My sister is a wonderful person. She’s also a complete packrat. You know, the kind of person who never seems to throw anything away… everything is kept “just in case,” “for the future,” or “because of sentimental value.” And I mean everything. She’s gotten better in the past few years, but I remember a time when entire rooms of her house seemed to be filled with random objects that hadn’t been used in years. Thank God she decided to overhaul things a bit before her house became a fire hazard!
I know a lot of librarians like this, too. Not necessarily when it comes to their homes or personal possessions, but in terms of their library collections. I don’t think there is a librarian in the world that doesn’t wish he or she had more space for materials, and in many ways I sympathize. But I often get a chance to see the contents of their collections and I frequently ask myself “Why are they keeping this?????”
Sure, they have collection development policies in place that in theory should be the driving force behind the decision to keep or to toss. But it all ultimately comes down to the librarian’s decision. And it can be really hard to give things up.
But is there really much value, at least in a public library setting, to keeping travel guides to 
I’m not talking about keeping things for historical value. As a former historian, I definitely understand the value of retaining cultural artifacts for future studies. But here I’m talking about a regular old public library collection. What, exactly, and I supposed to do with the 1997 New York City With Kids travel guide I found at my local library? Is any of that stuff even still there?? And prescription drug guides from 1997 are simply irresponsible.
Come on, folks. It’s time to let go. I know you spent a lot of money on some of those books. I k now you may not be able to afford to replace everything. I know you are busy. I know that you can’t keep up with everything. But I don’t want to hear you complaining about “no shelf space” if you have a collection full of old junk. Throw it out.
View blog reactions
Entries (RSS)
August 8th, 2007 at 9:54 am
In one of my LIS classes we visited a law library where the librarian’s policy was to keep everything. Period. She discussed the fact that she would need to find off site storage soon for some of the collection. On the discussion board afterwards, most of my fellow students praised her decision, saying these things were important and needed to be kept. I was one of the few that said that this idea was unsustainable, and that libraries need policies to dictate what they throw out just as much as they need collection development policies.
I think it’s irresponsible to simply say you’ll keep everything- because someday, someone will have to make the hard decisions you refused to make.
August 8th, 2007 at 10:08 am
Wow, Karin! Everything???
I can see why a law library would want to maybe keep more stuff than a public library. There is definitely a call for historic documents and so on in that situation. But everything? That’s crazy. Off-site storage isn’t cheap, especially if it needs to have the right climate control conditions to store these sorts of materials for the long term. You’re right, it doesn’t seem realistic.
I think it also creates some real access issues for users. I worked in an academic library with offsite storage for a while. Getting your hands on the materials for the patrons was not exactly the easiest thing. If you’re going to keep a lot of stuff permanently in storage, then you have to have a darn good catalog, and procedures in place to provide good access to those materials. Without that, what’s the point???
August 9th, 2007 at 12:31 pm
Oh, packrat ‘policies’ drive me crazy - there is no need to keep things that have no relevance? In certain libraries there is more of a need for keeping archival information, but still, we can’t just go around keeping everything.
We have collection management skills and policies for a reason, and it’s not just so that we can hoard everything away just because we don’t want to lose it. (I’d happily cull large chunks of my collection if I were allowed - why do we have almanacs and directories from the mid-nineties still? why?)
August 9th, 2007 at 7:09 pm
I agree with Emily, especially concerning public libraries. Books in areas like medicine and travel need to be up-to-date. Otherwise, librarians are not serving their users properlyor ethically. I’ve worked at two public libraries that did not weed regularly. It is embarrassing to show a parent a book on terrariums from 1972 and then have the parent make a rude comment about the terrible state of the collection. Patrons want and expect current and accurate materials. Also, they don’t want to touch a smelly book that might be older than them. How can we teach people good research skills if we have any old book on the shelf because we want something instead of nothing? My library is part of a library system to help make up for holes in our collection and the fact that we are a small library.
August 13th, 2007 at 10:51 pm
Amen. I have been a librarian for 35 years and some people understand that the concept of collection development is to buy and to discard and others don’t. Hey folks, we can’t keep everything. We are not a warehouse; we are a public library.
Even multiple copies of a former bestseller. Notice the word FORMER. I had a librarian once tell me that the title might become popular again. Well, if it does we can buy more and trust me, if it becomes popular again, the publisher will print more copies. Remember, that the shelf the books sit on is prime real estate.
A number of years ago when I first came to my current library a patron complained that the decorating books were too old and asked us to buy new ones. When I checked it out boy was I embarrassed.
Statistically, if you weed, they will come. More books makes it is easier to see what is on the shelf. Some librarians think that they more you have the better you look. Wrong!
Enough said, go do some collection development (I mean weeding).
Just some thoughts from a very seasoned librarian.
August 16th, 2007 at 4:49 pm
I love to weed! Weeding is good! In my experience in a busy public library branch, circulation goes up in an area right after it is weeded. Patrons aren’t willing to wrestle with the books on a jam-packed shelf, and they won’t ask us to do it for them. They’ll give up and go away without what they wanted, which isn’t how a library is supposed to work, is it?
August 17th, 2007 at 5:00 pm
Packrats….are fustrating beyond belief. A public library exists to provide up to date information it is not a shrine to books. My previous library had been weeded by a tornado that hit us back in the early 90’s and the librarians were so afraid to get rid of anything. But after a few years the shelves were so jammed with out of date books, our patrons didn’t want to bother browsing. Once we cleaned out the collection we were able to evaluate what we needed to update and present a coherent collection development budget to the city manager!
When I was in library school I took a class in Special Collections and the by word was “On the way to the dump, I thought of you!”
August 20th, 2007 at 12:00 am
I have found a solution to the packrat within - art from discarded library books. I am entranced by the patina of cards and discard stamps. I draw in them. Do you think I will go to hell? Will there be librarians there?
September 24th, 2007 at 4:56 pm
[…] Library Packrats: Come on, folks. It’s time to let go. I know you spent a lot of money on some of those books. I know you may not be able to afford to replace everything. I know you are busy. I know that you can’t keep up with everything. But I don’t want to hear you complaining about “no shelf space” if you have a collection full of old junk. Throw it out. […]