undefined

points

[-]

Disposing of books bequeathed by a major historical figure, with that person’s underlining etc., is not routine collection management. In my own location, I would expect such books to be moved to closed stacks, or perhaps moved to the national repository library, but not dumpstered.

Also, disposing of books when there are not actually space limitations, in order to create the supposed library of the future that has few books, is so new a phenomenon that it shouldn’t yet be called routine. Objecting to this trend is still very much appropriate.

by ciscoriordan3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

You're confusing the other library in the article with the (unnamed) one mentioned in the title, the Chester Fritz Library.

by canjobear3 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

Gratuitous destruction of books by librarians has been done for a while. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_Fold

by michaelt2 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

> Also, disposing of books when there are not actually space limitations, in order to create the supposed library of the future that has few books, is so new a phenomenon that it shouldn’t yet be called routine.

20 years ago when I was in university, this trend was already picking up steam.

First they removed the historical newspaper microfilms (replaced with an online archive which could be searched)

Then the academic journals went online, allowing desk-bound academics to access them online.

Then the paper journals they had on the shelves got older and older, and the library became less and less a place of research, more and more a collection of textbooks for undergraduates and a place for quiet study.

And once the library decided to focus on being a study space, whiteboards and areas for study groups and laptop users became the order of the day. Smart whiteboards and projectors too, this being 20 years ago.