Ok, so do not get me wrong. I love libraries. There are billions upon billions of books there that you can read...FOR FREE. They are wonderful institutions and librarians are wonderful people because they help put books in the hands of many, MANY people.
Now, the Cincinnati Public Library is downtown and it's actually an impressive building. It's huge, has lots of books, DVDs, CDs and lots of other things (including old newspapers and records of families in the Cincinnati area!). So, because of it's massive size, I was positive that it would have the books I needed.
I was looking for a couple of books that are considered classics: "1984" and "All Quiet on the Western Front." Most people, if they don't know what these books are about, have at least heard of them before. I have, that's for sure. Well I couldn't find them at the public library on my side of town and I had to go downtown anyway, so I went over there and in that huge building I was unable to find "1984." It's either not in the library or checked out and not in their catalog system yet.
Part of me was apalled by this. "1984" is definitely a classic. It's read in high schools all over the country, it is one of the most well-known dystopian novels, and probably George Orwell's most popular novel, and the library didn't have it. I investigated further and went to look at their stock of Dickens and Steinbeck, both which were pretty poor in numbers. How can institutions that exist purely to house books not have "1984"?
I got mad at the public library. I got very mad. Then, a thought occurred to me. The library cannot possibly afford to house every single book. I mean, let's face it, Cincinnati is in a bit of trouble financial wise and I understand that the city (and entire state, really) have to cut the hours and staff of the public libraries, so I'd assume that they might have to cut the supplies of the library, which are mainly books. So then I got angry at the government for not giving public institutions like libraries enough money to at least have one copy of literary classics on the shelves.
Then I was reminded about the essence of our very economy which I was blaming for the libraries having no money. Capitalism, which I would argue is mostly a good thing, is based on supply and demand. There may be little demand for 1984, and therefore, there is no supply of it in the library. No one in the Cincinnati area seems to feel the need to read 1984, so the library is simply not going to carry it. 1984 is probably taking up valuable space that could be used for Janet Evonovich books or that stupid Twilight Series (the library does, however, have somewhere around six copies of "Breaking Dawn" because HEAVEN FORBID THEY DON'T HAVE TWILIGHT).
So perhaps the real root of my anger is that people are not reading the classics anymore (unless they have to in high school) and so libraries are not carrying them. I find this to be a shame. I know I'm an extreme example, but I like to have a well rounded reading background and I'm sure there are people out there who do as well. 1984 is on the list of so many classics that I'm sure someone else at some other point in time wanted to check it out.
So, basically what I'm saying is, it's a shame that people don't want to read classics and instead want to read about vampires that sparkle. But still, if the option never exists, if 1984 is never on the shelf to begin with, then it eliminates even the possibility that someone would check it out.
And there. That's my beef with the public library.
No comments:
Post a Comment