A radical thought: Libraries are for books

Librarians have always had to perform the same nasty task that those of us with limited home library space have to perform--getting rid of books that have not been read in a long, long time or that will never be read. But now, according to an article in The Washington Post, they are performing this task with greater frequency and intensity. The title of the article, "Hello, Grisham--So Long, Hemingway" was enough to make my blood curdle, even before I read the contents.

In Fairfax Country, Virginia, a decision has been made to get rid of any book that has not been checked out in two years. Fortunately, librarians are making exceptions. For example, To Kill A Mockingbird and For Whom the Bell Tolls are staying--for now--even though they have not been checked out in two years.

"We don't want to keep what people don't use much of," say Sam Clay, director of the Fairfax system. That is understandable. But what the hell kind of nation are we living in when To Kill A Mockingbird stays on a library shelf, untouched, for two years? Doesn't that say just about everything about 21st Century America that we need to know?

Libraries, the argument goes, are not what they used to be. People find reference materials via the Internet, so not as many reference books are needed on library shelves. That is true. But what about literature? Are Americans really buying that much more of it via the Internet? Despite the fact that sites like Amazon do offer inexpensive and used copies of books, is everyone buying them? I suspect the answer is "no." I suspect that the people in Fairfax County--and many, many other counties--simply do not give a damn about Harper Lee or Ernest Hemingway or hundreds of other authors who wrote or write literary fiction, drama, creative nonfiction, essays, and poetry.

When I was an older child and younger adolescent, my mother and I would get a ride into town (she did not drive, and the bus rarely came by), and she would drop me off at the huge, ornate, musty public library, then go shopping. By the time she picked me up to go to the Chinese restaurant down the street, my entire world had shifted. I had read Shaw and Poe and Cather and de Maupassant. When I went back after lunch, I read some more, and when it was time to go, I checked out several books, as well as some record albums. Some of these were performance albums, which is how I first learned both Shakespeare and Chaucer.

I regret that I do not devour books the way I did when I was young. In a childhood devoid of many happy times, the hours spent in the public library stand out as some of the best. To think that people are not going to libraries to read literature or to check out literature is a depressing thought.

The Fairfax system has also had to deal with a $2 million budget cut. That is because compassionate conservatism does not concern itself with literacy and thinking, but with important things like invading another country, creating a massive fake airport security program, and giving money to groups that hate women and gays.

Finally, Sam Clay points out, the demand for meeting space and space for story hours has caused books to be swept off of the shelves. Meeting space? Let me get this straight: People want to meet in a library, for whatever reason, but in order for them to be comfortable, books must be removed. Because why the hell would you want books in a library?