That seminar was  20 or so years ago.  Have things changed? Well, we baby boomers are acting in a very predictable way.  Our generation always has a motto.  Back in the sixties, it was “You Can’t Trust Anyone Over 30.”  Now it’s ”60 is the new 35.”   The world revolves around us, and it always will.  Sorry about that Gen X. Can you visualize the banner in the rec center of a 2030 boomer adult assisted living center with people shuffling around with walkers….”85 IS THE NEW 49!”   No surprise there.  We boomers aren’t going to change.  It *is* all about us.

 What has surprised me is what is happening , at least judging from some of the comments I’ve read on this blog, to the Gen Xers.  Are they getting a bit grumpy or what?  Or were they always a bit grumpy?  Who could blame them?  The whole time they were growing up they were stuck with the table scraps left over from the boomers and now they’re having to pay for our Social Security and Medicare.  But they’re getting it from the other side too.  The Net Genners are treating the X Genners like they don’t know what a computer is.  As a result,  members of  generation X seem to be tangled up in a  murky middle, just as they are entering  their middle age years.  Let’s be nice to them and try not to tick them off.

Is there any validity to all this generation stuff?   Personally, I think there is.  A few months ago my son Stephen had to make a career decision.  He’s a computer engineer (no, he’s not adopted and no, he’s not a changeling!), and he had worked for a Silicon Valley computer company for over ten years, which is very unusual.  Then he got an offer from a start up company.   He asked me for advice (miracles do happen!).  I strongly advised him not to make the change given the state of the economy  and the size of his mortgage.  The next day he called me to say that he had made a decision, and that he was going to go with the start-up.  Sarcastically, I thanked him for following my advice.   “Oh, but I did follow your advice, Dad, I did the exact opposite of your recommendation.  You represent an outdated paradigm of the world of work and so I wanted to do the opposite of what you advised.  You were a very valuable resource. Thanks“

“You’re welcome,” I responded softly.  Maybe 60 is not the new 35.

Questions of the Day for Our Merry Band of Commenters

1.       60 is the new ____?

2.       In your libraries do you notice different work habits and attitudes for employees from different generational cohorts?

3.       Should catalogers be allowed to telecommute? Should reference librarians be allowed to telecommute?

4.       Should library managers and supervisors treat employees differently based on generational backgrounds?

5.       Should boomers start retiring to make room for all the unemployed kids coming out of library school?

6.       Are Generation Xers getting grumpier?

7.       Do you have anything else pertaining to the generational topic that you want to discuss?

BLOG UPDATE:  THE BIG NEWS TODAY IS THAT OUR BLOG HAS GONE  INTERNATIONAL.  BLOGS AND NEWS SITES FROM LATIN AMERICA AND EUROPE HAVE LINKED ON TO WILL UNWOUND.  TODAY WE HAD OVER  EIGHT THOUSAND READERS AND A BUNCH OF NEW SUBSCRIBERS.  YOU GUYS ARE GREAT!  THANKS.

We know that the machines in our libraries are getting smarter, but how about our patrons? 

In the past when people would ask me if libraries have a future my response was always “Yes, because patrons bring a never ending stream of cluelessness to the reference desk. They need our help.”  I wonder if that still holds true.  I hope you all can enlighten me about your patrons.  Judging from all the  bright yellow books that are being written for “dummies” and the bright orange books that are being written for “idiots,” I have to assume that it is still true that  the human race needs us to point them the way to wisdom, knowledge, and information.  Has much changed since I retired 2 years ago?

When I was a working librarian, one of my favorite activities was writing down stupid reference questions.  Remember David Letterman’s “Stupid Pet Tricks” routine?  Well, I developed a stupid reference question routine.  Here are some of my favorites:

Patron- Does this library have any information of King Malcolm the Tenth?

Reference Librarian – You mean the King from the play, Macbeth?

P – No I mean the civil rights leader.

RL – Oh, you mean Malcolm X.

P – I need to interview a schizophrenic.  Can you refer me to one?

RL – Maybe you should see a psychiatrist.

P- Do you have a videotape of Abraham Lincoln giving the Gettysburg address?

RL – No, we don’t.

P –   You should get it.  You have Bush on tape, and Lincoln was a greater President.

RL – Thanks for that historical analysis.

P- Do you have a good English translation of Hamlet?

 RL – Yes, it’s by a man named William Shakespeare…very close to the original.

P – Who invented the time machine?

 RL – H.G. Wells

P – I need information on the car BMW.  How do you spell it?

 RL – Go to the head of the class…you just did.

P – Why were so many Civil War battles fought in national parks?

RL – Trees provided great protection from bullets.

P – Do you have an audio tape of live dinosaur sounds?

 RL – No, but you might want to try the zoo.

P –  I need information on the woman named Rosetta Stone.

RL – Good luck.  Let me know when you find it.

P- I need books on youth in Africa.

RL – You need books on young people in Africa?

P – No I need books about killing old people and vegetables.

RL – Oh, you have the wrong continent.  That’s youth in Asia.

P – Is the correct term Swiss or Swedish?

RL – Yes.

P – I want to get the Gutenberg Bible on inter-library loan.

RL – That depends. Will you pay the shipping costs?

P – Do you have a copy of the Jerusalem newspaper on the day Jesus was born?

RL – No, but it might be on microfiche.

P- I need a book on impudence.

RL – Can you be more specific?

P – My husband can’t sustain an erection.

P – I need a cookbook for preparing dog food.

RL – You mean like kibbles and bits?

P – No for preparing a roast dachshund.

P – Is this library a government suppository?

RL – Sometimes it seems like it is.

P – I need a biography of a prehistoric man.

RL – How about Ralph the Hairy?

P – I need all the books on this bibliography by the man named Ibid.

RL – You must be a rocket scientist.

I have lists of such intelligent information requests but I can always use more.  Today’s questions for comments:

A-     Machines are getting smarter.  Are patrons? Are public schools getting better or worse?

B-      Give me your best stupid reference questions or weirdest reference encounters.

C-      Is it disrespectful for librarians to make fun of patrons behind their backs?

D-     Do libraries and librarians have a future?

Blog Update – We had 9,200 readers on the blog today (thank you Norman Oder of LJ), and I did 5 radio interviews and a Yahoo interview.  Someone just reported that we made the Today Show with Kathy Lee and Hoda. Tomorrow is another day.  Enjoy the ride, my librarian friends.  This has been fun.  This blog is definitely turning into a group effort and I’m very appreciative of that.  You guys are great!