Karen Coyle, someone we recognize as one of librarianship's clear-thinking thought leaders, said recently:
See the post for the referrents of 'this'. Her post is on the general topic of dystopias in the modern information age, and heaven knows there is plenty to feel dystopic about. But, if we want libraries (as she also says) to be of the Web, then why paint Google as the bugbear that threatens our future? Indeed, I would argue there is no single organization in the Age of the Web that has done more to improve access to information in general, and research specifically, than has Google. Google Books is something we didn't have the wherewithal to accomplish, even if we had had the vision. Google Scholar on the other hand, we have no excuse for not having done within our own community. It was doable. A failure of imagination. In a sense I suppose Karen and I are converging on the same position from different sides. Google abhors a vaccuum. Some parts of that vaccuum should have been backfilled by libraries. Other parts are simply beyond the resources, the imagination, and the organizational coherence that librarianship can muster.
Karen is frustrated by this. Lots of us are. But I find it in no way dystopic that Google has rushed in where librarians are too impoverished or too limited in vision to tread. Google (and Amazon, and Yahoo, and maybe even Bing) have already decided the future of libraries and research by putting information products and services in place that we couldn't, or didn't, imagine. But I belabor the obvious. The indirect benefit is also fairly obvious -- by invading territory we once imagined as 'ours', they have forced upon us a re-examination of our profession and what it means to be charged with looking after both the legacy paper and our slippery digital assets.
Karen rightly argues that there is danger in the mismatch between Amazoogle business models and the long term management of cultural heritage assets, and i strongly agree with this point. But I can't even imagine the overstretched resources of our community providing a tractable alternative with a prayer of gaining more than a small fraction of the search market (another failure of imagination?). I used to worry about this. I don't any more. Search platforms come and go (remember Altavista?), and if Google seems invincible now, we know that it isn't really. Libraries need to make damned sure that our digital assets are safely cared for, and that they are accessible according to standard web protocols that will survive corporate upheavals. Leave search to the marketplace. Its as changeable as last year's microprocessor platforms, and we don't feel compelled to be part of the engineering of those platforms, even though we use them to manage our stuff.
-----
Image: These screens, at the Nezu Museum in Tokyo, are designated national treasures, and the signature pieces of this wonderful museum. Built by a railroad baron, and still maintained privately in the Nezu family, this museum has a small, select collection of Asian statuary, ancient Chinese bronzes, a smattering of furniture and ceramics, some spectacular screens, and even a couple of 'sparkle plenty!' clocks. It is situated in a beautiful building that is at once traditional and ever-so-modern. But best of all, it has an extensive stone-lantern-studded-garden that features a pond with, yes, actual irises that were in explosive bloom on the occasion of my visit. The Nezu is my new favorite place in Tokyo. Eight bucks for a latte in the cafe-with-a-view, and darned well worth it. Thanks to Jan Askhoej for the tip. More pictures in the Nezu Museum set on my Flickr account [Warning note: Please be apart from the statues, when the earthquake occurs]
