College and Research Libraries By W I L L I A M M . R A N D A L L The Task of the College Library William M. Randall is professor of li- brary science in the Graduate Library School of the University of Chicago and managing editor of "The Library Quar- terly." IT S O M E T I M E S seems to me that we would be much better off if we could rid our vocabulary of one word and its derivatives, and replace them with a series of terms which more accurately connote our institutions, our activities, and our- selves. T h e word I have in mind, of course, is "library," with its fellows, "li- brarianship" and "librarian." All of these are derived, in the end, from the Latin word for book, and they originally re- ferred—and still do in most languages— to bookselling and the book trade. Librarianship Has Different Meanings M y dispute, however, is not with ety- mology. W o r d s and their meanings and the changes in these meanings are beyond reason and logic, and certainly there is little value in arguing about them. N o — the cause of my unhappiness is quite dif- ferent. M y concern arises rather from the effect that words have upon the thinking and hence upon the actions of people. Because we call a group of institutions "libraries," we are likely to assume that all of the members of the group are the same sort of institutions. Because we give to a rather amorphous and undefinable lot of processes, techniques, judgments, and de- cisions the name "librarianship," we are likely to suppose that we have a single profession with a single necessary appren- ticeship. And because we call all the members of the group concerned with these institutions and their management "librarians," it requires a real wrench of the imagination to realize that they are not all alike in their duties nor in the training necessary for the performance of them. I will not say that I am a librarian. Perhaps that is stretching the word too far. T h e catalogers at the Library of Congress are all librarians. So are the people who work at the loan desk in De- troit and those who write the book orders at the University of Chicago. All of these are librarians. And all of them have an equal right to call what they are doing "librarianship." T h e University of Michigan has a li- b r a r y ; in fact, it has several libraries. T h e y are not very much like one another except that all of them contain books. T h e r e is a public library in Chicago and there is a public library in the little town of Belleville, Michigan, but they are not very much alike, either. T h e r e is a library in Washington, D . C . devoted to works concerning Shakespeare and there is an- other library in the same city that serves the Department of Agriculture. I wonder if the number of their common problems is as great as the number of problems that are specific to each? I do not believe that we can get the entire t r u t h about the differences between the problems of various sorts of libraries 38 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES from librarians. Membership in what is generally supposed to be a common pro- fession and, above all, a common back- ground of professional training that tends to enforce a common method for han- dling the stock-in-trade—books—inclines the personnel toward a common attitude. T h e r e are certain ways of doing things in libraries. Because these ways of doing things have been found to work pretty well in a single predominant type of in- stitution, they are taught in library schools. If they do not work quite so well in other types of libraries, there seems to be an inclination on the part of the pro- fession to put this failure down to some sort of contrariness on the part of the patrons, rather than to an unsuitableness of the method. T h e idea that two institu- tions that are both called libraries may nevertheless be entirely different in their character, their aims, their purposes, and hence should be entirely different in their methods and in the training necessary for their personnels, seems not to have taken a very strong hold on the imagination. A person who is interested in history is likely to try to find an historical explana- tion for events. I believe there is some- thing in the history of library science that goes some way toward explaining the situation in which we find ourselves. Dual Purpose of Modern Libraries M o d e r n libraries have two great pur- poses : to collect and preserve knowledge in the form of books and other library ma- terials and to interpret these books to a group of patrons in need of the knowledge which they contain. But this duality of purpose is a relatively recent development in library history. For many centuries the purpose of libraries was to collect and pre- serve, and as long as this remained the only purpose, the basis of the science of li- braries was the thing collected and pre- served—that is, the book. I do not mean to say that no one ever read the books in older libraries. But I do mean to say that the chief concern of the librarian was col- lection and preservation. W e have only to remember the comparative newness of those techniques of librarianship, such as subject cataloging, which have as their pur- pose the interpretation of the contents of libraries to realize the t r u t h of that state- ment. Books and Librarianship As long as you deal with books alone, and interest yourself only in their collec- tion and preservation, you are dealing with things which are alike, and, since they are alike, with things which are amenable to a single technique. W h e n we deal with books alone, and buildings to contain these books and keep them safe, and ways to arrange them in these buildings which