A Good Job is Hard to Find

I have yet to beat myself into applying for jobs unrelated to the field I have so far enjoyed, and in which I can actually boast experience. Ah, libraries - so quiet, well-ordered, and filled with an unmistakable air of pseudo-intellectualism.

However, there seems to be a prejudice against me, somehow. I've applied for about 7 positions, most full-time but one half-time, and I was unmistakably qualified for all of them (and not overqualified, either), but I haven't heard a word from any of them. Maybe it's the fact that the mailing address currently listed is for Florida - but I did specify that I would be moving as soon as possible (i.e., as soon as I could get a job), and that I'd be happy to fly into town for an interview. Maybe it's the fact that the undergraduate degree I have bears the stigma of the liberal arts, i.e., it saith, to the unenlightened, "I did nothing nothing useful in college". Maybe it's the fact that I'm 23. I mean, old people sue for age descrimination, but to be honest, for all I can tell, they're not the ones who actually suffer from that sort of thing in the working world. Sometimes I think people see my birthyear and think, "Goodness, in 1985 I was (insert adult activity here) - she couldn't know what she was doing. That's just crazy young."

So, I am rather torn, here. Do I stall myself out in the job hunt, out of a preference for a "career" I'm (hopefully) not going to keep all that long? Or, rather, do I just knuckle under and apply for some pathetic secretarial job I may very well end up hating?

Hmmmmmm . . .

Student Surveys

So, I'm still processing nearly 200 student surveys for my academic library. It's very boring, and when it's not boring it's frustrating, because inevitably the students who give more than the required information state that they want the library open all night long or they want to be able to bring in their coffee and sticky rolls (we used to let them do this until the spills, sticky tables, molding food under the furniture and abandoned trash got out of hand) or they want free printing/copying (this is the Engineering dept.'s prerogative, not ours) or they want special access to the library if they're music students (the security department isn't about to let people wander in here after hours just for the sake of rehearsal rooms - especially with all of Mr. Monaghan's art all over the place. Once again, not our prerogative.), blahdity blah blah blah. Arg! students can be such little beasties. I know, more grumpy bug Emily. Grumpity grump grump grump.

However, today, one student managed to brighten the drudgery:

-How could the Library be improved? Please include any comments, ideas, or suggestions for the Library.
We need smoke machines, black lights and rave music. Oh, and free coffee, too.

Do you have any special needs or disabilities you would like the library to accommodate, and if so, how would you like them to be accommodated?
I have moderate to severe ADD and a complete lack of motivation.
Please fix that.

oh, and God bless.

LOL. I guess I'm a little less grumpy now.

How upsetting it is

to look about me and think of the things that might have been.


BNF PARIS




HANDELINGENKAMER TWEEDE KAMER DER STATEN-GENERAAL DEN HAAG




BIBLIOTECA DE LA REAL ACADEMIA DE LA LENGUA MADRID




REAL GABINETE PORTUGUES DE LEITURA RIO DE JANEIRO




TRINITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN




OXFORD UNIVERSITY, ENGLAND




STRAHOVSKA KNIHOVNA PRAHA




RIJKMUSEUM AMSTERDAM




STIFTSBIBLIOTHEK ST. GALLEN

Management Schmanagement

My week in a nutshell . . .





(Click on the above photo to see it in full resolution.)

The hubby says I need to think of this as an opportunity to grow in my management skills.

. . .

Leisure

What is it? Is it simply the time to do something or is it the doing of something important or worthwhile? I'm not so silly as to think it has something to do with owning a boat, going on cruises or surfing. (Aside: why do most culturally-established "leisure activities" have something to do with water? E.g., the picture above was the first hit on a Google image search for "leisure". What's up with that? . . . but I digress . . .)

To descend from the intangible philosophical question into the reality of practical affairs: I'm really in a quandry as to what activities I should be employing in the minute bits of "free time" I possess. I feel as if it's important that I reinstitute some kind of intellecually worthwhile activity, but, which one?

Should I read more Chesterton? I mean, I list him third in the short list of life-shaping obsessions I possess, and all in all I've only ever managed to give serious time and thought to one of his books, a handfull of his essays and a smattering of his poems. At that rate I think I've given more serious thought to the works of Descartes (per force of it being assigned as homework, mind you. Modern philosophy is not leisure reading.), and that's just wrong.

