Yes, but are we really extinct?

Today, Jasper Reese gave a provocative talk about whether the library as a place is really necessary. I don't think he presented his case very well, though. For example, he spoke about his department buying books. A few minutes later, he spoke about how irrelevant books are to his research and how in a few years time, we can expect all books to be digitised. He also showed us his PhD thesis (only in book form).

Huh?

I don't doubt that libraries are changing. That's pretty much all we're about, isn't it? We've moved from card catalogues to online catalogues, from sending photocopied journal alerts to departments to offering RSS feeds. We communicate on listservs, write blogs and teach students with PowerPoint presentations.

So are we irrelevant? I don't think so. We're the people who work behind the scenes to make the information available on Jasper's desktop. We're the people who train his students to find information in the first place. Yes, more and more journals and books will be digitised in years to come, but will they all be digitised and available on Google. Nope.

I have to say, I'm a bit bored by this approach. I've spoken to one too many academics who believe librarians are an extinct, irrelevant breed. We know our jobs are changing and that in the future, they probably won't look anything like they do at the moment. But to call us a dying breed is just short-sighted. Electronic journal subscriptions don't just magically appear on your desktop. They're there because librarians have spoken to academics and decided together that this is what they need. Students aren't born with the knowledge of how to look for information - it's a learned skill and generally, it's the librarian who teaches it to them.

If librarians were a dying breed, I'd be the first one outta here. There are plenty of other careers that interest me. But I'm willing to stick around for awhile. And that's only because I believe there's still a lot of work to do.