6 Reasons We're In Another 'Book-Burning' Period in History
The next thing I'm going to say is going to make 80 percent of you want to punch me in the face, so let's get it out of the way: For the past year or so, part of my job has been to walk through library warehouses and destroy tens of thousands of often old and irreplaceable books.
Book burning is something people usually associate with the Third Reich (the fact that this is the second time this year I've been compared with Nazis on this website probably speaks more about me than I would care to admit sober), a symbol of intolerance and a hatred of intellectualism. But that's not why we're doing it. So, let me take this chance to make a few things clear ...
#6. A Library Near You Is Doing It Right Now
And I'm not just talking about the crappy local library in your nearest hick town where you assume nobody can read anyway.
"No need to repair the sign -- we have an audio version."
Industrial-scale book destruction is going on at the British Library, possibly the most prestigious library in the world (you can tell because it's British). Recent book-pulping scandals have hit the University of New South Wales in Australia, as well as several other institutions. Hell, when Borders bookstores went belly-up earlier this year, they decided to destroy all the unsold books instead of donate them.
Getty
The hobos would have just traded them in for books about drugs anyway.
And no, I'm not just talking about duplicates and old TV Guides, either. Imagine holding a beautiful, dusty, illustrated volume of Shakespeare printed in the 1700s, a calligraphic message from its long-dead owner inscribed on the inside cover, and throwing it straight in the trash. I've been there, more than once. I could have kept it and maybe gotten a few hundred dollars for it on eBay, if my supervisor wasn't watching with specific orders to prevent me from doing that.
Getty
"Look, this isn't the Dead Sea, and I'm not interested in its scrolls. Throw them away."
This isn't some secret Soviet plot driven by Obama's New World Order of CommuNazis, you understand. The reasons are much more mundane and infuriatingly bureaucratic. It just so happens that ...
#5. It's Cheaper Than Giving Them Away
The first and most obvious objection is, why not give the books to the poor? They need stuff to read. Or to prisoners? Or to sick kids? Or to struggling independent booksellers? It doesn't cost a thing to give something away, right?
The problem is the situation for a library is more complicated than when you just take a bunch of old clothes and unwanted porn down to the Salvation Army. A library book is stamped and bugged and cataloged so that the library knows that it belongs to them. When a book is given away or sold, the library has to go through and remove all that crap, so whoever winds up with it can prove they didn't just steal it off the shelf. I'm not kidding about that, either -- some people who wind up with such books helpfully return them to the library.
Photos.com
"Sir, for the last time, your friend is not a 'thieving douchebag.' We gave him those."
And we're talking about a lot of books here -- these libraries are having to cut down their stock in a hurry. Imagine you're the manager of a library, and some accountant tells you that you need to get rid of 100,000 books, and do it in a week. You really have two options. One, you can get a bunch of academics to scour your collection and painstakingly rate each book according to its value and importance. Then you can hire a bunch of people to take down the 100,000 least important books and painstakingly stamp and debug them, one by one. Your second option is to get the computer to spit out a list of the 100,000 least borrowed books, and hire a few people to walk down the aisles with their arms out, throwing those books in a shredding machine.
That second option is much quicker and much cheaper. Sometimes you can find a paper recycling centre that will pay you for the pulp, so destroying the books leads to a net profit. Nobody likes it, but for a librarian it's like your best friend just got bitten by a zombie and you're the only one with a gun.
Photos.com
"Dude, I just ate spaghetti off of recycled Hamlet!"
Also, remember that the stuff worth saving is buried among a lot of other books that are basically garbage. Though everyone realizes that extremely valuable books are going to inevitably get caught in the same net, there's not much that can be done about it. Nobody is going to order a first-edition Moby-Dick from a library warehouse if the 2011 reprint is sitting right there on the shelf. A computer list that ranks books by popularity can't tell the difference.