However, Chesterton wrote little "enjoyment-oriented" fiction (most of it is that transcendental sort of fiction and/or poetry meant to let you float through intangible truths) and I'm not sure I find his preferred literary modes, fiction or non, very recreational. His works of theological and philosophical intent are difficult for me to take seriously and study, as his profound distractibility jumps from one thing to another, in a way that would be delightful if you didn't take it all too seriously and/or literally. However, I've been rigourously trained into an Aristotelian love of brevity that hungers and thirsts for clear, concise, syllogistic form. Due to this, Chesterton's somewhat erratic treatment of important ideas annoys me a great deal these days. I can no longer bring myself to devour Chesterton's intellectual works - I can only nibble.

Then, there are any number of intellecual treatises I could be reading, many of which are plenty systematic and quite worthwhile. My husband occasionally tries to tempt me to some of them, pointing at the piles of volumes he's required to peruse for classes. I know he misses the theoretically engaging aspect of our early relationship - fortunately for us we are also well-matched on nearly every aspect of the practical realm, so losing depth in the intellectual connection post-TAC has caused less pain than it has for other married grads I know. He still misses that, though - as do I. Last weekend there was a Humanae Vitae conference here at the University, and I made a point of attending the closing lecture (the only one I could manage with last weekend's work schedule). It was undoubtedly the best lecture of the event, given by Dr. Michael Waldstein, who is fantastically gifted, especially in the realm of answering questions. It sparked an evening full of discussion between my husband and I which was thouroughly delightful. I can remember noting how much I must be starving the deeper parts of my brain these days, such was the urgency with which I devoured every bit of the exchange. Yeeeaaaaah. So, uh, maybe I should try reading more deep stuff before my brain dies of malnourishment.

But, then again . . .

There lies this bothersome question regarding these pesky little things called my talents. I've been talking since I was 10 months old, and to this day I continue to delight in communication. Correction: as my husband pointed out, my delight is not so much in communication as in talking, as my powers of listening are decidedly limited in their scope. (Did I ever tell you how annoyingly perceptive my husband is?) Thus follows the great enjoyment I derive from talking to inanimate things like paper or webpage interfaces - I never have to listen to a thing they say so I can talk talk talk to my heart's content. Now, my love of talking led to developing a knack for "turning phrases", especially on subjects about which I am more than usually passionate. That being the case, I can't help but think it would be a good exercise to develop those talents more carefully, to indulge in venting the half-thought thinkings that float through my distracted brain all day. Whether that would be in the form of blogging or more formal composition, I don't know, but I know it's an activity I'm inclined towards and which some people insist I ought pursue.

*SIGH*

[Student returns some books. I check them in. *Beek* *Beek* *Beek* . . . ]

Ooooo, what is this?
(Reading)

Librarian angst . . .

Oh, the poor fellow. I can relate. An occasional college student receives the term "little monster".

;)

Junk

This has been a very depressing week for me, professionally. I've sorted and/or catalogued 112 books, many (if not all) of them full of nothing but senseless, amoral drivel. They are the brain children of various modern (many of them "highly-acclaimed") novelists. Many of these works were tossed by WorldCat into a genre entitled "psychological fiction", and, from all appearances, the titles are every bit as bad as that sounds.

I've been trying to sort through them, reading the summaries on the insides of the dustjackets, to try and pull out the ones that are so filthy they ought not be tolerated in our collections. If it were up to me they'd all be feeding a bonfire on the lawn, but Terence, the Aquisitions Librarian, said, "Well, since we have a literature department we really ought to keep the works of well-known authors for the sake of their research." I responded, "But they're so seedy, Terry. They're either as bad or worse than romance novels. Do we really need to keep such junk?" "Well, it may be junk, but it's famous junk, so yes." He was amused at the expression this got him. "Who in the sam heck acclaims these pervs, anyway? . . . " I mumbled, turning back to my computer screen. "Go ahead and go through them, though." said Terence, "If there are any you think are really beyond all boundaries, set them aside and I'll look at them."

Sooo, yeah, it's been a tough week. Playing the "how immoral is this novel?" game all the day long, filling my mind with disgusting images and then filling bookcarts, databases and shelves with perverse stories about people breaking every command of the decalogue, and breaking them with pizazz.

I have the whole weekend off. God be praised!!!!

The Clash of the Great Gods

That is, the American gods of today, i.e., Information, Technology and Money.

