College and Research Libraries desired: teaching f r o m texts; big and im- personal lecture courses; objective tests; dull teachers who, according to Professor William C. Steere, inspired one s t u d e n t at Michigan to write: "Every student has some small spark of genius. It is the d u t y of the pro- fessor to water this spark." August Heckscher speaks of how the break-up of Community a n d the disintegra- tion of Authority have affected book read- ing. T h e problem is then examined from the viewpoint of the teacher: Professor Reu- ben A. Brower of H a r v a r d in discussing the humanities arouses much discussion about his techniques of "reading in slow motion." T h e social sciences are covered by Professor R o b e r t C. Angell of Michigan, and the sci- ences by Dr. Steere. H a r o l d Guinzburg, pub- lisher, a n d R a l p h E. Ellsworth, librarian, p u t stress on the importance of the accessi- bility of books through a college bookstore a n d library. Many ways to encourage more book read- ing are suggested by the conferees. Several q u o t e approvingly the recommendation of the President's Committee on Education Be- yond the H i g h School: " T h e Committee par- ticularly urges increasing emphasis on the development of educational methods which place larger responsibility for learning on the s t u d e n t himself." T h i s should force the u n d e r g r a d u a t e to t u r n more to the library a n d i n d e p e n d e n t reading. Dr. Ellsworth em- phasizes that the library must have the sup- port of the college administration in order to have t h e p r o p e r staff and resources to meet such demands. All agree, however, that incentive must be supplied by devoted teachers a n d effective teaching methods. W h a t , then, is discouraging about this symposium? Briefly, it is the discrepancy be- tween the ideal solutions offered here a n d the harsh reality of the formidable obstacles blocking t h e way to any practicable accom- plishment. Previous studies by Dr. Patricia K n a p p a n d testimony bv teachers at this conference indicate that the laudable objec- tives of the institution with regard to pro- moting lifetime reading interests are often at variance with the aims of a particular in- structor who is concerned with inculcating a narrowly defined body of knowledge. Mrs. R o b e r t a Keniston, librarian of the Michi- gan u n d e r g r a d u a t e library, warns that the library h a d better not try to dictate to the faculty how courses should be taught. Fur- thermore, D e a n Roger Heyns of Michigan admits that "many of the most conscientious university teachers today are not fully con- vinced about t h e primary place of reading in the learning process." Finally, several conferees stress the great importance of motivation in reading: moti- vation which is d e p e n d e n t u p o n the status of the scholar, intellectual (egg-head), and bookworm in American society. Unless the library can be made to seem as i m p o r t a n t a n d acceptable to the u n d e r g r a d u a t e as the student union, football, fraternities, and other symbols of social standing, book read- ing will be a minority activity. Can librarians make reading glamorous? Can they persuade teachers to stress the book? Can they inspire lifelong enthusiasm for book reading? If not, who will? Dean Asheim concludes with the admoni- tion that for college teachers, administrators, a n d librarians to read this stimulating book is not enough. Book reading must lead to book use, and achievement of some of the challenges in this book "can come only through constructive action, action stimu- lated a n d given direction by the ideas re- corded here."—Henry James, Jr., Ferguson Library, Stamford, Conn. Mean What You Say Mean What You Say: Proceedings of a Con- ference on Written and Oral Library Re- porting at the University of California, Santa Barbara, July 20-23, 1958 Ed. by Betty Rosenberg. (UCLA Library Occa- sional Papers, N u m b e r 10.) Los Angeles: University of California Library, 1959. xii, 85p. "I think of this conference as a conspiracy, bent on overthrowing the dullness, ambigu- ousness, formlessness, verboseness, jargon, that keep librarians from effectiveness when they write a n d speak. . . . T h i s is no light task. W e are like X e n o p h o n ' s Greeks, deep in the desert, ringed by laziness, indiffer- ence, fear, even despair, a n d the blue water is far away." W i