Controversy of RA

In my last post, I talked about RA and mentioned discussing more the controversy in RA. But first, I want to briefly explore an idea that has percolated to the surface of my mind since yesterday.

RA (Reader's Advisory for those unfamiliar with the acronym) is a type of service that connects readers with books they would enjoy. Active RA (see my previous post) falls in with more general reference services and librarians use similar tactics in an RA interview as they would in other reference interviews. In addition, there are tools for RA--just as there are for other types of reference work--to assist librarians with connecting their patrons with another book (or DVD, magazine, etc.) that they will like. The idea of RA made me think of Ranganathan's 5 Laws (a very good discussion of them can be found here), and the second law in particular, "Every reader his or her book." During my class in which RA was the topic last week, I came to understand more about RA and the importance it plays in the service libraries provide to their patrons. However, this morning I realized that it is necessary to provide RA in the context of Ranganathan's second law. The second law justifies reference services in general and RA services in particular because it defines the purpose of connecting patrons to the items or information they desire. This is what a library does; how it happens may manifest differently in different libraries, but at the heart of every library's operation is the help library staff give patrons to find what they're looking for. General reference works to connect patrons with information or items they know they want. What is RA but helping patrons find a book they don't yet know they want? General reference and RA are two sides of the same coin (aka the second law).

Now so far, RA sounds like a pretty awesome and important service, right? So how can there be any controversy about helping people find a book? Well to start, not everyone--even within the profession--see RA as a necessary service to provide. Controversy can build when a few librarians are fighting to keep their RA resource subscriptions going at a time when libraries are having to slash budgets and work with less funding. A lot of librarians don't understand or are apprehensive about RA. Feelings can include "I don't read a lot of genre X, so how can I do RA?", "I don't like genre X, so how can I do RA?", "There's no real answer to RA questions, so how can I provide an accurate response?", or even "I don't know how to talk books" (Trott, p. 63). It's hard to get support for a service (even an important one) if the voices of dissension are loud.

In addition to controversy and conflict on the part of librarians, there is also controversy and conflict on the part of patrons and others outside the library. Why? Because of the types of materials patrons are looking for and are connected with. One of my classmates proposed a very thought-provoking hypothetical example. In it, a teenaged boy was looking for a hypothetical movie with lots of nudity and violence for a "guy's night." The library didn't have the exact item he wanted, so the librarian fielding the boy's question recommended another movie about a classic character in horror stories (Dracula) that was rated R for nudity and violence. This kind of situation of course would raise concerns with parents who would be worried about the fact that the librarian recommended an item with mature content to a teenager. However, our professional ethics dictate that we connect patrons with the materials (or types of materials) and information they want, as long as the materials or information can exist within current US law; if you want to see one of our most core tenets, check out the ALA Bill of Rights (particularly articles III and V). Also, as much as parents and guardians would like surrogate parents in librarians for their children, the responsibility of assuring children and teens don't borrow materials their parents would object to ultimately falls on the parents. Many libraries have policies that state they do not censor materials or refuse to check out items based on a patron's age. To see how this might look, here is the Access to Materials Policy of my local library:

"All staff members will respect every patron's right to choose his/her own library materials.

As part of the Reference interview, in recommending material to any patron, reference staff will consider the patron's reading capabilities, reading comprehension, and the specific question or interest at hand.

When material is not available at a branch library, reference staff will explain and encourage the use of Interlibrary Loan by both adults and children when it is appropriate.

It is not the responsibility of the circulation desk staff to question patrons about the materials being checked out of the library.

This policy applies to all formats of materials in the Library's collection and to patrons of all ages."

Before last week, I didn't realize how closely connected RA and larger issues like censorship and freedom to information are. I see RA in a much different light now. It is a vital service to patrons, but one that sees its fair share of objection from patrons and a lack of support from librarians. I feel like I have a better grasp of what it is and how it fits in both within a library and within our profession.

Trott, B. (2012). Reference, readers' advisory, and relevance. The Reference Librarian, 53(1), 60-66. doi: 10.1080/02763877.2011.596367