Search News


Browse Archives

News

The Joy of Stacks

June 9, 2005

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

To understand why professors need great libraries, says Andrew Abbott, "you need to think about an ape swinging through the trees."

Abbott is not an evolutionary biologist, but a sociologist at the University of Chicago. And to Abbott, a scholar in a library is just like a swinging primate. "You've got your current source, which is the branch you are on, and then you see the next source, on the next branch, so you swing over. And on that new hanging vine, you see the next source, which you didn't see before, and you swing again."

When books aren't browsable or instantly available, Abbott says, a scholar becomes the ape "with no branch to grab, and you are stopped, hanging on a branch with no place to go."

At far too many libraries, he says, that is becoming the norm. Many universities are boasting about how they are digitizing collections or building vast, off-site facilities to store millions of books. Even when those books are available within hours, Abbott says, that destroys the way scholars need to think -- moving from source to source, not knowing which source they will stumble on.

Abbott heads a faculty committee at Chicago in charge of guiding a mammoth expansion of the Joseph Regenstein Library there. Chicago recently embarked on a plan that will end up with Regenstein housing more volumes -- 8 million -- under a single roof than any other university library in the United States (the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign currently has the honor, with 7.5 million volumes in its main library). What's more, none of the library's collections will be moved off site, most monographs will be browsable, and miles of new stacks will be added in the expansion of 38,000 square feet.

Duane Webster, executive director of the Association of Research Libraries, says that many university libraries would love to keep their books in a single central facility, but lack either the funds to do so or the space on central campus. "Books remain central to the mission of the research library," he says. "The Chicago expansion is very significant nationally in showing the commitment to the printed book."

To understand how unusual the Chicago expansion is (Regenstein currently has only 4.5 million volumes), Harvard University offers an illustrative comparison. Harvard has more volumes in total -- 15 million -- than any American university. But Harvard has more volumes stored off-site (5.5 million) than in its single largest library, Widener Library, which has 3.5 million volumes.

The non-bibliophile might ask, isn't 3.5 million plenty?

Judith Nadler, director of the library at Chicago, answers with an emphatic No, which isn't surprising given that she supervises the purchase of 150,000 new volumes a year. "Collections within quick reach matter," Nadler says. "Our research today is interdisciplinary. You don't just go in one subject area. So the more you have under one roof, under one classification system, the easier it is, the better it is for scholars."

Nadler is quick to point out that Chicago is not Luddite with regard to the role of technology in helping libraries. Regenstein's users, for example, have access online to full text of more than 40,000 journals. But she says that the hype about digitization ignores the limits technology offers, especially for research facilities with global subject matter.

"I think the significance of what we are doing is enormous," she says. "We have a very, very large and rich collection, and it is rich in area studies, in languages, rich in materials from all parts of the world -- including many parts of the world where digitization will not come for a very long time in the future." Chicago intends to step up its purchasing in such areas in the years ahead, Nadler says, creating a repository of materials that the best search engine couldn't find.

Some materials -- primarily searchable journals -- will not be in open stacks, Nadler says. But Chicago is creating a high-density, rapid retrieval system that will allow professors to receive such materials within five minutes. A few other universities -- such as Sonoma State and Valparaiso Universities -- already use this system, but Chicago will by far be the largest to use it. Nadler says that the system could have been used for books, too, but the university wants to do everything possible to promote browsing in the stacks.

"Our faculty believe very much in the need to use materials by finding them in a serendipitous way," Nadler says. "You walk through the stacks and find what you want."

Richard P. Saller, Chicago's provost, says he thinks the university's plans provide it with more flexibility than a move in favor of digitization. The university will continue, of course, to add to its online materials, he says. "But for all the talk about digitization, our flow of printed material into the library hasn't diminished at all," he says. If at some point in the future, more digitization makes sense, he says, Chicago could move in that direction.

"But what if there is a dramatic move away from digitization?" he asks. In such a scenario, a place like Chicago that has placed a premium on acquiring printed materials will have collections others can't match. "Our aim here was to be absolutely the top-notch university library."

Saller, a historian of the Roman empire, also says that he relates to the frustrations of faculty members elsewhere who have to wait for books. "The off-site facilities that other libraries are building take 24 or even 72 hours to deliver materials," he says. "If that's a one-time need, that's not insurmountable," he says. "But for faculty who are intensive users of the library, and I count myself as one of those, at least in my past life, it can substantially slow you down."

And Saller, too, speaks with passion about serendipity. "Everyone here is emphatic about the value of browsing, and the possibility of coming across unexpected materials."

In fact, the library plans are expected to be so popular with researchers that the university sees the library as a recruiting tool for people who will want to work at Chicago or just do research here.

Abbott, the sociologist, says that he spends three weeks a year at the University of Oxford, home to one of the greatest libraries in the world, the Bodleian. But as great as its collections are, Abbott says, all of his Oxford friends are so frustrated with their inability to quickly use its materials that they go to Cambridge or London for research, where they can get at the books.

Back in the United States, he says, "everyone else in the country is going to these off-site facilities because they are cheaper and they don't have room to build. We are going to be the place where those faculty come. We are creating a facility that will attract lots and lots of people from everywhere."

