By: Shirley Burnham

Shirley Burnham — Mon, 26 Nov 2012 07:13:35 +0000

My eyes popped to see what seems to be a conciliatory statement here about libraries’ co-location in *supermarkets*. Look at what such a statement implies:
…
1. Local, accessible public libraries axed in favour of such a co-location. 2. The annihilation of quiet study space, access to computers, children’s Story Time, homework clubs, reading groups, etc. 3. The inevitable loss of paid frontline staff. 4. Book stock and space squeezed by the store’s promotions and commercial priorities. 5. A travesty of the spirit of the 1964 Public Libraries Act and local councils’ statutory duties to provide a comprehensive and improving service.
…
Would people change supermarket allegiance for the sake of a library book – which is all that might be offered – or (as I would) stop being library-users altogether? Would they cross town for the privilege? Would teenagers, small children, the elderly, infirm and disadvantaged be flocking to a far-flung supermarket? I think not.
…
One goes (by car) or Dial-A-Ride or taxi to the nearest one with a sole purpose – to get the weekly ‘shop’, not to spend an hour browsing some book-stacks, or to make vain attempts to seek information and expertise – once available on my street corner – that, if such proposals became a reality, would be a thing of the past.
…
Patrons of public libraries do not want to borrow books from a dumbed-down version of a library in Tescos, Debenhams or any another entirely inappropriate location. I maintain that proposals for such ugly, insulting and impractical co-locations should be vigorously opposed.

Comments on: A Hive of noisy activity

By: Shirley Burnham