Leigh Article

First of all I have to commend the ALA for recognizing the value that could come from an inquiry like this but I wonder if everyone anticipated what was going to be said or if anyone was surprised or upset.

I found some problems with Leigh’s six assumptions. For one he assumed that librarians would exert ultimate control over management which I take to include management of the collection. He puts a lot of emphasis on librarians “as conservators of the classical and permanently valuable in knowledge, morals and taste” as if them things won’t change.

Under the “Direction of Development” chapter Leigh states that libraries that supply books based on patron demand are controversial minority which makes some sense when one considers his above assumptions but still seems like a very closed minded view for someone who has done such an extensive study on libraries. Leigh goes one to use what seems like circular reasoning to claim that demand oriented collections would mean that the present library system are “irrelevant or hopelessly inadequate” to choose popular texts. Leigh does express the fear that libraries that serve the purpose of entertainment versus education run the risk of abandoning its role in a larger information/ communications system.

Leigh’s elitist ideas and contradictions concerning collections continue when he advises libraries to choose quality texts over popular ones and to keep in mind that book choice should be objective in relation to the criticisms of the day.
I didn’t disagree with everything that Leigh said. I think he made some good points about how library boards and librarians need to work together to make a careful mission statement and specific plan concerning the goals of individual libraries.