I was given this article by my New Yorker boss - he wanted to know whether I thought it worth sharing with the rest of the library staff. It's a well-written article, and this morning, having been in a rather unusual fit of intellectual agility it sent me into the following thoughts:

Since entering the field known as "library science" (aptly named 'library', being the field related to and concerned with such things, but named 'science' for no good reason - see previous post) I have encountered a very strange attitude. Many people, supposedly in authoritative positions, have decided that the library field is defined and determined by one, modern (and incidentally very wrong) conception of scholarship, learning and "progress". The main way their concept of these things is manifested is not through intellectual works aimed at these thoughts themselves (that would be far too theoretical, after all - much too unscientific), but through militant resistance to any and all forms of "censorship" from anyone, anywhere, at any time. It seems to be widely accepted that all things written, no matter on what subject, for what purpose, or with how much intelligibility, are to be included by the librarian in his or her collection. This is especially the case if the librarian works with the academia; if there is no freedom of expression (i.e., license to commit any form of stupidity) in the academic library, the world is indeed going back to the middle ages (i.e., the modern notion of going to hell) in a handbasket.

The article I linked to above points out the same conception on the grand scale, including it to expand the efforts of corporate monstrosities such as Google, Microsoft, and others. Google, especially, is shown to step forth in glory, championing the great and noble mission of placing all written words at the fingertips of Everyman.

No doubt, scoffing is natural. Nobility generally assumes a lack of self-interest, and Google made its millions through its edgy advertisement schema. Without a doubt, their aim is to make more millions off of those search-appropriate advertisements little Billy will see when he's clicking through their Universal Library for Everyman. The standards of our capitalist economy do not, however, adjudge this ignoble, but savvy - those that complain of the circumstance have no real reason to do so aside from sheer human jealousy. Google has as much rights to the millions as anyone else - if you'd thought of it first, you'd be rich, too. So stop your crying.

My real objection, however, is that people seem to think that putting together a sheer collection of all this wordage is somehow going to bring about "progress". It all comes of modern philosophy, really - Cartesian and Hegelian contortions of the universe and it's nature. If existence only comes about in the perception of the thinking thing, every expression of thinking beings becomes a valuable chunk of the universe. By virtue of this, the most nonsensical blather becomes information of inestimable worth, to be searched, referenced, annotated. Up it goes, loaded into the Google machine of data-collection so that it might, perchance, be converted into statistics and fed into the vacuous mouth of the World Spirit, swelling it towards the next epoch in this Bacchanalian revel. No doubt, everything written by men will bring us that much closer to becoming gods, per the promise given by that long, green snake with the shiny fruit of death.

Those were the more philosophical thoughts that came of this article, however. There were others, dwelling more upon the matters of social justice. No doubt, copyright law is very useful to ensure creative men the ability to make a living off their work. This can be easily seen as a good - nobody likes starving artists. On the flip side, however, it does give both artistic expression and scientific discovery the flavor of a manufactured commodity. This is highlighted by Mr. Kelly's concept that copyright laws of undue duration do not encourage the productivity of the creative artist. This seems like a twisted way of seeing it - copyright law as a way of pressuring artists into becoming "very useful engines" (to use the catch-phrase of the uncomfortably Marxist childrens' program 'Thomas the Tank Engine'). The end result is that even those rare noble discoveries, beautiful paintings, and good music all become vehicles of filthy lucre - nothing more, nothing less. If they're used in a way that doesn't make-a-buck, call out the lawyers 'cause there's gonna be a row.

Now, there is one notable (and even somewhat odd) response of the common man to this situation. Men around the world, most likely grown tired of the subscription-based or pay-per-view industry of enlightenment, have turned to 'open-source'-ing their knowledge and collecting it into free, easily accessed database programs, like Wikipedia or Open Office. Far from returning to the hell of the middle ages, where intelligent men (scarcely kept from starving by the alternate help and persecution of a Church that hated the progress of human knowledge - I'm SO serious, I actually saw this blatantly stated on an academic website's guide to copyright law) wrote on vellum in leaky, badly lit rooms while the peasants rolled in the dirt outside the gate. No, now, in our new, improved modern world, Joe Smith stocks shelves at Wal-Mart on his day-job, and later on he writes articles on Wikipedia by way of recreation - that is, after he watches "Grey's Anatomy"; he would never dream of missing that.

What a strange, strange world we live in. In the meanwhile, the men who worship the god called "money" sue the men who worship the god called "technology" and both utilize arguments against the other from their respective devotions to the gods we know as "rights" and "information" - and the demons devour one another for all eternity in the hole called hell.

!!!!

So, my most recent project is researching copyright policies and writing one for the university my library is associated with.

Oh, the depth of confusion. Copyright law seems to be the most complicated thing in the *world* to get a grip on. Pray that I make some headway soon.