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Comments on The Joy of Stacks

  • The Joy of Stacks
  • Posted by Carl Kinbar , ABD at University of S. Africa on June 9, 2005 at 9:34am EDT
  • "Even when those books are available within hours, Abbott says, that destroys the way scholars need to think — moving from source to source, not knowing which source they will stumble on."

    This is exactly right. Waiting several hours for the next books in a line of thought is to the research process like waiting several hours for the next move in the act of sex. It has a somewhat dampening effect.

  • Posted by Ronald Granieri at Penn on June 9, 2005 at 10:05am EDT
  • As a Chicago alumnus, I am delighted to hear that the U of C is choosing this path. The ability to browse is what makes libraries such exciting places, and it is nice to know that someone somewhere understands how important serendipity is to the life of the mind.

  • Posted by lorraine colts on June 9, 2005 at 10:19am EDT
  • I like to let my finger do the walking down the the shelves, and take,not to wait, we not that in the line. However, this is and can become a good thing for such large volumes of books, to always have ready printed copy in the same. But lets not forget those that just like to sit read and take with and not have to have for.

  • Posted by Bill Murphy on June 9, 2005 at 2:42pm EDT
  • I researched an interdisciplinary dissertation in Regenstein and a number of other libraries, notably the National Library of Ireland and Trinity College. There is absolutley nothing like seeing an unlikely title two books away from the one you went for, checking its index, and finding key information. I so flooded the NLI with requests that the staff eventually let me in the closed stacks for a Regenstein-like expereience.

  • "The Joy of Stacks"
  • Posted by Ed Strauss at Cambridge in America on June 9, 2005 at 2:42pm EDT
  • I sent this to Peter Fox, Librarian of the Cambridge (UK) University Library, who comments:
    "The UL has well over 8 million volumes under one roof, so that puts us ahead of any US university library - we could well have the biggest collection under one roof of any university library in the world."

  • Posted by Andrew Purvis on June 12, 2005 at 6:08am EDT
  • I could not agree more. This style of research is something I teach to my community college students. They all too often walk into a first-year course with tunnel vision, not realizing that these wonderful computer searches are often too focused to assist them. Crossed-eyes in the stacks often help more than cross-indexing in most databases.

  • Joy of Stacks
  • Posted by Tim Porges , librarian on June 13, 2005 at 1:25pm EDT
  • The librarian at Regenstein says that she has lots of material that can't be searched electronically? Then how does she catalogue it? Does she keep a separate card index for these materials? If so, how does she index them, and so on...

    Seriously, doesn't it strike anybody else a bit funny that here are the big deal scholars and they need the serendipity of shelf scanning in order to grow intellectually?

    The primate metaphor has occurred to me as well, and not because of brachiation. Scholars in an open stack library are a lot like Gorillas. They build temporary nests and move on, sometimes returning to old nests in a regular cycle, sometimes not. One of the regular tasks of student librarians is to go through the stacks and find these nests and return the books to regular order or at least remove them for reshelving. This can be done with student help at most smaller university libraries. At a huge semi-open repository like Illinois (which is also the largest Dewey Decimal library in existence) the job is beyond imagination. Most of the shelving is of the movable variety, which cuts into ones comfort a good deal, and the lighting is dim at best, and timed to go out at regular intervals. Otherwise the university wouldn't be able to find enough space or afford the electric bill.

    But also, much of the collection is uncatalogued. This means, it went missing during the last electronic catalogue conversion, and it now no longer exists as far as the Illinois consortial catalogue is concerned. So a better measure of the Illinois collection would be the number of books that are actually cited in Illinet, and it's millions of books smaller. Frankly, nobody knows now many books are up there. I guess this is the kind of gothic dimness to which Regenstein aspires: I wish them joy of it.

    Two other issues: cold remote storage for seldom-used materials (which in academic terms means materials that haven't been touched, ever) is better for the books, so they'll live longer. That's a real advantage for the "scholars." Plus, a lot of that material is in dead sciences, like phrenology. I like a library that holds on to its phrenology section, but does it have to do that in the open stacks?

    Thank You

  • 'The Joy of Stacks'
  • Posted by Bob Kaster at Princeton Univ. on June 14, 2005 at 3:14pm EDT
  • T. Porges, librarian, asks: 'Seriously, doesn’t it strike anybody else a bit funny that here are the big deal scholars and they need the serendipity of shelf scanning in order to grow intellectually?'

    Nope, not funny (though the phrase 'big deal scholars' does strike me as a bit nasty). The issue isn't so much growing as connecting, and the ability to work the stacks makes connections possible in ways that information-retrieval science hasn't yet devised (with all due stress on 'yet'). And apart from the beauty of the stacks, the spatial relation between stacks and reading rooms and periodicals in the Regenstein makes it more conducive to good intellectual work than any library I've known in 30 yrs. university life, which include (besides the 22 yrs. I spent at Chicago) much time spent in the libraries of Harvard, Princeton, and Oxford.

  • Libraries
  • Posted by Michael Class on June 27, 2005 at 1:52pm EDT
  • Interestingly, nobody has mentioned the greatest of all libraries in the US: The Library of Congress. It has closed stacks, and yet draws researchers from around the world. There are arguments pro and con for accessible stacks and closed stacks, but what ultimately determines a great research library is the richness of its collection, not how it gets into the researcher's hands.