Off the Mark

NOTE:  Part of response to readings for week 6, Oct 1st 2004, LIS 501 (1 of 2 required courses) last fall.

On the issue of selection vs. censorship I’d like to make a few observations, primarily referencing the "Ortega Revisited" slide. [I am working on a reproduction of the slide to link to.]  When I first saw the Asheim quote "they should never prescribe," I immediately thought that he must not be a fan of bibliotheraphy. I also agreed with him, taking ‘prescribe’ in a prescriptive sort of sense. [I reserve personal judgement on bibliotherapy at this time.] I also agree with Atkinson’s conclusion that the resulting exclusion is "inevitably a form of prescription;" taking ‘prescription’ in a limiting sense. As a philosopher, I’ve been thinking about this sort of dichotomy arising from the use of "prescribe." Why is it that I can agree with both so easily? Yes, I know I’m using the word in two different senses, but how different are they? I consulted my Oxford American Dictionary and finding little definitive solace  I turned to the OED. It, of course, was eminently helpful, but also had the potential for much complication. The OAD gives us gives us two possible relevant definitions: The first involves advising use of, particularly as beneficial; the second involves authoritative imposition. I believe Asheim would possibly agree to using it in the first sense; but it was the second which he was claiming we should not do. But where is the narrowing sense I use to interpret Atkinson’s use? The OED gives us eight definitions with the fourth being exactly what I want. " 4. trans. To limit, restrict, restrain; to confine within bounds." [The etymology is interesting and this use is almost as old as the others I've mentioned.] This sense of narrowing or "confining within bounds" is  exactly the sense I  use to interpet Atkinson, while also accepting Asheim. If Atkinson intends to use it in one of its more authoritative senses, then I do not agree with him. I take Asheim to represent one good philosophy for addressing this issue of selection vs. censorship; while I take Atkinson to be making an interesting philosophical, and in one sense correct, argument. But, Atkinson addresses the reality of our efforts in a negative sense, that is, he reminds us of social reality and human fallibleness; while not providing any positive insight into a better philosophy. One reason it is important  for one to know which sense of ‘prescribe’ they use in this realm of selection vs. censorship is that it carries with it a connotation that may well influence intention and action on one’s part. Approaching one’s job of selector as one of narrowing or constraining the information universe, but not of banning is entirely different than considering oneself to be  laying down the law, or of ‘proscribing.’

Personally, I prefer a new to me, although obsolete, sense of ‘prescribe.’ "To inscribe on the front or forepart." I use it metaphorically to describe what it is selectors do. Selection is the process of choosing what to provide  either physical or virtual access to (inscribing), which is then placed  in a physical or virtual library. The library can only provide access to small portions of the information universe; but it serves as the "front or forepart" to much more of the information universe. Asheim gives us a much more pragmatic use of the idea to positively guide us as we select.

I believe that this quote from the ALA site "Lester Asheim in Cyberspace" sums up exactly the attitude and action that Asheim is claiming is the job of the selector:

  "The major characteristic which makes for the all-important difference seems to be this: that the selector’s approach is positive, while that of the censor is negative," Asheim said. "The aim of the selector is to promote reading, not to inhibit it; to multiply the points of view which will find expression, not limit them; to be a channel for communication, not a bar against it. . . . Selection seeks to protect the right of the reader to read; censorship seeks to protect—not the right—but the reader himself from the fancied effects of his reading. The selector has faith in the intelligence of the reader; the censor has faith only in his own."
 

Citations

Asheim, Lester. "Ortega Revisited." Library Quarterly. 52 (Jul 1983): 215-226. (My source: Week 6 slides)

Atkinson, Ross. "Library Functions, Scholarly Communication, and the Foundation of the Digital Library: Laying Claim to the Control Zone." Library Quarterly. 66 (1996): 239-265. (My source: Week 6 slides)

Pinnell-Stephens, June. "Lester Asheim in Cyberspace:
  A Tribute to Sound Reasoning." ALA Intellectual Freedom Issues. 2004. ALA. 7 Oct. 2004 <http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/ifissues/issuesrelatedlinks/lesterasheim.htm>.