Another downside to this option is that you have to ensure total destruction. You can't just throw the books in a Dumpster for some asshole to come along and grab later. If you go the Dumpster option, you have to tear out chapters so that people won't want them, or just fill the Dumpster with detergent. You don't want people to get in the habit of treating your Dumpster like the clearance rack -- it's dangerous and messy for everyone involved.
Photos.com
"... and this is our horror and romance section."
And if a staff member does come across some forgotten 16th century treasure, the library can't allow it to be rescued -- that's encouraging employees to sort through the books rather than dispose of them. The order from the top is "no mercy." It's easier to throw books out if you don't know what they are, just as it was easier for the Son of Sam to shoot people if he didn't know their names.
#4. It Has to Be Done in Secret
If you didn't know any of this, it's because destroying books is a job that, by necessity, is done in secret. Ordinarily the first the public hears of it is when someone unwittingly finds a bunch of books in a Dumpster. Your library won't announce they're doing it, but you can find message boards with librarians discussing it in private.
Back in 2004, Victoria University in New Zealand decided that it was going to have to destroy around 130,000 books. But they had a crisis of conscience, and revealed their plans to the academics and the student body. The idea was that they would mark the condemned books with red tape, and if anyone wanted to rescue a book, they needed simply to strike the tape with a black felt pen.
Material World
"If they burn all these books, what will I use for rolling papers?"
Predictably, everyone went apeshit. A professor sent an email around the faculty calling the library "barbarians," and he led a campaign in which staff and students went through the library armed with felt pens, searching for red tape and marking every single book for retention.
Material World
Because successful activism is about feeling, not thinking.
In my case, the only people who were let in on the bookpocalypse were the people who were charged with carrying it out. By the time the general public heard about it, there was no chance to lead a rebellion -- the job was already done. And libraries will use tricky rhetoric to avoid people catching on. If you notice a ton of shelves in your library suddenly empty, and they tell you the books have been sent to a warehouse, chances are they're telling you the truth. But what they're not mentioning is that a hundred thousand books already in the warehouse had to be destroyed to make room for them.
Photos.com
This room is the entire walkthrough for The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim.
Why? Because ...
This is a really depressing article. Such a shame to see so much good material literally going up in flames for those sorts of reasons.
ReplyMy local libraries sell books all the time, mostly at just one location, but at each library also. Everytime I have gone down to the basement, aka, sales floor, it was teeming with people, some with armloads. A library might say it is not worth it, but that is just because they have not tried it yet.
ReplyI don't see the point beyond historical value to keep physical copies of books. I started reading when I was 17 and haven't stopped for 3 years, went through over 40 books, but ran out of space after 15. I have a Kindle and I have over 30 books on it, some I still have to get to or finish. We probably shouldn't make any more physical copies of books anymore, considering they're more expensive than digital ones because of the extra costs to the publisher. We save more trees that way anyway.
ReplyI'm not putting down you or your opinion in any way, but from what you wrote, you are definitely not a book lover. People who have read their whole lives and who love language and literature see the value in having the physical copies of books. I have a kindle, and ibooks, and I have lot of books on them, but my favorites I want in print. There's just something awesome about getting a new (or even old) book...I find it depressing that books are becoming obsolete. I know it's a good thing because we're going to save paper and trees...but there's something about a book. Especially the smell of a new book. Tehy just give me a good feeling. Ebooks seems almost impersonal somehow.
Yeah. My dad is a book-lover and he still buys 'em in print despite having an e-reader. He isn't a luddite--he uses it PLENTY, but some books you just want to be able to hold...
The schools I went to always donated theirs to charities / other libraries. And the library here has a little outlet store for books they think are worth selling (although I'm sure damaged or especially stupid ones get scrapped). Why not try to get volunteers to sort and sell books? Goodwill started its own nationwide eBay-type thing; it seems like libraries could band and allow the employees the ability to veto destroying books they think can be sold, and just sell them instead. And theoretically it could be done for almost nothing, since there's enough anti-book-destroyers out there who'd volunteer to maintain and update such a thing. :\
ReplyExactly. Like he said, that book that could be sold for a couple hundred dollars on ebay... Instead of burning it why don't you sell the f*****g thing?! that's so incredibly stupid!
