<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d14462747\x26blogName\x3dLIS+950:+Libraries+and+community\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dBLUE\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttp://lis-950.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den_US\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://lis-950.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d1224404710664714099', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>

LIS 950: Libraries and community

The purpose of this seminar is to explore an important topic in library and information studies in depth — in all its intertwined historical, cultural, philosophical, and political aspects — through a graduate reading/discussion seminar. The topic varies each time the course is taught; this time around, we will focus on "libraries and community"

Friday, November 04, 2005

Leckie and Hopkins

One thing that came to mind as I read the Leckie and Hopkins article is that it seems to be following the "crisis culture" thinking that Buschman is so critical of in Dismantling. They choose a specific path -- fear of private interests and exclude the fear of technology, but fear seems to motivate their research.

Another thing that these readings made me think about is the evolution of how public space works. Buschman emphasises the public sphere as a place of discourse. Early public spaces were places of primarily oral discourse, but it seems like things have changed as libraries have evolved to reading being primary. The Leckie and Hopkins article shows that reading was the number one thing to do at the libraries studied. There's no back and forth here as there is when the public space is being used for oral exchanges of information. On the other hand, the CI article talks about the social connectedness of digital CI systems. There is a back and forth flow, even if it isn't verbal. It seems like a step in a more vibrant direction, where discourse is active and alive.



Blogger Soojin Park said...

I'd like to analyze the 'fear' in Leckie and Hopkins article. The notion of fear brings up changing the public library's identity (specifically 'public'). Their interests and research in the fear provides justification for the public library's identity. Why still we need the word, 'public'? I just want to say about the logic for getting their research questions.

About the concept of reading! I think it is an important component of written communication. In the verbal conversation, we talk and listen. In the written conversation, we read and write. In this context, I just wonder about that there was none to write in the public libraries. The paper mentioned studying but writing. Did they miss the activities in the libraries? Or just mixed in other actions in the public libraries.

4:10 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home