Letters to the Editor

Is gently suggesting a life of faith really a bad thing?

The words of Edith Ching's letter to the editor (“Give God a Rest,” April 2008, p. 12) have been ringing in my head. She noted that in his books, Orson Scott Card “gently suggests” in a “subtle” way that living a Christian life is a positive thing. She also indicates that his books are “very popular” with her students. However, she is no longer eager to recommend them because there is “enough proselytizing in the world without it sneaking up on our students in books.”

The word “proselytize” indicates the action of converting someone from one belief or attitude to another. I assume that she reads book reviews as I do. I find few where there is any mention that a Christian faith is central to the characters and/or plot, much less a subtle part of the story. However, many of the reviews I read note sexual content, abusive families and relationships, underage drinking, etc. When we stand against something—in her case, recommending books that subtly recommend a life of faith—we automatically stand for something else. What lifestyle does she wish her students to adopt? What books will she recommend?

I was truly astounded by her stance, however, when I went to the Web site for her school. St. Albans is an Episcopal school that declares on its Web page that it is “spiritually rooted in the life and teachings of Jesus Christ” and that it “strives to develop in its boys…a sense of moral responsibility.” It seems ironic that she is unwilling to recommend books that are in line with the foundational beliefs of her school.

Censorship is censorship—whether we choose to marginalize realistic fiction that is too real for our personal taste or fiction that has an undercurrent of faith. Proselytizing is proselytizing—whether we wish to convert one to an “alternative lifestyle” or to a life of faith. I would hope that Ms. Ching would reevaluate her position.

Bandwagons can be dangerous things, especially when you jump on them without considering the destination.

In response to the recent article “The Gaming Life” (April 2008, pp. 30–32), I want to play devil's advocate. Few of my patrons have the new, expensive systems that run the games we circulate, and they are often frustrated by the lack of games for their PS2 or portable systems. Why is everybody so gung-ho to buy games for the big three systems, while few libraries circulate for the handhelds and almost nobody supports PC gamers? Keeping up with available systems will be an ongoing problem as new ones are released, and not only are we taking money away from collecting other items, we're only supporting the patrons who have the money to buy the expensive systems. Why? Because the library wants to be “cutting edge.” But from what I've seen, most people with the cutting-edge technology don't come to the library looking for games—they go out and buy them. And what did my patrons do with the games they didn't have the systems for? Stole half of them in the first month and tried to sell them to GameStop.

You don't have to be a “library traditionalist” who sees gaming as the “antithesis to reading” to be against circulating games. Take Eli Neiburger at the Ann Arbor District Library. He travels around the country teaching librarians how to host gaming events, and he's one of the biggest suporters of video games at the library I know—but he doesn't support game circulation. His major points include theft, cost, and community building. For the price of a breakable, stealable collection, you can have an amazing setup for game events at the library.

Mr. Oakley spoke about making a library “truly relevant to teens' needs.” Since when do teens need circulating video games? What they need are socialization and community, which game events at the library can provide.

I do think it's great that Mr. Oakley's library is circulating games so successfully in his beautiful building in a relatively wealthy suburb of Albany. While I think there are good reasons against game circulation, that doesn't mean I don't acknowledge that it can be successful.

I'd just like people to step back and take a moment to assess the place for this “fad” in libraries. Think about supporting gaming in other ways. Throw tournaments at the library. Buy novel tie-ins. Buy strategy guides. If, after careful deliberation, you still choose to circulate, at least it will have been a thoughtful, educated decision.

I was interested to see how Renate Bernstein reports on the opening up of her library (April Letters, pp. 12–13). Although I haven't opened my library up for food and drink for students, I do try to ensure that the library is at least a comfortable place for them, if not always fun. Our library is small, and there are no separate study rooms, so we're all together all the time. I'm glad to say that the emphasis on respect for the needs of others and courtesy generally prevails. We say that no one has the right to be noisy at the expense of other people having a quiet place. At the same time, total silence is almost never found here!

Delightful as it was to read of Susan Taylor's exciting purchase of over $20,000 worth of materials in the Khmer language for the Long Beach Public Library, it was also surprising to read that San Francisco Public Library is among California libraries that have “either no Khmer books or just a few.”

It is true, of course, that “few” is a relative term. A quick peek at the catalog shows that we have more than 50 books in the Khmer language. I will concede that it doesn't rival the 1,105 new Khmer books that your article so rightly celebrated. Nonetheless, I don't want anyone left with the impression that we have no Khmer books. We are proud that our collection reflects over 40 of the many languages spoken here in San Francisco, Khmer included!

I just finished reading your editorial in the April issue (“What Should a Librarian Know?,” p. 9). Thank you for speaking up on behalf of school librarians. It would be nice if we received at least some of the credit that we deserve for the role that we play in that “lifelong learning” process.

Your editorial left me with a smile on my face, goose bumps on my arms, and I could have sworn that someone just patted me on the back. Sometimes it doesn't take much to make someone's day!

The April 2008 editorial has one odd comment in it. Kenney says, “After two weeks of reading the ALA Council's electronic discussion list, with its endless bickering about the same topics (ALA's foreign policy) by the same people….” People keep perpetuating the idea that all the ALA Council addresses are issues related to foreign policy. I know this is not true since I serve on ALA Council and regularly read and contribute to the list.

I went to the archive of the ALA Council list and looked at the discussion topics between October 2007 and February 2008. There were 426 postings. Among all of those postings was one on the political situation in Kenya posted in January. Among the other topics discussed were the school library situation in Washington, state association endorsements of the SKILLS Act, and the situation in school libraries in Mesa, AZ.

Among the other major issues on the list were 76 comments on how to make ALA's discussion lists more transparent; eight on privatizing public libraries; four on the “Letter on Bullying” from the ALA Washington office; 17 on National Legislative day; 10 on term limits on ALA Council; many on various aspects related to the conference including the hotels, events planner, etc.; six on how ALA Resolutions are disseminated and other related PR; four on a bill in Colorado that would have been bad for libraries; and five on the library situation in Memphis. There was even some discussion of the proposed core competencies.

If you want to get the facts for yourself about what ALA Council is discussing, go to lists.ala.org/wws/ and look at the ALA Council List archive.

Earlier this year I saw the announcement in SLJ for a joint Gale and School Library Journal Giant Step Award. Because my school had taken some giant steps these past two years, I spent quite a bit of time writing and documenting everything required for the award. I was proud of what we had accomplished and felt I had a chance of winning. So when I received a call from SLJ last week, my heart skipped a beat in anticipation, only to be defeated when the lady asked if I wanted my items returned. I thought I did not win, and that was OK, but when she told me they were not awarding it because enough people did not apply, I felt deceived. The wording in the announcement was “Thomson Gale will award $5,000 to each winning school and public library….” It did not say only if enough libraries apply. Something like that really makes me wary of ever trying for an award again. If any other applicants feel the same as I do, please let your disappointment be known.