I would tell you to read Fahrenheit 451, but you've probably burnt that s**t too.
ReplyLol I love you xD
I never saw the problem with book burning. I can understand if some super rare book has been destroyed but realistically, there isn't much that can be done about it. Most books are just run of the mill ones that are either not at all rare or no one wants to read, so what's the problem?
ReplyWithin America, no. There's more than enough to go around, so much so that they're obsolete. But there are countries that can put those books to use instead of burning them.
Luckily, our local libraries do sell (or in some cases, give away) books instead of destroying them. I'm sure occasionally some get destroyed for some reason or another (damage or whatever), but most don't meet that fate. I've personally brought home untold boxes of books, It's a great way to expand your personal library.
ReplyAs a librarian I have to say that A) this happens rarely and B) do you want to pay for the storage of these books? Because that is millions and billions of dollars libraries don't have. People whine and complain when a book is burned or a library closes, but wow, do they ever actually go and use them? No they decide to support major corporations like Amazon and Chapters (which are killing the publishing scene). Usually old and rare books are kept in an Archive or Rare books collection. If anyone knows the value of books it's librarians who have their Masters in loving them. Don't buy an e-reader if you love books. Go to your library if you love books. Actually read if you love books. Donate your time or money if you have it. Trust me if we could keep every book ever made we would. Choosing a book to go is like choosing your between your children (Sophie's Choice), and we, like everyone else out there need to cater to out market in order to stay alive.
ReplyI no longer feel guilty about all the books I've stolen over the years.
ReplyHaha, love the name. How's Ruth?
My local library has a monthly book sale. I never was terribly interested, since they rarely sold anything I wanted to read, but I think now I'll be attending those sales more often.
ReplyI don't care WHY a library is destroying books. I'm fine admitting to a gun-wrenching emotional response; burning books, any books, is a form of murder. It's destroying thoughts, possibly rare, possibly common as mud, but still something that should be preserved. The fact that it may be necessary in no way eliminates the appalling nature of such an act, any more than the most justified wars ever eliminate the human tragedy of mass deaths. It's a sad day.
ReplyAnd I'm sorry, but emotional and visceral impact of digital media will never have the same impact as the written word in a physical form, at least not for me. Pixels on a screen are immaterial and simply can't bring me to the same heights and depths as a good book on paper, held in my hands. The smell and texture of the book, reading outside on a sunny day or under a blanket with a glass of Scotch on a cold night... There's no comparison. A good book is a seduction, and an e-book is masturbation.
I would up-vote this one thousand times if I could. I agree with you entirely. No digital media will ever compare to the tactile pleasure of holding a book and flipping through its pages.
I know a lot of people with "e-readers", but the ones I know don't love books. They might love reading, but not the act of physically handling and reading a book. It's like vinyl versus CD versus digital, except that there is no vinyl that predates the existence of people like Einstein, or Bach, or King John.
Mate, I own an e-reader and I've also worked in a bookshop for years. I love books. I have shelves upon shelves, and cases next to cases of books. It is possible to both love books and also see the convenience of having an e-reader. I typically go to the library and check out a book as my first choice, but the library I go to happens to be extremely popular, and I often I go in with a list of 10 books I'm interested in and all of them are checked out. When that happens, I have zero problems with downloading something and reading it.
I appreciate this article for it's honesty. What I find amusing is that everyone uses the comments section to boast their superiority because they disagree with it.
I think my soul just died...
ReplyI hope most of them don't actually get burned. At the very least they could recycle all that paper... MONSTERS
ReplyMy library system looked into recycling. It appears that since books have glued in bindings and ink that may contain lead in the paper, they require a lot of extra processing, and many libraries especially in these challenging financial times, cannot afford to pay to have this done. I'm sure many libraries would prefer to recycle if but paying for this would result in library closures/curtailment of hours , neglecting needed infrastructure improvements, cutting children's programming and such, it's a hard sell.