de- pend only on the books themselves, and ways to enter them in catalogs which again depend only on the books themselves, we can have a single profession of librarian- ship. And that is what we have had for many years. You may say that books themselves are different—different in their content, in their character, in their physical format. Of course they are. But for all those properties which enter into the business of collecting and preserving, books are not different in essential characteristics. W h a t is true about a book in one library is true about it in another. A folio vol- ume requires a special shelf in the Library of Congress or in the Peoria Public Li- brary. T h e preservation of a vellum book presents the same problems in the Folger Library or the Library of the Department DECEMBER, 1940 39 of Agriculture. T h e H u n t i n g t o n Library or the University of Illinois Library will find a given book best purchased from the same source. Steel stacks and air-con- ditioning are as useful one place as an- other. I t required no particular wrench to introduce the Anglo-American theory of entry into the Vatican Library, because the theory of entry is based on books alone. T h e introduction of American subject cataloging was another thing. So, a professional background is built up on a basis of a common element—the book. Convenient ways of collecting and preserving books are devised and studied and revised. W e find ourselves suddenly with a profession built around this com- mon element and a training for this pro- fession which teaches people to do things to books. Sometimes it does not work so very well and we wonder why. W e l l — it is our own fault. If we would only stick to books, we should be all right. Book Interpretation and Librarianship As long as the only business of libraries is to acquire books and to keep them safe, librarianship has a common content which constitutes its larger part. T h e differ- ences between libraries are very small compared to their likenesses. But as soon as the second function of the modern li- brary is introduced—the function which may be described as book interpretation— the differences between libraries become greater in importance than their likenesses. T h e book, which before was the only unit about which the science was built, becomes only one of two units, and, furthermore, the one of lesser importance because it de- pends for its importance on the second unit. T h i s other unit which must be con- sidered in a modern library science is the patron. Books which are alike in all respects as items for collection and preservation be- come quite different as items to be inter- preted to readers. Even the same book becomes two different books in two dif- ferent libraries, if they serve different groups. And when the books become dif- ferent, the techniques which are suitable for their interpretation become different as well—or, at least, they may become dif- ferent. Patron's Needs Should Determine Library Techniques As soon as we introduce the patron into the picture we are no longer able to say, for example, of a system of classification: " T h i s is a good system because it arranges the books into classes which are exclusive, different, and logical." W e must also be able to say, if we are to justify the system for a particular library, that it arranges the books into classes which have meaning for the patrons of the library. Unless it does this, the system is of no value to the patrons. W e can no longer say of a list of subject headings: " T h i s is a good list, because by means of its terms we can de- scribe the content of the books." W e must also be able to say that we can describe the content of the books in terms which the patron understands and in terms which are significant to him. Unless we can do this, our subject cataloging will be of doubtful usefulness. And it should be evident, I believe, that because a system of classifi- cation and a list of subject headings is found to be useful in a library of one type, serving one kind of patron, it is not neces- sarily true that it will therefore be useful in a library of another type, serving an- other kind of patron. In fact, logic will force us to conclude, it seems to me, that the more useful an interpretative technique 40 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES is for one group, the more carefully it is fitted to the needs of one class of patrons seeking certain things from books, the less likely it is that it will serve satisfactorily to convey the necessary information about books to another group, who want to know something different about them and who are differently equipped by education and experience to find out what they want to know. W h a t is true of such things as classifi- cation and subject cataloging is equally true, of course, of other library techniques in which service to the patron is a factor. It is true of book selection. W e cannot collect "good" books or "important" books or "significant" books. These terms have no meaning. W e must select and acquire for a given library the books which are good and important and significant for the patrons of that library. W e cannot even build "good" library buildings. T h e building, too, must be fitted to the needs of the group of patrons who are to be served by it. All Libraries Should Not Be Alike N o w all patrons are not alike in what they need from libraries. I t must follow, therefore, that all libraries should not be alike; and that all librarianship should not be the same; and that all librarians should not seek to do the same things in the same ways. W e must realize this. W e must study our professional training