Tinfoil + Raccoon

ALA Annual 2007 Days 1 and 2: Party Crashing, Authors and LISNews

ALA Annual 2007/Day 1/June 22

Very happy reunion with Mr. LISNews, Blake Carver, last seen in Toronto in 2001.  Andrea Mercado and I accompanied Blake to the Library Journal Mover & Shaker luncheon, despite neither Andrea or I being M/S material.  So, I announced to retired LJ editor John Berry that I was crashing the joint.  His response was to invite me as his guest which took some of the fun out of crashing.   Andrea declared that she and I were Rogue Elements, and contributed as much to the LIS landscape as officially designated movers, shakers, emerging leaders and other notables.  You know, she's right, and that's a whole 'nother blog post. It also didn't stop me from lobbying to news editor Norman Oder for an M/S "Dilettante" category. Was pleased to sit at a table with some senior troublemakers, especially ALA past president Mitch Freedman, who managed to get us shushed by the other tables.  After the formal presentation, we played "Will the real John Berry please stand up." We stayed long after the official shindig ended and enjoyed talking to LJ staff. 

Late in the afternoon, Blake and I stopped by the pre-screening reception for Hollywood Librarian, and gave our regards to filmmaker Ann Seidl.  Andrea joined us and we headed over to the WebJunction reception, hoping to find food and the much-coveted WebJunction custom Pez dispenser.  Both were gone by the time we got there, but we stayed for a drink and much fellowship.  Blake is truly a rock star and so many people were happy to meet him, finally.  I'm here to tell you--it's not the formal sessions where the real learning happens. I heartily endorse scanning the conference schedule for receptions.  It's a good way to find people you'd like to meet, in a more relaxed setting than a presentation. 

After the reception, we grabbed some Chipotle for supper and headed to the Hollywood Librarian premier which I wrote about earlier. I didn't review the movie itself, but am thinking I was looking for something other than what I saw.  It'll be interesting to see what happens to it from here.

ALA 2007 Day 2  June 23

Made my way to the exhibits late morning and headed to the Public Programs booth.  Since I was scheduled to emcee the LIVE! author stage on Sunday, I wanted to say hi to the PPO staff and have a look at the set-up.  When I got there, Sherman Alexie had just taken the stage, so I took a seat in the booth where I got a great view from which to listen to him read from his upcoming novel--his first young adult title, the semi-autobiographical novel The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-time Indian.  What I love about his writing is that humor is never far from heartbreak, and in fact, are welded together.  He took the audience from laughter to tears in the space of a sentence.  I've heard Alexie read about three times, and it's always fun to watch him flirt with a room full of librarians.  After he read, he did some Q & A before being whisked off to his next venue.  After he was done, the booth got busy, so I jumped in and talked to folks and answered questions.  At one point, I turned around, and there, right in front of me, was Sherman Alexie, looking for his bag.  I introduced myself (after assuring him that I would find his bag) and after a moment of hesitation, he genuinely remembered me from an email exchange.  And really, that's all an author groupie wants--a bit of recognition.  We found his bag and off he went, surrounded by fans.

David Isay, the founder of the Story Corps project, was up next.  I really admire his work, so decided to stick around and listen to him as well.  He's not an author per se, but talked about Story Corps in between playing some favorite selections. Again, more teary-eyed librarians. 

After that, I decided to make my way to the Teens Read! author panel where Alexie was speaking.  It was packed, with folks spilling out into the concourse.  Laurie Halse Anderson was up when I got there. I knew she was on the panel, but never would have guessed it was her, based on the work of hers that I'd read. The woman I heard presenting was over-the-top energetic.  She was a lively, vibrant speaker--to the point where I would have been exhausted by more than 30 minutes of her, I think.  I didn't see much, but just listened from my floor seat in the concourse. 

That evening was the LISNews shindig, where Blake was lauded and toasted, and many LISNewsters got to put user IDs to real names and faces.  I sat across from fellow Illinois alum Katie Dunneback who is always fun and bubbly.  I met and talked to so many people--great fun! I left at a reasonable hour, cabbing back with the always-awesome Walt Crawford. 

Erin Hunter's Editor

Erin Hunter's Editor
Originally uploaded by rochelle, et. al.

I got a great surprise at the Harper Collins booth--I got to meet Tara Weikum, editor for the Warriors series. The HC folks were very interested to hear about the Warriors fan action on Tinfoil+Raccoon. Tara gave me some scoop on upcoming Warriors stuff.

ALA Council Farewell

Here I am at ALA's Annual conference and to my last (for now) Council meetings.  A couple months ago, I announced my likely resignation from Council and promised a post with my final answer and reasons for that answer.  When I posted my likely departure, I was frustrated about the outcome of the Council elections.  People who had made significant contributions were not reelected and at least two people who have voluntarily sat through several seasons of Council meetings and know more about ALA governance than most Councilors, were not elected.  At that time, I just plain wasn't sure I wanted to be a representative for an organization whose low number of voting members clearly didn't do their homework.  To a large extent, I still feel that way.  I've been on enough committees the past few years to know that a good number of people are elected to Council who have no idea what they've gotten into.  "Do you mean I have to come to both Midwinter and ALA?"  I've been a member of an APA committee where appointees had to admit that they really didn't understand what APA was.  That's ...discouraging...to say the least.

A lot of folks have lobbied hard and encouraged me to stick it out.  They have been just as loud and attentive as the "ALA sucks" devil on my other shoulder.  The attention has been flattering and most of the arguments compelling, but the bottom line is this:  My service to Council is simply not a good fit with where I am in my career.  What I do on Council is too far removed from what I am and should be doing as a new manager, so much so that I don't think it's an appropriate use of my time.  No one in my building wants to hear about what I did at Council. Most of my colleagues outside of my building don't much care what I do on Council.  And, ultimately, I don't have the energy, heart, fire, to work to fix what I find problematic. 