Easy solution to several problems at once - just get digital subscriptions to all of those scholarly journals!
ReplyAs an irrational book lover, I refuse to accept such a tragic fate. *cries bitterly* Let's gather the masses and save the books!
ReplyI actually cried. I'm a book lover- the smell and texture of books (particularly old ones!) is one of my little pleasures in a life that is increasingly depressing. Going to the library is my only chance to read books that I don't own- and I love the classics!
ReplyI wonder if libraries could be convinced to sell those books- put them up for auction maybe? It'd take a bit of time in manhours but the risk/benefit might be a bit more on the positive side.
I can pretty much guarantee that any library you go to has more than one rolling cart full of books for 50 cents apiece. They just don't sell fast enough.
Trust me I've been down this road many times, and it takes more than a "bit" of time. A library's main expense is staff, so when library budget's get cut guess what gets cut first? I've spent lots of my own time and money, sorting, packing, shipping and convo-ing to get a small fraction of what would be considered useable or sellable items into the hands of people who want them. I couldn't possibly do this on work time.
This article made me sick.
ReplyRe people who helpfully return deaccessioned books to the library: I've actually done that. I found a book in an antique store with all the library markings, labels, catalog number, etc., from the local county library. No indication that they'd deliberately gotten rid of it. The store even let me have it for free so I could return it. But when I took it in, it wasn't in the system, so they gave it back and said "It's yours."
Reply Hide All See All 3 RepliesOnly problem was, it was a biography of George Lincoln Rockwell, founder of the American Nazi Party. Not written by a follower and very critical of him, but still, I didn't care to be stuck with it. I did read it (actually quite interesting) but then I threw it out.
Normally I would never throw a book away, but in this case...
Dude. Take that s**t to a museum.
Yep, take it to a museum so they can burn it instead, because THEY ALREADY f*****g HAVE A COPY.
That's the problem you simpleton.
just got meta
perhaps some of you would prefer that any of these books be bought rather than destroyed: awfullibrarybooks dot net
ReplyThe problem with this is that the libraries don't differentiate by the quality of the books. That means that even though the books on that site would most likely be destroyed, it wouldn't prevent a priceless first edition of a 17th century novel with the same amount of check-outs from being destroyed as well.
This is a boon for those who want to minimize or deny historical tragedies. How many limited-run books are on the shelves, perhaps the only remaining records of a local tragedy (or even a larger one)? The Holocaust was mentioned (on back pages, below the fold) before Allied troops arrived in the camps.
ReplyPurveyors of woo-woo also get some help. Without newspapers to show that a given event either did not occur (or did not happen as reported), they can make all kinds of claims about crashed 19th Century spaceships, ghosts, lynchings to 'explain' purported hauntings, and so on. With no evidence to the contrary, they think their claims are proved true.
Really, though: would it cost so much to put advertisements in the appropriate publications or on the Internet, so that people can come and look over the collections and take those old, rare books that might be among the last few in existence?
Cracked readers: next time you're at the library, toss at least a quarter in the box for donations. Better yet, a dollar or two if you can spare them. Encourage donations, so that they can add on, rather than sacrifice books for comfy chairs. (I'll admit that if it takes a coffee bar to get people into the library, we might have to deal with it. Although a vending machine would do as well. Just add one for those who don't want coffe.)
I'd use the donation box. But then I remembered the local news story of a meth head cutting a hole through the siding of the library and stole the donation box cash. Dude was later seen on camera using a CoinStar to cash the coins. Lesson? Make sure the library cleans out the donation box daily before giving.
Surely one meth head in one library can't be enough to discourage you from ever giving?
If it turned out a Cancer Research collection bucket was once stolen by a tweaker, would that stop you from ever donating again?