t h these eloquent words (p. 2) Law- rence Clark Powell o p e n e d this conference. Anyone who has ever plodded through that 182 C O L L E G E A N D R E S E A R C H L I B R A R I E S vast wasteland whicli librarians, with un- conscious humor, call " T h e L i t e r a t u r e " will agree that there is need for such a task, a n d that the task is not light. But X e n o p h o n had one advantage: His little b a n d were experts, tough Greek sol- diers who knew what they wanted and how to get it. "Mean what you say," Betty Rosenberg named the conference, a n d she explained the title with a story (p. viii): " T h e n you should say what you mean," the March H a r e went on. " I do," Alice hastily replied; "at least— at least I mean what I say—that's the same thing, you know." " N o t the same t h i n g a bit!" said the H a t t e r . "Why, you might just as well say that 'I see what I eat' is the same thing as '1 eat what I see'." T h e H a t t e r won the prize, b u t Alice named the conference. Indeed, the story was introduced with a sentence on the "difficulty of making words say what we mean or mean what we say." Are the two, then, after all, identical? Ap- parently not, for later (p. 24 a n d 25) Miss Rosenberg cites with approval Sir Ernest Gowers (elsewhere, p. ix, called "Gower"): "Very few can write what they mean. . . ." It seems that the giant "Ambiguousness" has yet to be overthrown. Several misfortunes befell this latter day Anabasis. For o n e t h i n g there is language: "this t r e n d i n g p e r i o d " (p. 17); "research-type li- braries" (p. 32); "public-type library" (p. 32); " p r e c i p i t a t e " apparently intended to mean "work its way d o w n " (p. 54); "lengthen it o u t " (p. 61). Occasionally there are awkward clauses or sentences. "Now there is a great urge on the p a r t of editors, for myself also [why the 'for'?] to publish fine writing. . . . Literature with a capital 'L'. Once in a while we have one [one what?] which we feel we can use" (p. 22). ". . . I'm very much disgusted when they d o n ' t have in them exactly what I want, like, for instance, how long is t h e children's book room o p e n " (p. 36). " . . . T h e r e is noth- ing about scholarly writing that excludes liveliness a n d interest, except the i n t e n t of the writer" (p. 37). Does this mean that the i n t e n t of the a u t h o r always or only sometimes (perhaps because of thoughtlessness) ex- cludes liveliness and interest? In any event, the next paragraph praises t h e grace and economy of academic writing, concluding that " T h i s writing is not lacking in surprise and excitement—good, simple, economical, sparse sentences lack excitement only if the matter is dull." In this sentence "surprise" a n d "excitement" overlap in meaning, as do also "good, simple, economical, sparse"; is, then, economy a virtue not needed in librar- ians' writing? "I know of no library, great or small—and I have been in h u n d r e d s with my feelers sensitive to this problem to a degree you would not believe possible if you did not know me so well, with my a n t e n n a plugged in a n d the communication really coming through—I know of no library which . . ." (p. 54). These words and phrases a n d sentences are not necessarily incorrect, a n d certainly they can be understood. But it is a bit sur- prising to find them on the lips of Caesar's wives. Gobbledegook is properly d e n o u n c e d (p. ix), yet the only instance cited is curiously enough not f r o m library literature, b u t "a classic example . . . f o u n d in Dwight Mac- Donald's history of the Ford F o u n d a t i o n . " (Apparently if you m e a n what you say you need not give exact title, date, and page when you refer to a passage from a book; for pedants like the a u t h o r of this review the details are here added: The Ford Foun- dation, the Men and the Millions (1956), pp. 105-106.) T h i s example may be "classic" but its "gobbledegook" is sometimes quite in- telligible, a n d the " t r a n s l a t i o n " seldom translates—e.g., " T h e first phase had con- sisted of intensive exploratory studies of the a d j u s t m e n t of foreign students to life on American campuses. . . . As was hoped [Translation: W e were disappointed], these studies . . ." (p. x). In some of the papers the dash is ubiqui- tous; on page 38, for instance, there are seventeen dashes. Something perhaps akin to the "formless- ness" denounced