College and Research Libraries dissertations on classification technique. However, it is in terms of the depth and maturity of its deeper function—as a collec- tive focus and appeal for research—that the Dorking Conference will either prove viable or wanting in the years ahead. As a crystallizing medium for needed re- search, the Dorking Conference may prove limited to a certain extent by its inferential definition of research. T o be sure, if all of the successive recommendations were ful- filled, applied knowledge and technological know-how in classification and information retrieval would unquestionably be enriched. Research, for example, is called for in the area of analysis (facet, relational, codifying, semantic, synthetic, and linguistic). Research is also proposed in the development of clas- sification schedules, and in the designing of a universal scheme. Upon review, these rec- ommendations, given great weight and de- tail at Dorking, would appear to gravitate more about classification engineering than classification research, and to lend themselves more to mechanical and technological in- ventiveness than to the objective methods of academic research. Much less emphasis is placed upon logi- cally researchable areas such as quantitative and qualitative usage studies, and compara- tive analysis of internal characteristics of information systems, such as relative effi- ciency or cost. These vital areas, awaiting fuller research, are defined in the Dorking recommendations but with detectably low- ered enthusiasm and reduced detail. It is interesting, for example, to compare the maturity and foresight which accompanies their description at Dorking, with the re- search prospectus of the Washington Inter- national Conference on Scientific Informa- tion, 1958, which de-emphasizes application and technique in order to isolate, in a highly detailed manner, those areas lending them- selves to a variety of objective research meth- ods. It is quite possible that the ideas ex- pressed at the Washington Conference may have some influence in accelerating research in areas of classification and information re- trieval.—Frederic D. Weinstein, New Haven State Teachers College. Comment "Human Relations Training for Librarians? Yes, But—" T h e suggestion that library schools offer courses in interpersonal relations, as set out in the article, "Human Relations Training for Librarians?" (CRL, X I X (1958), 227-29) at first found this reader in agreement. T h e n he found himself resisting the pro- posal. Or at least doubting its efficacy. T h e proposition—that there is a definite need for librarians to study and understand the dynamics of human behavior—is beyond dispute. T h a t point was well made by Mr. Anderson and Dr. Kell. It is true that li- brary work is a service occupation-profes- sion: essentially, we help others carry out their purposes in pursuing the use of li- brary materials (and in so doing seek our own fulfillment). And it follows that we ought to work hard at comprehending the wondrous workings of the human mind and the complex of emotional responses which combine to produce motivation, attitudes, action, and reaction. Still, the writer wonders about the pro- posal that courses adapted specifically to human behavior in the library field be taught in library schools, or as part of li- brary school curriculum. In fairness to authors Anderson and Kell he freely ac- knowledges that it is easier to render cri- tiques of others' proposals than construct a recommendation of one's own. What follows is not intended as a rebuttal, but only a summation of the reasons for the doubt in his mind about the proposal. T h e proper study of man (in the sense under discussion) would seem to rest with the behavioral or social science faculty of- fering basic undergraduate instruction in sociology, psychology, philosophy, cultural anthropology (and perhaps a graduate course in human dynamics). Few persons probably would disagree with MARCH 1959 165 the point just made, but many librarians might reasonably ask, " W h a t of the library school student who has had little or no background in the social sciences? Would not a library course or two in human rela- tions at least help bridge this gap?" T h i s writer's answer would be a qualified yes, if said student were allowed or required to take a basic course(s) in the social science discipline, taught by the social science fac- ulty. Authors Anderson and Kell suggest that library schools emulate the medical, legal, and nursing professions in giving special in- struction on concrete human relations situa- tions in the field. Why not join hands with all service occupations and professions on campus and together request a good, solid course in human dynamics applicable to all interested groups—lawyers, librarians, jour- nalists, or whatever? It would seem a waste of faculty for each group to undertake this on its own. Human relations as applied specifically to librarians, to lawyers, doctors, and other such groups would seem a rather desperate attempt to give the students some background, that he has not acquired along the way. But why should any subject field adapt for itself, at the college level, fundamental theories which, once learned, can apply in all situations—in libraries as well as in oil fields? Human relations is nothing more than the study of human behavior; there is nothing on record which would indicate that librarians as a group, and the people with whom they come into contact, are sufficiently aberrant to warrant special attention. An applied course in human behavior, dealing with interpersonal relations in li- brary work, smacks too much to this writer of a Dale Carnegie, or power of positive cir- culation approach. Possibly it need not be so, but the situation does not in itself augur well for the best results. W h a t we are really after is not the acquisition of skill in manip- ulating people but the recognition of uni- versal values and hungers that, conditioned by environment and culture, make us some- times lovable, sometimes contrary, human beings who are to be cherished despite and perhaps because of our many weaknesses. After all is said about the best way of imparting the import of interpersonal com- munication through force feeding, this much still remains: T h e techniques and principles of personnel psychology can be taught and theoretically learned, if we feel this is im- portant enough for all library school stu- dents. But that rare quality of empathy— the ability to put one's self in another's posi- tion—comes (if it comes at all) in response to one's own motivation. T h a t motivation itself will be the sum total of personality, study, observation, and life experiences.— Frank D. Hankins, Librarian, Del Mar Col- lege, Corpus Christi, Texas. Rare Books Conference Sufficient e x p r e s s i o n s o f i n t e r e s t h a v e b e e n r e c e i v e d t o assure h o l d - i n g t h e R a r e B o o k s C o n f e r e n c e p l a n n e d by A C R L ' s R a r e B o o k s S e c t i o n f o r C h a r l o t t e s v i l l e , V i r g i n i a , J u n e 18-20. R e s e r v a t i o n f o r m s f o r t h e c o n f e r e n c e will b e m a i l e d i n a few days t o t h o s e w h o h a v e a l r e a d y m a d e t e n t a t i v e r e s e r v a t i o n s . O t h e r s s h o u l d re- q u e s t t h e m f r o m W i l l i a m H . R u n g e , A l d e r m a n L i b r a r y , U n i v e r s i t y o f V i r g i n i a , C h a r l o t t e s v i l l e , V i r g i n i a . T o t a l r e g i s t r a t i o n w i l l b e l i m i t e d , so e a r l y r e s e r v a t i o n s a r e a d v i s a b l e . T h e r e g i s t r a t i o n f e e o f $ 3 0 . 0 0 i n c l u d e s c o n f e r e n c e fees, a s i n g l e r o o m in a u n i v e r s i t y d o r m i t o r y f o r two n i g h t s , a n d s i x m e a l s in t h e s t u d e n t u n i o n . A l i m i t e d n u m b e r o f d o u b l e r o o m s f o r m a r r i e d c o u p l e s w i l l b e a v a i l a b l e at t h e s a m e f e e p e r p e r s o n . T h e en- t r a n c e f e e f o r r e g i s t r a n t s w i s h i n g to m a k e t h e i r o w n l i v i n g a r r a n g e m e n t s w i l l b e $ 2 5 . 0 0 , w i t h m e a l t i c k e t s a v a i l a b l e a t a d d i t i o n a l cost.