Comments on: habitually probing generalist

By: Mark

Mark — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 19:46:16 +0000

Thanks, Joe. It may be a (slightly more) limited take compared to previously, but then I guess it was mostly pretty narrow even when I was posting heavily.

Kirsten, I understand the feelings in your comment but the practical is also my concern seeing as my critique is not just of the theoretical (although i may focus there) but of the practical.

Theory that does not impact on the practical is of no consequence at all. And the practical that takes no account of theory (on the occasions when it needs to) is of consequence but not connected to the consequence one might hope for. Nor is it professional. Each must inform the other.

In the end, my real concern is for what we do and not for what we say. But then I seriously hope that they are connected.

By: Kirsten

Kirsten — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 19:06:17 +0000

What Christina said. Though I haven’t been doing much LIS theory-type reading lately — it’s all geared toward the practical. *sigh*

By: Joe

Joe — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 14:59:16 +0000

New name or old name, I’m glad to see you blogging again Mark. As an MLS student, I’ve always enjoyed visiting your site and hearing your take on the library world.

By: Mark

Mark — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 13:45:46 +0000

Thank, John!

Thanks, Christina! Speaking of the list, I actually started to put in a parenthetical saying I was thinking of you directly but decided it’d be better not to ask you for anything until you finish Comps.

Hope to get some more info out soon about what I’m looking for; which is a couple of slightly different but certainly related things.

By: Christina Pikas

Christina Pikas — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 23:52:35 +0000

Re the list – once I get the hang of what you’re looking for, I’ll keep an eye out for it in my readings. And Yay, about you being back!

By: John Miedema

John Miedema — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 19:45:47 +0000

Welcome back!