on page 2 appears on page 8, when we are urged in some detail to "have something which will be of profit to those who will hear or read it"—a splendid idea, albeit somewhat elementary. But the writer had already developed this theme at some length on page 5 and h a d then moved on to something else. Again, on page 12 we M A R C H 1 9 6 0 183 read: "Ephesians 4:29 tells us: 'Let no cor- r u p t communication proceed out of your mouth, b u t that which is good.' I n other words, we can only take o u t of t h e treasure chest what is in it." Is this really the Ephe- sians passage " i n other words"? T h e fact that the editor of a staff bulletin does not "get much comment f r o m within the library" sometimes "worries the editor because he wonders if anybody is reading his publication. . . . Is it really necessary? Is it interesting . . . ? Could it be d r o p p e d a n d nobody notice it? Most of these ques- tions never get answered, a n d it's just as well for the editor not to worry a b o u t them. . . ." (p. 42). W h y is it "just as well"? Surely, if he were at all concerned a b o u t the theme of this conference, he would give much thought to these matters. " T h e r e was so m u c h to talk a b o u t a n d be controversial a b o u t that somehow we did not get down to 'how-to' mean what you say" (p. 84). A n d yet there was time for things not even remotely connected with the g r a n d "conspiracy" a n n o u n c e d on page 2— e.g., the emphasis on being sure to sign the library report (p. 34) or to n a m e the library a n d (often) t h e place in which t h e library is located—"If you should h a p p e n to be op- erating a library called the Los Angeles Public Library in San Francisco, it would be i m p o r t a n t to a d d the city" (p. 37)—; a n d the instructions on not merely how to make a talk b u t also how to get to be invited to make a talk (p. 56) a n d how to dress for the occasion—"If you wear a corsage, a n d a pin, a n d several other assorted trimmings, you will be a distraction to the audience" (p. 62). It is h a r d to escape the feeling that some- how some of the sessions may h a v e slipped into the "Sin of Verbosity. T o o m u c h is said, too much is written a b o u t too little" (p. 5). Fhe book is a "transcript from tape, some- what revised a n d abridged . . ." (p. vii). In a conference whose "goal is clear thinking, precise writing a n d speaking" (p. 2) one would expect papers carefully written and revised by their authors before they were presented a n d carefully revised again by the editor before they were published. W e are indeed "ringed by laziness" (p. 2). A n d yet, perhaps, it was a notable confer- ence, if for n o other reason than that it tackled, however inadequately, a m a j o r problem whose very existence o f t e n goes without notice: W h y cannot, or do not, librarians write readable prose? Some of the side issues raised are also n o t a b l e — f o r in- stance (p. 8 a n d p p . 80-81) why d o we have so little controversy if librarianship really means much to us? Finally some of the pa- pers were excellent; Mr. Powell was elo- q u e n t , Mr. Malkin was stimulating, and Mr. Lubetzky was lucid a n d brief.—Paul S. Dun- kin, Rutgers University. Comment Research and Reality I n the September 1959 issue of CRL Rob- ert E. Dysinger of Bowdoin, writing on " T h e Research Library in the U n d e r g r a d u - ate College," tells us that " . . . a collection which reflects the curriculum of the insti- t u t i o n a n d the interests of individual schol- ars a n d is well selected a n d t h i n n e d will bulk large a n d have far in excess of 250,000 volumes." By an interesting coincidence, CRL statistics for 1957/58 show that Bow- d o i n just h a p p e n s to have h a d 249,564 vol- umes in its library at t h a t time. At the same time, the median figure for G r o u p II college libraries in the same set of statistics shows 130,284 volumes. At the m e d i a n rate of increase, as of 1957/58, 5,151 books per year, it would take almost a quarter-century to reach the figure Mr. Dy- singer indicates as a m i n i m u m figure, 250,000 volumes. W h y is there any feeling, in this day of ready accessibility of needed volumes a n d pages, through interlibrary loan a n d mod- ern copying methods, that the undergradu- ate college library must try to be what it can 184 C O L L E G E A N D R E S E A R C H L I B R A R I E S