What do I find problematic?  Despite my personal political feelings, I don't want to spend my professional development time listening to arguments about what is and isn't a library issue.  It doesn't make me swell with pride to know that ALA sends out "statement" and feel-good resolutions on torture, impeachment and troop withdrawal.   I find it problematic that Council does not have alternative means of participation and requires significant financial resources (please, no stories of sacrifice about sleeping 12 to a room, walking to ALA in a foot of snow, or how you lived on cheese cubes and cheap wine at vendor receptions).  If I'm not willing to duke it out on the Council list or on the Council floor,  I need to give my seat up to someone who hopefully has a clue and wants to do the work.  I am telling you right now: vote for Aaron Dobbs next time around.  In fact, if we could do a Cyrano thing and let me be Aaron by proxy, I'd do it.

Part of the reason it's taken me so long to write this is that: a) I've had enough doubt that I knew it wasn't time to write something I might regret; b) when I was talking to my Library Society of the World compadres about it, I got a lot of negative feedback on ALA as a whole.  While ALA is huge, lumbering, inefficient, and certainly not relevant to all librarians,  I still find value in it.  My intention has never been to ditch ALA, but rather, to find a more satisfying, meaningful way to serve and be served by the organization.

This is not a call for anyone to ditch ALA or follow my lead by leaving Council.  There are folks who have no use for ALA, and I respect that. There are folks who want ALA to work better and to be more relevant. Please, work to make this happen. If you are actively involved in ALA or considering governance, please make sure you know what you are signing on for.  Don't be a seat warmer, don't feel cowed or bullied by other Councilors.  You need to roll up your sleeves and duke it out sometimes.  If you are on Council and have not participated in discussions on the list or floor, take a hard look at why you are on Council (aside from being able to get first crack at hotels).  It's politics, folks, and you if you are dissatisfied with ALA in general, do pay attention to Council and to who gets elected. Council is the governing body for the entire organization.  Most significant change to ALA comes from and through Council. Karen Schneider and Aaron Dobbs are plotting the revolution.  I'm not sure at what level I'll be participating at this point, but I certainly will be cheering them on.  Become an Agiterati and have a look at the Improve ALA wiki, put together by Aaron.

None of this means that I am absolutely and finally done with ALA governance.  And it doesn't mean that it's been a waste of my time. I've made terrific friends and gotten a practical education in politics and governance.  I only hope that I've made an equivalent contribution to the organization.

Hollywood Librarian: World Premier

Friday night, I attended the world premier of the Hollywood Librarian, a much-anticipated film directed by Ann Seidl. From the film’s website:

The Hollywood Librarian: A Look at Librarians through Film will be the first full-length documentary film to focus on the work and lives of librarians. Using the entertaining and appealing context of American movies, the film will hold some surprises for people who may think they know what librarians do. 

While we missed the red carpet walk, straggling in with our Chipotle bags right before the movie started, we were surprised to find over a thousand folks--an impressive number for a Friday night at Annual. 

The film was loaded with clips from well-known films featuring librarians (Desk Set, Party Girl and several others), featured interviews with librarians and was delivered with surprisingly good production values. It was charming and heartwarming and, at times, had me alternately cheering and teary. Toward the end, the film dragged slightly and was a bit heavy-handed. I'm not convinced the film, as is, would go too far in converting library agnostics.    

After the film, Seidl announced that the film had already garnered a spot in a film festival and was generating some buzz. She then announced that rather than going through a traditional release, she was going to use libraries to release the film. All libraries had to do was ask for the film and she’d send it. Cool, we thought! Then came the caveats which left many in the audience scratching their heads. Libraries that take the film have to agree to host at least two public screenings during Banned Books Week, 2007. And, they have to agree to charge admission; specifically--8.00 for adults, $5.00 for youth, no charge for librarians. Libraries will then return one-third of the proceeds to the production company and another third to help defray distribution cost. They'll keep the last third for themselves. In addition, the film will come with marketing, promotional and other value-added materials.   

While Seidl offered solid reasons for doing this, I don’t think there was full consideration or understanding of how public programming works in libraries.  Seidl offered that there are more libraries than there are McDonalds, which would, presumably, give the film an tremendous distribution mechanism.  But, not all of these libraries are large, thriving, well-staffed facilities. This more-than-McDonald’s number includes school and special libraries, tiny libraries with limited hours and staffing, and academic libraries, which may or may not offer traditional cultural programming.  Other reasons that  make her plan less than ideal:

• Many libraries have policies that preclude them from charging admission to public programs. In fact, it is counter to  ALA policy, and probably a violation of local and state ordinance in some cases to charge for library programs.
  
• Some libraries lack facilities and equipment to host such an event.
• Libraries that have healthy public programming probably have their calendars and rooms filled through next year.
• It's hard to predict attendance at library programs. Seidl imagined large numbers of attendees. In reality, programming is an unpredictable activity for many libraries. I've offered several video discussion programs offered through ALA. Some have been wildly successful. (Wild being 80 attendees.) One was downright disastrous. Even on the night when we hosted a film with discussion facilitated by the director, we were only able to attract 6 people. We did not charge admission.
• Charging admission would severely limit attendance. Free screenings would attract a broader audience. Only the most die-hard of library fans would be willing to shell out money, and the largest potential audience--librarians--wouldn't have to pay at all.

Unfortunately, I won't be able to take Seidl up on her offer as I imagine most libraries cannot. I would urge her to reconsider and use a traditional distribution model. While not perfect, it’s an impressive first effort and a film that deserves to be seen.