Other than displays involving a small number of books for a special event or holiday, having books all over as if the library was a bookstore sounds downright ludicrous. Having a librarian (routinely) say, “now I know I saw that one, where is it?” sounds like a complete abdication of some of our professional responsibilities has taken place in your library.

But the really bad news for me is that my local library thinks this a a good thing, and has started to display books ‘face out’ on top of shelves, on random tables, on moveable carts, anywhere they can get the cover art at eye level. Which means that even if the books ARE in the library building, there is a good chance that they are not on the shelf where they are supposed to be. I wind up hunting down a librarian who will say something like, “now I know I saw that one, where is it?” and begin hunting around the stacks looking, literally, high and low for the requested title.

Maybe a good application for RFID, but not particularly helpful for patrons who actually know what they are looking for.

I am unsure whether you meant to disagree with or support my point, but I’m going to take it as an excellent added reason to support my concern over the bookstore-library analogy. In fact, it was something that I was alluding to.

Bookstores are in business to sell us stuff. Do they really care what specific stuff it is? Nope. Not at all. As long as we buy stuff from them they are happy. Or as you said, as long as we buy 5 “stuffs” from them they are happy.

N.B. I am using the highly technical term “stuff” and its plural, “stuffs,” to represent the kinds of content objects and assorted paraphernalia that bookstores sell.

I also believe there’s a third (or 5th, counting classically) objective, that of navigation–as per Svenonius–that needs to be supported. And if anyone objects to me slipping “objectives of the catalog” in here, then, fine. Forget the catalog reference.

I am speaking of ways of navigating the world purposefully, and there are at least three: browsing, finding, and navigating. These apply to the “world of information” and to the wider world.

Jennifer asks great beginning questions: “Which one is more important? Which one should we cater to? Can we cater to both? How do we balance the two behaviors in order to provide the best service possible to our constituents?” I would only widen the scope of what we are looking at by a bit first.

And I fully agree with Jennifer that we can learn a lot “from places in which people enjoy spending time,” which is one reason I support Meredith’s use of the analogy.

I know I certainly naturally feel more or less welcome in any specific bookstore or library. Often the why or why not is never even considered; I either feel comfortable or not, and I go back or don’t. I am glad we have people who want to understand these behaviors (and, hopefully the reasons behind them).

And wide variation was another of the points I was trying to make, whether or not I suspect myself of being a valid data point or not. Another way to say this maybe, is beware the research of people trying to sell you stuff. To sell you must pick a market; is their market our market?

Thanks for the great comments, Jennifer!

I also tend to get very irritated with finding specific books in bookstores . I agree that their subject groupings often leave quite a bit to be desired – and leave me frustrated. Putting books in the What’s New section, but not in their proper subject area is something that drives me insane. I absolutely hate the prospect of asking for assistance. If I can’t find something specific, I am way more apt to buy it online (and yes, it is often cheaper that way).

I agree that this is worth a conversation.

I was thinking about how I do navigate far better in smaller, independent bookstores, new or used, which have their differences, too. I can generally navigate quite well in a used bookstore, even one of decent size.

I guess one way to put it is that I do not like to browse when I want to find. To me they are different objectives. I may be browsing to find (via serendipity or directed “luck”) but I may just be browsing. When I know what I want (know item search) then I want to find via find, and not via browse. For me, large bookstore “book classification” and arrangement does not work for me when I have find qua find as an objective.

We do quite a lot of analogical thinking, so much so that teasing apart our analogies can be a very difficult thing. Unfortunately, much of our stereotyping, biasing, classifications, and other discriminators are based almost wholly on (usually unchallenged) analogies.

You seem to have a good attitude towards learning via analogy. I wish more of us did.

When I worked in this small bookstore, we had our regulars and I would set aside books as we received them knowing that one or another of my regulars would want to see them, and we spent a lot of energy tailoring the inventory for our community. In fact, I left the store when a manager came who had worked in a big box and who wanted to make this store like his old stores. He was later fired because sales dropped so dramatically…

But at the same time, you’re very right: a collection is not the same as an inventory. Luckily, my favorite part of learning by analogy is that they help you figure out what’s the same, what’s different, and what you can reinvent to make work for you. They don’t work nearly as well if you just take them, swallow them, and apply them without testing them.