A couple of days ago, I sent email to a few colleagues who (I believe) hadn’t made any public statements about either Library 2.0 (any one of several sets of concepts) or “Library 2.0” (the meme, slogan, bandwagon…), asking them whether they’d like to send me a paragraph or two suitable for publication.
I’m going to open that call to the slightly larger number of people who read this blog.
Here’s the situation:
I’ve read lots of stuff on “Library 2.0”–at least 40-odd documents.
I’ve prepared the first draft of a C&I Perspective, including “54 Views of a Brand-new Meme” (54 one-sentence “Library 2.0 is…” statements), a core section of cites (excerpts) and insights (commentary) on what’s being said, and a set of conclusions. That draft is just under 15,000 words long–in other words, a complete C&I issue.
I’m not happy with the essay, but I’m not about to discard it either. I believe it needs a philosophical wrapper to relate it to some earlier C&I essays and to illustrate why it’s just possible that Walt Crawford, who in this case observes more as a public library patron than anything else, but who also has five decades in the trenches, “just doesn’t get it.”
If you’ve gone on record at any length, there’s a pretty good chance you’re already included in the core essay.
I’d hoped for a nice medium-length (3,5000 to 5,000 words) essay that would fit in a four-essay (or so) issue, probably the February issue. But I’ve already edited the piece–and, particularly given that I don’t see any reasonably comprehensive essay on “Library 2.0,” particularly from someone who’s not busily pushing the concept, I don’t see that I can cut it in half. Or less than that.
So here’s the open query:
If you have something to say about either Library 2.0 or “Library 2.0” that is both publishable without further clarification and no more than, say, 200 words (brevity does count, at this point), I’d be interested, under the following conditions:
- It must reach me by Friday, January 6, at 4 p.m. Pacific Standard Time.
- You can either provide it as a comment on this post or as mail to firstname.lastname@example.org
- If it’s a comment, you must explicitly say that it may be published in C&I (Mail to the email address implicitly carries that permission.
- It must be signed–not with a pseudonym, but with who you actually are.
I reserve the right to edit or ignore any submissions, of course–but I believe there are thoughtful people out there who have followed some of this, have an opinion, and just haven’t chosen to make that opinion public. This is a chance. Of course, your own weblog–or whatever–is a faster chance, where you can say more and won’t be subject to editing. I’m just offering.
Right now, subject to change at any time, best chance is that this will all emerge as a special one-topic issue, before ALA Midwinter.
I think this is my last post of the year. But who knows? In any case, happy new year.