Grownup College

So far, my education in library science has largely been reading documents and opinions on ethics and methods and thinking about things certain ways, rather than deeply informational. Much of the ALA.org documents were clearly written by well-meaning hippies. As you may know, I was raised around hippies and despise them intensely because they are hypocrites and parasites on their environment, every bit as awful as Yuppies. The ALA.org statements should be read out loud with a breathy lisping female pot-head hippie voice to truly understand what I am talking about. Then you pause and surge as you read, as if the hippie had just finished reading a passage from one of those bodice rippers from the 19th century. Hilariously outlandishly wrong. Its not that the teachers at Cuesta are wrong about things in Library Science, per se, but it would be more helpful not to setup strange expectations with the students. Real life is going to disappoint them terribly.

I am starting my Masters degree, at San Jose State University and its a different environment. I can already tell the books weren't published to exploit student's bank accounts. They are current and well written. I am impressed so far. I may actually read these books. I aced my classes at questa merely refrencing those books most of the time, rather than reading them entirely. I can detect BS most of the time, and a lot of what was in them was BS. SJSU's books were better written, with some attempt at reasoning rather than accretion of essays into a binding. We'll see, but it is off to a good start.

Cuesta's courses are a good start for a high school student level education requirement, and is probably perfectly adequate to do most of the tasks in a library, even if its really skimpy on details like Cataloging or work performance.

The Supervisor class was a major downer, since there was little time spent on budgeting and there seriously needs to be. Money defines what is possible in a library, and telling kids/students/library techs that there's this or that magic beans program that suddenly enables the blind to see or cures ignorance? Nope. Programs are the BANE of libraries. They always cost lots of money and often special training and there's rarely funding for them. Its programs that strip away money from BOOKS, which are the entire point of a public library. Spend your money on books. Not programs. As soon as the programs thing happens to a public library, it goes sour, and like a radio station, that sort of rot poisons the whole staff with despair. And since the manager of the library is often the instigator of the poison-program? Its the manager responsible, which causes self destructive behavior in the staff, reduced efficiency, and paranoia over firing. People in libraries end up working "just barely enough" rather than their usual efficiency before the rot set in, and the result is terrible bad things. And when you stop serving the community and get wrapped up with local govt politics? You are screwed.

I have seen this several times in various libraries in the Sacramento and Gold Country areas. Rotten, run by rotters who see parasitical and destructive programs as their one scam to get their resume souped-up and get them a job somewhere better. Bad programs are a catapault over the wall to freedom. Locals here think the Midwest, which pays double for librarians, is the holy grail for their careers. And maybe it is. I don't know yet. I do know that I love the West, and while hippies stink of dope and a lack of soap, they also read. So I need to serve their interests too, and while my local library is imploding socially and financially, they get enough books to remain viable thanks to the Friends of the Library, who donates the books for about half the collection, keeping the book budget out of the hands of the self destructive librarians running the library into the ground for their ambitions and egos, hoping to escape from a town that's been kind to them. Sigh. There's been four or five head librarians that bailed out of this county after nearly bankrupting it with expensive programs that looked good on paper.

I have long been someone who cared about ethics and reputation and critical thinking. I think I can spot selfishness in management. I've seen this before, after all. The Bay Area is 100% evil selfish people, after all. Any goodness you think you see in the Bay Area is just someone who is fooling you. Remember that.

The other bane in an industry is staffers who brag of their mobility. Turnover rates are important, because they teach you which libraries have serious management or structural problems. When staffers quit after a few months, this is their vote of no confidence. They really ought to teach that at Cuesta, since recognizing you're bathing in a toxic pool (library mismanaged) is a crucial life skill. You should not stay in such places, and keeping an emergency fund to LEAVE, and staying active in job offers down the line is very important. In my experience, communities don't really notice who their librarians are. You're a person behind the desk, like any clerk. You don't matter. There's no connection or gratitude from the community. Sure, some librarians embrace programs at their own expense to make a connection and feed a sort of masochism, which explains teachers really well, but even loved teachers become anxious to jump ship? That's a big warning sign. The local high school librarian said she's ready to go elsewhere any time. Ready to be poached. When librarians are like swingers there's a real problem in the industry.

The most important thing I learned at Cuesta is to listen more, and to not express my opinions. For one thing, my opinions may be misinformed, ignorant. If you don't have all the facts you're wrong. Ignorant ranting is pointless ego. It is far more useful to get the facts and learn and watch what others do and say. That is often more entertaining, as well. When wishful-thinking hippies start to blather about some ALA.org tripe, and get themselves fired for breaking various laws, that is the sort of karma you can giggle over. And probably should. In Library Science, you have no excuse not to get the facts, and I'm a much better researcher now than I was before, when I started blogging seriously in 2013 when my mother was dying.

I plan to listen carefully, to remember Dana's Rule (still wish I could thank her in a personal and meaningful way she would appreciate, such as curing her inherited kidney failure), and continue to write essays that match the requirement specified. It is easy to get distracted on side-topics related to the center of the issue, but Masters school is for grown ups. I am not some damn floppy hippy. I am a cynical and observant adult.