program carefully to identify the parts of it which are common to all types of librarians and should be taught to all. W e must also study our professional training program carefully to identify the parts which are useful only to some and not only useless, but actually detrimental, to others. T h e college library is in a class by it- self when it is considered from the stand- point of its patrons. Its functions are well recognized. Further, they are dic- tated by the educational institution of which the library is a part. Its patrons form a homogeneous group. W h a t they need from the library in the way of serv- ice is known, or can be discovered without much difficulty. Certainly they do not need the same sort of service as that re- quired by the patron of a public library, or of the Library of Congress, or of an ele- mentary school library, or even of a uni- versity library. T h e r e is no reason to suppose that a system of classification which suits a great national library—if it does—will suit a college library. T h e r e is no reason to suppose that a type of sub- ject cataloging which serves the needs of public library patrons—if it does—or graduate students in a great university will also serve the needs of college stu- dents. W e know—or we can find out— for what purposes college students use books. W h y , then, should we not ar- range, catalog, select, and administer the books in a college library definitely and accurately for these purposes? As a matter of fact, we are forced to do just this in certain cases when the pressure is heavy. N o matter what classification system we use; no matter what kind of cataloging we do; no matter how our ref- erence service is organized, still, for the part of the book collection which is most used, we discard them all and arrange and administer the material as the college situation demands. In the case of reserve books, the college library is really a col- lege library. It is not a public library or a university library or a reference library. But with all other books it becomes just a library, adopting for special purposes, for the use of a very special group of read- (Continued on page 54.) DECEMBER, 1940 41 loan. Since B a r d is affiliated w i t h C o l u m - bia University, the cooperation of the C o l u m b i a L i b r a r y is given generously. B u t often help w i l l be received also f r o m other libraries. T h e best example of liber- ality and understanding is offered by N e w Y o r k State L i b r a r y . W h e n one of the ablest Bard students decided to w r i t e his Senior P r o j e c t on the history of Mc- Clure's Magazine, the State L i b r a r y im- mediately agreed, in this exceptional case, to send to B a r d the fifty-odd volumes that w e r e needed. Sometimes, however, the task of getting the literature for the senior projects together becomes too heavy for the B a r d L i b r a r y , and the students are advised to do research in the metropolitan scholarly libraries. T h a t in itself w i l l be a useful experience for students w h o in- tend to go into graduate or professional schools. O n the whole, the Senior P r o j e c t brings about the c r o w n i n g effort of the library to help in realizing the educational ideals of the college. I have tried to describe here some phases of the w o r k done in the libraries of the three Eastern progressive colleges in gen- eral, and experiments at Bard in particu- lar. I am f u l l y aware not only of our achievements, but also of our shortcomings and of the fact that some of the methods w e use cannot be employed very easily in large institutions. B u t w h a t e v e r faults there may be, these three libraries seem to be moving in the right direction. T o quote once more from B r a n s c o m b : " I f funds are limited and staffs are inadequate, it may be necessary to be less correct along formal lines in order to take an active part in the shift of the teaching program from reliance on formal instruction towards a greater faith in individual s t u d y . " T h e libraries at Bard, Bennington, and Sarah L a w r e n c e have taken this active p a r t ! T h e Task of the College Library (Continued from page 41) ers, methods, techniques, and processes whose only virtue is that they are so gen- eral in their character and so all-inclusive in their results that some little bit of use- fulness is bound to be in them. If you shoot at a target w i t h a shotgun, you are almost bound to hit it, and one of the shots may find the bull's-eye. B u t many of the shots w i l l be wasted. A rifle w i t h a sure aim is much more efficient. T h e task of the college library, it seems to me, is to become a college l i b r a r y — n o t just a library in a college. T h e task of the college library is to find o u t ; first, w h a t it is for and for w h o m it exists and w h a t its patrons need, not only in books, but in service; and then to devise w a y s to give these things. T h e w a y s may not be orthodox. T h e r e is little reason to suppose that they w i l l be. T h e classifi- cation system may not be like any other on e a r t h ; the subject catalog may look very strange to a teacher of cataloging. B u t there is no essential virtue in ortho- doxy w h e n it is a question of service. T h e only valuable consistency is one that g r o w s out of need, not one that g r o w s out of practice. T h e college library is a highly specialized institution, giving a very spe- cial service f o r a special purpose to a special group. I t w i l l be a wonder in- deed if the best means and methods for doing this do not turn out to be highly specialized as w e l l . 54 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES