I was rather impressed recently, when the Australian Library and Information Association announced last week that they were going to develop a National Framework for Public Libraries, which would coincide with a new initiative from ALIA in developing National Standards for the provision of public libraries in Australia.
Now, I love public libraries, as you will already know. And one thing I'm very passionate about is setting consistent standards of quality and professionalism in public libraries. There is an unfortunate attitude amongst many in the community that you don't get a professional service from a public library, and that it's basically a 2nd-rate public service that you wouldn't expect to get anything of quality from. For many young / professional people in the community, they wouldn't even THINK about going to the public library for anything.
There is also an all-too-unfortunate attitude amongst many library and information professionals in the academic and research industries that public librarians aren't "real" librarians, in terms of professional practices of library and information sciences. It's also unfortunate that these attitudes are often reinforced by the growing trend in public libraries of doing away of the "Eligible for Associate Membership of ALIA" when it comes to librarian roles.
And I will happily concede that the completion of an accredited course in librarianship shouldn't be mandatory in public libraries (or many libraries) in order for the librarian to provide a professional service. Professional accreditation, after all, has always been more about being accountable with an assessed evidence of professional knowledge, but there are other ways in which this can also be achieved, such as transferable skills and industry experience, combined with on-the-job training.
However, this is certainly a bone of contention across many a public library service, and it will be interesting to see how it is addressed by ALIA in establishing national workforce standards in the public library sector.
I also love how some public libraries are extremely pro-active in innovation and social inclusion, and incorporating these elements into national standards would be a fine move in raising the bar for other libraries who may, perhaps, miss the mark in terms of customer service, community building, and online engagement. I realise that resources can be tight, and you can be worked off one's feet just in managing library circulation and acquisition workflow, let alone doing all that other "extra" stuff. But it could be the justification that some library services need to point out to their directors where their services are falling short of the bar.
I also really look forward to seeing which other bodies are consulted in developing these guidelines, such as PLA, PLVN, PLNT, as well as the statewide public library projects that are run by the State Libraries.
I'm really excited at the prospect of all this, and that such a positive direction has come out of the ALIA Public Libraries Summit. I can't wait to see where this leads...
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Friday, July 17, 2009
Parallel Importation... a conversation with myself.
Thanks for your comments, guys. They've been food for thought. And yes, it's something that I've been thinking about quite a bit lately.
So, here's the conversation that I'm having in my head. On one side, we have Andrew-the-literature-buff, who cares about the Australian literary industry. On the other side, we have Andrew-the-librarian, who wants books to be cheaper, and therefore more accessible to the Australian people.
Librarian: Books cost too much! Rah!
Lit-buff: Yes, they do. What's your point?
Librarian: Well, books are so much cheaper overseas! Why can't we get them here?
Lit-buff: Well you can, but wouldn't you rather support Australian publishers and authors.
Librarian: But they charge too much for books. if we get rid of Parallel Importation Restrictions (PIRs), then books will be cheaper.
Lit-buff: Um, no. PIRs have no bearing on the actual cost of the production of Australian books.
Librarian: But the Australian publishing industry have a monopoly on the Australian market. Bringing in some competition will surely drive down the cost of locally-produced books, yes?
Lit-buff: It's possible. It's also possible that the Australian book industry can't afford to reduce the prices of locally-produced books to compete with the international market. Especially if they are allowed to compete on our turf, but we can't compete on theirs because their countries are retaining their PIRs.
Librarian: But there would still be cheaper books!
Lit-buff: UK and US editions of books, whereby your money would go to US and UK publishers, and a smaller royalty to the author.
Librarian: They're not *that* much different. And really, the question of royalties shouldn't come into this argument. That's up to the author and the publisher to negotiate. If they go for a crappy book deal, that's their problem.
Lit-buff: I can't believe you actually said that.
Librarian: No, neither can I. My point is that the outcome of this recommendation *shouldn't* affect how much authors are being paid. Their books will be sold, one way or another. And they might get paid less per overseas copy of their book, but if they are cheaper books, it is likely that they will sell more books. It all evens out, right?
Lit-buff: You don't sound so sure. Besides, you've totally avoided the issue of Australian editions being replaced by overseas editions. They're NOT the same. The language is subtly different. They're representative of a society that isn't our own.
Librarian: Not substantially. I mean, yes, when it comes to some spellings. But the Macquarie English Dictionary accepts most American spellings as Australian nowadays. Stop being a linguistic pedant and get with the program!
Lit-buff: Okay, fine, you can have that one. But I'm still not convinced that the removal of PIRs won't result in the demise of smaller publishing houses and independent booksellers.
Librarian: That's capitalism, baby. Why should some have it easier, at the expense of the consumer? Open up the market and let some healthy competition even things out. Sure, there will be some victims, but the market will be healthier for it.
Lit-buff: That's bullshit. You made that up, didn't you?
Librarian: *sigh* Yes.
Lit-buff: So, what you're saying is that selling out our book industry to the international market is worth the chance to have cheaper books from overseas, even if it means possibly reducing the already-pitiful income of writers, putting smaller publishers and booksellers out of business, and minimising the opportunities for new and emerging writers to get published. Whilst, at the same time, we will undoubtedly boosting business for overseas publishers and writers. The benefits for overseas publishers for writers are absolutely certain, whereas the future of our own Australian literary culture will be uncertain.
Librarian: ...
Lit-buff: But the people who have the most to gain from these recommendations aren't the Australian people. It's the multi-national corporations who can afford to drop prices whilst still maximising their profit margins by flooding the market with cheap leftovers from overseas. The Australian people might be paying less than before, but their money will be going straight into the pockets of corporate profiteers, and not the Australian creative industry.
Librarian: Look... all I'm saying is that we shouldn't have to pay more for a book here in Australia than people do over in the UK and the US. That's all I care about. That's my issue.
Lit-buff: Well my issue is that removing PIRs doesn't actually deal with that problem.
Librarian: Okay, I'll agree with you there. So, why is it exactly that books are more expensive here than overseas? They have Parallel Importation Restricts over there too.
Lit-buff: I have no idea. However, it seems to me that there are probably more constructive ways to regulate the price of books, other than by simply trying to force prices down by bringing in overseas competition which will close down any businesses who simply cannot compete, and force writers to try to get international publishing deals if they hope to be able to sell their books in their own country.
Librarian: Ugh, that sounds way too complicated to even try to contemplate. I guess I'll settle for more expensive books. Better the devil you know, after all.
Lit-buff: Hey, you're a librarian. You know better than most that you don't actually *have* to buy books to read them - you can borrow them at the public library. In fact, the very existence of public libraries means that you shouldn't need to have an opinion in this matter, as a librarian.
Librarian: Somebody over at ALIA co-produced a submission on the matter. I thought it was relevant to my profession. Now, I'm not so sure. However, as a librarian, I'm also keen to promote and preserve our literary cultural heritage.
Lit-buff: Even if it means paying more for Australian books?
Librarian: Yes.
Lit-buff: Good. Then we're agreed.
*GROUP HUG*
*Andrew goes to sleep*
So, here's the conversation that I'm having in my head. On one side, we have Andrew-the-literature-buff, who cares about the Australian literary industry. On the other side, we have Andrew-the-librarian, who wants books to be cheaper, and therefore more accessible to the Australian people.
Librarian: Books cost too much! Rah!
Lit-buff: Yes, they do. What's your point?
Librarian: Well, books are so much cheaper overseas! Why can't we get them here?
Lit-buff: Well you can, but wouldn't you rather support Australian publishers and authors.
Librarian: But they charge too much for books. if we get rid of Parallel Importation Restrictions (PIRs), then books will be cheaper.
Lit-buff: Um, no. PIRs have no bearing on the actual cost of the production of Australian books.
Librarian: But the Australian publishing industry have a monopoly on the Australian market. Bringing in some competition will surely drive down the cost of locally-produced books, yes?
Lit-buff: It's possible. It's also possible that the Australian book industry can't afford to reduce the prices of locally-produced books to compete with the international market. Especially if they are allowed to compete on our turf, but we can't compete on theirs because their countries are retaining their PIRs.
Librarian: But there would still be cheaper books!
Lit-buff: UK and US editions of books, whereby your money would go to US and UK publishers, and a smaller royalty to the author.
Librarian: They're not *that* much different. And really, the question of royalties shouldn't come into this argument. That's up to the author and the publisher to negotiate. If they go for a crappy book deal, that's their problem.
Lit-buff: I can't believe you actually said that.
Librarian: No, neither can I. My point is that the outcome of this recommendation *shouldn't* affect how much authors are being paid. Their books will be sold, one way or another. And they might get paid less per overseas copy of their book, but if they are cheaper books, it is likely that they will sell more books. It all evens out, right?
Lit-buff: You don't sound so sure. Besides, you've totally avoided the issue of Australian editions being replaced by overseas editions. They're NOT the same. The language is subtly different. They're representative of a society that isn't our own.
Librarian: Not substantially. I mean, yes, when it comes to some spellings. But the Macquarie English Dictionary accepts most American spellings as Australian nowadays. Stop being a linguistic pedant and get with the program!
Lit-buff: Okay, fine, you can have that one. But I'm still not convinced that the removal of PIRs won't result in the demise of smaller publishing houses and independent booksellers.
Librarian: That's capitalism, baby. Why should some have it easier, at the expense of the consumer? Open up the market and let some healthy competition even things out. Sure, there will be some victims, but the market will be healthier for it.
Lit-buff: That's bullshit. You made that up, didn't you?
Librarian: *sigh* Yes.
Lit-buff: So, what you're saying is that selling out our book industry to the international market is worth the chance to have cheaper books from overseas, even if it means possibly reducing the already-pitiful income of writers, putting smaller publishers and booksellers out of business, and minimising the opportunities for new and emerging writers to get published. Whilst, at the same time, we will undoubtedly boosting business for overseas publishers and writers. The benefits for overseas publishers for writers are absolutely certain, whereas the future of our own Australian literary culture will be uncertain.
Librarian: ...
Lit-buff: But the people who have the most to gain from these recommendations aren't the Australian people. It's the multi-national corporations who can afford to drop prices whilst still maximising their profit margins by flooding the market with cheap leftovers from overseas. The Australian people might be paying less than before, but their money will be going straight into the pockets of corporate profiteers, and not the Australian creative industry.
Librarian: Look... all I'm saying is that we shouldn't have to pay more for a book here in Australia than people do over in the UK and the US. That's all I care about. That's my issue.
Lit-buff: Well my issue is that removing PIRs doesn't actually deal with that problem.
Librarian: Okay, I'll agree with you there. So, why is it exactly that books are more expensive here than overseas? They have Parallel Importation Restricts over there too.
Lit-buff: I have no idea. However, it seems to me that there are probably more constructive ways to regulate the price of books, other than by simply trying to force prices down by bringing in overseas competition which will close down any businesses who simply cannot compete, and force writers to try to get international publishing deals if they hope to be able to sell their books in their own country.
Librarian: Ugh, that sounds way too complicated to even try to contemplate. I guess I'll settle for more expensive books. Better the devil you know, after all.
Lit-buff: Hey, you're a librarian. You know better than most that you don't actually *have* to buy books to read them - you can borrow them at the public library. In fact, the very existence of public libraries means that you shouldn't need to have an opinion in this matter, as a librarian.
Librarian: Somebody over at ALIA co-produced a submission on the matter. I thought it was relevant to my profession. Now, I'm not so sure. However, as a librarian, I'm also keen to promote and preserve our literary cultural heritage.
Lit-buff: Even if it means paying more for Australian books?
Librarian: Yes.
Lit-buff: Good. Then we're agreed.
*GROUP HUG*
*Andrew goes to sleep*
Thursday, July 16, 2009
On Parallel Importation...
Now, there's been a lot of angst circulating about the recent recommendations that were made by the Productivity Commission, in regards to the Copyright Restrictions on the Parallel Importation of books.
Up until yesterday, I was utterly convinced that the recommendations were a Bad Thing. This was after seeing many writers blog on the issue, such as this post on Lili Wilkinson's blog, which I felt summed up the situation quite nicely.
Basically, if these restrictions were to be abolished, our local industry would be undercut by an international industry who can afford to sell them at cheaper prices and therefore put local publishers out of business. For local authors who rely on local publishers to produce their books, and don't have the profile / success to make it on an international stage, this creates a further barrier toward getting published. Furthermore, we wouldn't be able to read Australian versions of literature written by Australian authors. And, finally, cheaper books mean that authors don't get paid as much in royalties.
Now, I feel strongly about supporting the Australian literary industry. Yes, books cost money. However, in the scheme of things, books are better value for money than most forms of entertainment. We're talking about the equivalent cost of going out and having a meal. And if you can't afford that for books, we have public libraries, which will cost you nothing.
So, yesterday, I was a little surprised when I started seeing people in my social network making positive comments about the PC's recommendations, saying that this was a good thing. Who were these people? These people were librarians. And then I received an email from the Australian Library and Information Association - of whom I am a proud card-carrying member - drawing attention to the recommendations, and also highlighting ALIA's own recommendations which contributed to this result.
And so I had a look at ALIA's submission, and I was intrigued to find that ALIA supports the removal of restrictions on parallel importation, based on the following statements:
The restrictions are not needed in order to provide creators with further incentive to create and innovate.
The restrictions are not needed in order to provide local publishers with incentive to invest in creative endeavour.
The restrictions should be considered as a competition issue, and not a copyright issue.
Basically, the current issue is that, on an international market, Australian consumers are paying too much for books. This is creating an inequality, whereby books are more accessible to those who can (a) afford it, or (b) have the knowhow to get books from overseas. Consumers in Australia should be able to go to the bookstore and pay the same amount of money as consumers in the UK or the US.
And, speaking as a librarian who believes in social equality, social inclusion and accessibility to literature, this is an option that we need to seriously consider. The majority of literary culture in our society is from an international market. Australian literature aside, why should we be paying substantially more for international literature that is locally published when we can import a cheaper version?
So, my question is this: is there a way of opening up the market, and making books more accessible (ie. cheaper) without (a) compromising the creative integrity of Australian writers, and (b) putting our local industry out of business? Is it naive to think that overseas publishers will respect an international audience when exporting books to Australia (especially if they are exporting Australian literature INTO Australia?
One thing seems obvious - if we are to remove restrictions on parallel importation, then there also need to be new measures also brought in to protect our writers. We can't just pass this motion, and expect the other to follow, just because it's theoretically possible.
I'd be curious to hear what you think, writers and librarians (and publishers?) alike...
Up until yesterday, I was utterly convinced that the recommendations were a Bad Thing. This was after seeing many writers blog on the issue, such as this post on Lili Wilkinson's blog, which I felt summed up the situation quite nicely.
Basically, if these restrictions were to be abolished, our local industry would be undercut by an international industry who can afford to sell them at cheaper prices and therefore put local publishers out of business. For local authors who rely on local publishers to produce their books, and don't have the profile / success to make it on an international stage, this creates a further barrier toward getting published. Furthermore, we wouldn't be able to read Australian versions of literature written by Australian authors. And, finally, cheaper books mean that authors don't get paid as much in royalties.
Now, I feel strongly about supporting the Australian literary industry. Yes, books cost money. However, in the scheme of things, books are better value for money than most forms of entertainment. We're talking about the equivalent cost of going out and having a meal. And if you can't afford that for books, we have public libraries, which will cost you nothing.
So, yesterday, I was a little surprised when I started seeing people in my social network making positive comments about the PC's recommendations, saying that this was a good thing. Who were these people? These people were librarians. And then I received an email from the Australian Library and Information Association - of whom I am a proud card-carrying member - drawing attention to the recommendations, and also highlighting ALIA's own recommendations which contributed to this result.
And so I had a look at ALIA's submission, and I was intrigued to find that ALIA supports the removal of restrictions on parallel importation, based on the following statements:
The restrictions are not needed in order to provide creators with further incentive to create and innovate.
The restrictions are not needed in order to provide local publishers with incentive to invest in creative endeavour.
The restrictions should be considered as a competition issue, and not a copyright issue.
Basically, the current issue is that, on an international market, Australian consumers are paying too much for books. This is creating an inequality, whereby books are more accessible to those who can (a) afford it, or (b) have the knowhow to get books from overseas. Consumers in Australia should be able to go to the bookstore and pay the same amount of money as consumers in the UK or the US.
And, speaking as a librarian who believes in social equality, social inclusion and accessibility to literature, this is an option that we need to seriously consider. The majority of literary culture in our society is from an international market. Australian literature aside, why should we be paying substantially more for international literature that is locally published when we can import a cheaper version?
So, my question is this: is there a way of opening up the market, and making books more accessible (ie. cheaper) without (a) compromising the creative integrity of Australian writers, and (b) putting our local industry out of business? Is it naive to think that overseas publishers will respect an international audience when exporting books to Australia (especially if they are exporting Australian literature INTO Australia?
One thing seems obvious - if we are to remove restrictions on parallel importation, then there also need to be new measures also brought in to protect our writers. We can't just pass this motion, and expect the other to follow, just because it's theoretically possible.
I'd be curious to hear what you think, writers and librarians (and publishers?) alike...
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Has the world changed, or have I changed?
I have to say that, after seeing what Australia voted for on Triple J, I feel the need to compose my own list, in no particular order, of songs that should have made the hottest 100 of all time...
I mean, yes, I do understand that the whole *point* of having a popular vote is that not everything is going to make it, but there is so much good stuff out there, that is better than a third of what made the final list. Here is my list of songs which I feel have either been overlooked, or, worse still, completely forgotten...
1. Echo and the Bunneymen - The Killing Moon
2. Lou Reed - Perfect Day
3. They Might Be Giants - Birdhouse In Your Soul
4. The Smiths - There is a Light that Never Goes Out
5. The Boys Next Door - Shivers
6. The Church - Under the Milky Way
7. Do Re Mi - Man Overboard
8. R.E.M - Losing My Religion
9. Prince - When Doves Cry
10. Elvis Costello - Alison
11. Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds - The Ship Song
12. Grandmaster Flash - The Message
13. Talking Heads - Psycho Killer
14. U2 - With or Without You
15. The Doors - The End
16. David Bowie - Heroes
17. Portishead - Glory Box
18. NWA - Straight Outta Compton
19. Velvet Underground - Sunday Morning
20. The Pixies - Debaser
21. The Cure - Lullaby
22. Soft Cell - Tainted Love
23. Neneh Cherry - Buffalo Stance
24. Rolling Stones - Sympathy for the Devil
25. Elliott Smith - Miss Misery
26. Leonard Cohen - Suzanne
27. Kate Bush - Wuthering Heights
28. The Whitlams - No Aphrodisiac
29. Blind Melon - No Rain
30. Jane's Addiction - Been Caught Stealing
31. Sex Pistols - Anarchy in the UK
32. Joy Division - Atmosphere
33. Nine Inch Nails - The Perfect Drug
Feel free to disagree... of course! Can you think of any other songs that didn't make it? Let me know! I'm always keen to expand my tastes in music. :)
I mean, yes, I do understand that the whole *point* of having a popular vote is that not everything is going to make it, but there is so much good stuff out there, that is better than a third of what made the final list. Here is my list of songs which I feel have either been overlooked, or, worse still, completely forgotten...
1. Echo and the Bunneymen - The Killing Moon
2. Lou Reed - Perfect Day
3. They Might Be Giants - Birdhouse In Your Soul
4. The Smiths - There is a Light that Never Goes Out
5. The Boys Next Door - Shivers
6. The Church - Under the Milky Way
7. Do Re Mi - Man Overboard
8. R.E.M - Losing My Religion
9. Prince - When Doves Cry
10. Elvis Costello - Alison
11. Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds - The Ship Song
12. Grandmaster Flash - The Message
13. Talking Heads - Psycho Killer
14. U2 - With or Without You
15. The Doors - The End
16. David Bowie - Heroes
17. Portishead - Glory Box
18. NWA - Straight Outta Compton
19. Velvet Underground - Sunday Morning
20. The Pixies - Debaser
21. The Cure - Lullaby
22. Soft Cell - Tainted Love
23. Neneh Cherry - Buffalo Stance
24. Rolling Stones - Sympathy for the Devil
25. Elliott Smith - Miss Misery
26. Leonard Cohen - Suzanne
27. Kate Bush - Wuthering Heights
28. The Whitlams - No Aphrodisiac
29. Blind Melon - No Rain
30. Jane's Addiction - Been Caught Stealing
31. Sex Pistols - Anarchy in the UK
32. Joy Division - Atmosphere
33. Nine Inch Nails - The Perfect Drug
Feel free to disagree... of course! Can you think of any other songs that didn't make it? Let me know! I'm always keen to expand my tastes in music. :)
Monday, July 13, 2009
Sabbatical
It has now been over a month since I have spent most of the working week... well, working. I knew this time would come, sooner or later, and, frankly, I had been looking forward to it. After all, I have been working regularly on at least 0.6 EFT (and mostly completely full-time) for almost four and a half years. I know it sounds very Gen Y of me to say this, but after a few years of scampering around the rat-race, I was conscious of the fact that I was becoming part of a machine, and losing a sense of perspective and control. And it's easy to get sidetracked from your original hopes and dreams for your life and career. I needed to take some time out to reflect, regroup, and make new plans.
Staycation. Funemployment. Bludging. There are numerous terms which could sum up the conscious decision to spend time away from the world of gainful employment.
However, I like to think of it as a sabbatical. A respite. A retreat, to spend time engaged in the things that are important to me, and work toward a sense of self-actualisation.
So far, I've found the experience to be extremely liberating yet challenging. So often, people use "The Job" as an excuse to avoid ever getting to do the things that they really want to do. Take away that excuse, and there's only yourself. I've taken to writing and practising musical material for a cabaret show that I will be performing at the Butterfly Club next week. I've done a spot of solitary overseas travel (something that I've never done before). I'm registered as a volunteer at the Melbourne International Film Festival.
It also feels empowering to be at that point in my career where I can say, "No, I don't feel compelled just to take 'any old job'. I'm going to hold out until I see a job that I know is right for me." I've let a couple of job opportunities pass me by - jobs which I would probably be more than satisfied with, but I wasn't convinced that I would actually find fulfilling as an activity that would occupy a large chunk of my time.
Because something that I've come to realise now is exactly how valuable my time is. And, for now, I want to keep that time for myself. Yes, it's a financially-expensive option, but so many professionals these days complain about being time-poor. The question no longer seems to be a case of "How much money will you give me for my time", but rather "How will I be spending my time with you as an employer?" and "Is there something I'd rather be doing with my time?" Time spent being bored or unhappy is time wasted, and nobody benefits from that.
Of course, when you're in a job, it's hard to see the forest from the trees. However, now that I'm seemingly "outside" the loop, I can see across the industry, and it's quite clear to me where the changes are occurring, where the "don't go there" areas lie, where people are happy and enjoy working (and where they aren't), and where my ideal future career lies. I see the movers and the shakers - the shining lights in the industry - who I know I need to team up with to get there. And, for the first time in my life, I have a strong idea of exactly what I want to do with my life and my career. When you get that feeling, doing anything else feels like the stupidest waste of time. I feel both lucky and cursed by this.
And whilst I wait for the next bus that will get me onto that particular road, I have plenty of valuable time to live, love, read, write, create and share the passion - skills which I can build on in my future career.
Staycation. Funemployment. Bludging. There are numerous terms which could sum up the conscious decision to spend time away from the world of gainful employment.
However, I like to think of it as a sabbatical. A respite. A retreat, to spend time engaged in the things that are important to me, and work toward a sense of self-actualisation.
So far, I've found the experience to be extremely liberating yet challenging. So often, people use "The Job" as an excuse to avoid ever getting to do the things that they really want to do. Take away that excuse, and there's only yourself. I've taken to writing and practising musical material for a cabaret show that I will be performing at the Butterfly Club next week. I've done a spot of solitary overseas travel (something that I've never done before). I'm registered as a volunteer at the Melbourne International Film Festival.
It also feels empowering to be at that point in my career where I can say, "No, I don't feel compelled just to take 'any old job'. I'm going to hold out until I see a job that I know is right for me." I've let a couple of job opportunities pass me by - jobs which I would probably be more than satisfied with, but I wasn't convinced that I would actually find fulfilling as an activity that would occupy a large chunk of my time.
Because something that I've come to realise now is exactly how valuable my time is. And, for now, I want to keep that time for myself. Yes, it's a financially-expensive option, but so many professionals these days complain about being time-poor. The question no longer seems to be a case of "How much money will you give me for my time", but rather "How will I be spending my time with you as an employer?" and "Is there something I'd rather be doing with my time?" Time spent being bored or unhappy is time wasted, and nobody benefits from that.
Of course, when you're in a job, it's hard to see the forest from the trees. However, now that I'm seemingly "outside" the loop, I can see across the industry, and it's quite clear to me where the changes are occurring, where the "don't go there" areas lie, where people are happy and enjoy working (and where they aren't), and where my ideal future career lies. I see the movers and the shakers - the shining lights in the industry - who I know I need to team up with to get there. And, for the first time in my life, I have a strong idea of exactly what I want to do with my life and my career. When you get that feeling, doing anything else feels like the stupidest waste of time. I feel both lucky and cursed by this.
And whilst I wait for the next bus that will get me onto that particular road, I have plenty of valuable time to live, love, read, write, create and share the passion - skills which I can build on in my future career.
Saturday, July 11, 2009
A day in the life (depending on your definition of "having a life")
7:00am Sleep is interrupted by alarm clock. This is obviously an inappropriate time to be waking up on a Saturday, and hit snooze. Twice.
8:00am Realise the time, and hurriedly have a shower and get dressed and out the door, wishing that there had been more sleep the previous night, and less YouTube.
9:00am Suitably caffeinated. Arrive at the Nova Cinema, and take a seat in a theatre predominantly populated by teenage and twenty-something slashfic-writing fangirls.
9:10am Curtains open. Cue John Williams soundtrack. Albus Dumbledore arrives at Number Four, Privet Drive, Little Whingeing.
9:30am Ginny Weasley says her only line in the film: "Good luck, Harry." Most people in the cinema slightly squee, quietly but audibly enough for everybody to realise giggle at what they've done collectively.
10:00am Hermione Granger has reached intolerable levels of annoyingness. Dialogue is full of painful unnecessary exposition and over-acting. How long can this continue for?
11:00am Fluffy slobber. Kids go "ew".
11:30am Hagrid waves goodbye. Hogwarts Express takes everybody home. Or not-home, if you're Harry. Roll credits.
11:45am Harry's voice has broken. The Masons visit the Dursleys. Dobby "takes the cake".
12:00pm Draco tries out some eyebrow-acting which just looks suss. "See you at school, Potter." *wiggles eyebrows" Half the audience giggles.
1:00pm Polyjuice potion. Hermione has facial hair issues.
1:30pm "Why couldn't it be follow the non-arachnid plot device?"
2:00pm Harry Potter battles Tom Riddle and a basilisk, aged 12. Dumbledore states the obvious: "I sense something is troubling you, Harry." Dobby gets a sock. Lucius begins to cast an unforgiveable curse, despite the fact that they don't get mentioned until book four.
2:10pm All exams are cancelled. Just as well, because there were no classes this year. Hagrid comes back. Everybody applauds for no reason. Roll credits.
2:30pm Harry inflates Marge Dursley and is all, like, whatever.
3:00pm Dementors search Hogwart's Express, hissing "Shire... Bagginssss..."
3:30pm Gryffindor vs. Hufflepuff quidditch match. Cedric Diggory looks nothing like Edward Cullen.
4:00pm Sirius Black and Remus Lupin are reunited. Almost snog, but then realise that they have company.
4:30pm Harry and Hermione mess with time travel. Space-time continuum almost implodes on itself.
4:45pm Harry receives his Firebolt, but the film ends before he can actually use it in a quidditch match. Roll credits.
BREAK Re-caffeinate.
5:45pm Harry, Hermione and the Weasleys go for a walk. Edward Cullen jumps out of a tree in front of them, and sparkles slightly.
6:30pm The first unforgiveable curse is uttered when Ron Weasley tells Harry to "piss off" in a PG-rated film.
7:00pm Hermione appears at the top of the stairs, Molly Ringwald style and pretty in pink. All the girls (and some of the boys) in the theatre audibly sigh.
7:30pm Ed Cullen and Harry Potter head into the maze to rescue the baby of power from Jareth the Goblin King.
7:45pm Harry and Voldemort's wands touch. It's weird.
8:00pm Dumbledore tells the entire population that the Ministry doesn't want them to know this, but Cedric Diggory has now been turned into a vampire, and will go on to make awful movies in the United States. Everybody cries a bit. Roll credits.
8:30pm Harry likes kicking things. A lot. And shouting.
9:00pm Umbridge reminds the students that they are actually at school, and there are these things called classes and exams that they should be preparing for. Who would have thought it?
9:30pm Harry seduces Cho Chang under the mistletoe whilst wearing a rather nerdy mandigan. Edward Cullen looks on from the photograph and cringes.
10:00pm Fred and George have somehow gotten their hands on Gandalf's fireworks, and set them off during exams.
10:30pm Somehow, everybody ends up at the Ministry of Magic. Lots of smoke, blurring, evil laughter, and explosions. Sirius dies. Everything goes into slow motion. More explosions and smoke. Harry realises that he has more friends than Voldemort, so he wins. Dumbledore explains that the prophecy says that Harry must eventually face Voldemort and one must kill the other. Harry says, "What? That's it? That explains NOTHING." Roll credits.
Midnight Get home. Blog about my day.
8:00am Realise the time, and hurriedly have a shower and get dressed and out the door, wishing that there had been more sleep the previous night, and less YouTube.
9:00am Suitably caffeinated. Arrive at the Nova Cinema, and take a seat in a theatre predominantly populated by teenage and twenty-something slashfic-writing fangirls.
9:10am Curtains open. Cue John Williams soundtrack. Albus Dumbledore arrives at Number Four, Privet Drive, Little Whingeing.
9:30am Ginny Weasley says her only line in the film: "Good luck, Harry." Most people in the cinema slightly squee, quietly but audibly enough for everybody to realise giggle at what they've done collectively.
10:00am Hermione Granger has reached intolerable levels of annoyingness. Dialogue is full of painful unnecessary exposition and over-acting. How long can this continue for?
11:00am Fluffy slobber. Kids go "ew".
11:30am Hagrid waves goodbye. Hogwarts Express takes everybody home. Or not-home, if you're Harry. Roll credits.
11:45am Harry's voice has broken. The Masons visit the Dursleys. Dobby "takes the cake".
12:00pm Draco tries out some eyebrow-acting which just looks suss. "See you at school, Potter." *wiggles eyebrows" Half the audience giggles.
1:00pm Polyjuice potion. Hermione has facial hair issues.
1:30pm "Why couldn't it be follow the non-arachnid plot device?"
2:00pm Harry Potter battles Tom Riddle and a basilisk, aged 12. Dumbledore states the obvious: "I sense something is troubling you, Harry." Dobby gets a sock. Lucius begins to cast an unforgiveable curse, despite the fact that they don't get mentioned until book four.
2:10pm All exams are cancelled. Just as well, because there were no classes this year. Hagrid comes back. Everybody applauds for no reason. Roll credits.
2:30pm Harry inflates Marge Dursley and is all, like, whatever.
3:00pm Dementors search Hogwart's Express, hissing "Shire... Bagginssss..."
3:30pm Gryffindor vs. Hufflepuff quidditch match. Cedric Diggory looks nothing like Edward Cullen.
4:00pm Sirius Black and Remus Lupin are reunited. Almost snog, but then realise that they have company.
4:30pm Harry and Hermione mess with time travel. Space-time continuum almost implodes on itself.
4:45pm Harry receives his Firebolt, but the film ends before he can actually use it in a quidditch match. Roll credits.
BREAK Re-caffeinate.
5:45pm Harry, Hermione and the Weasleys go for a walk. Edward Cullen jumps out of a tree in front of them, and sparkles slightly.
6:30pm The first unforgiveable curse is uttered when Ron Weasley tells Harry to "piss off" in a PG-rated film.
7:00pm Hermione appears at the top of the stairs, Molly Ringwald style and pretty in pink. All the girls (and some of the boys) in the theatre audibly sigh.
7:30pm Ed Cullen and Harry Potter head into the maze to rescue the baby of power from Jareth the Goblin King.
7:45pm Harry and Voldemort's wands touch. It's weird.
8:00pm Dumbledore tells the entire population that the Ministry doesn't want them to know this, but Cedric Diggory has now been turned into a vampire, and will go on to make awful movies in the United States. Everybody cries a bit. Roll credits.
8:30pm Harry likes kicking things. A lot. And shouting.
9:00pm Umbridge reminds the students that they are actually at school, and there are these things called classes and exams that they should be preparing for. Who would have thought it?
9:30pm Harry seduces Cho Chang under the mistletoe whilst wearing a rather nerdy mandigan. Edward Cullen looks on from the photograph and cringes.
10:00pm Fred and George have somehow gotten their hands on Gandalf's fireworks, and set them off during exams.
10:30pm Somehow, everybody ends up at the Ministry of Magic. Lots of smoke, blurring, evil laughter, and explosions. Sirius dies. Everything goes into slow motion. More explosions and smoke. Harry realises that he has more friends than Voldemort, so he wins. Dumbledore explains that the prophecy says that Harry must eventually face Voldemort and one must kill the other. Harry says, "What? That's it? That explains NOTHING." Roll credits.
Midnight Get home. Blog about my day.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Libraries in Vanuatu - Part two
So, after spending a little time at the National Library, I wandered into town and had a look at the Port Vila Public Library.
This is the only public library in Vanuatu, with a fee-based membership, but members are also able to pay for their membership in woven mats - the "kastom" (i.e. traditional) means of payment in Vanuatu.
Anyway, from the entrance, the first thing you encounter is the adult fiction section, which lines the entrance hallway.
As you can see, whilst the collection is a bit old, there's still no escape from James Patterson. Some things are just universal in public libraries.
And then we come to the main service desk:
which was occupied friendly staff, and a table displaying new additions to the collection.
Wandering through the non-fiction section, I saw this sign, and I know that I've been reading Tame The Web too long, when my first reaction was to take a photo of it so I could blog about it...
Of course, another universal trait of public libraries (and state libraries) is that they are seemingly a convenient source of power for charging up phones, laptops, and other accessories whilst checking one's email, or reading the newspaper, etc. A bit of strategically-placed signage seems to have discouraged library users from taking advantage of this.
And then, there is what is possibly the most wonderfully eclectic mixture of children's literature that I've ever seen.
The optimist tells me that all the children's literature that has been written in the past 20 years is all out on loan, and that the remaining fiction, predominantly from the 70s and 80s, is what's left. However, from what I've gleaned from other volunteers, the public and school libraries in Vanuatu rely on donations, mostly from Australia. This generally means old books that have been weeded from public library collections - that is, the books that nobody reads anymore.
Finally, I poked my head into the Reference and Study room:
This was by far the busiest area in the library, with the room occupied by school students. I particularly liked the big mural on the far side of the wall, with the caption "rid mo raet emi openem rod blong laef blong yumi". My handle on bislama is rudimentary at best... anybody want to translate for me?
And finally, the reference desk:
All in all, despite the unfortunate age of the collection, the public library appeared to have no shortage of users, and certainly seems effective in the ways by which it engages with the local community. Imagine the difference it would make in the community if it were able to provide access to new literature and up-to-date information...
This is the only public library in Vanuatu, with a fee-based membership, but members are also able to pay for their membership in woven mats - the "kastom" (i.e. traditional) means of payment in Vanuatu.
Anyway, from the entrance, the first thing you encounter is the adult fiction section, which lines the entrance hallway.
As you can see, whilst the collection is a bit old, there's still no escape from James Patterson. Some things are just universal in public libraries.
And then we come to the main service desk:
which was occupied friendly staff, and a table displaying new additions to the collection.
Wandering through the non-fiction section, I saw this sign, and I know that I've been reading Tame The Web too long, when my first reaction was to take a photo of it so I could blog about it...
Of course, another universal trait of public libraries (and state libraries) is that they are seemingly a convenient source of power for charging up phones, laptops, and other accessories whilst checking one's email, or reading the newspaper, etc. A bit of strategically-placed signage seems to have discouraged library users from taking advantage of this.
And then, there is what is possibly the most wonderfully eclectic mixture of children's literature that I've ever seen.
The optimist tells me that all the children's literature that has been written in the past 20 years is all out on loan, and that the remaining fiction, predominantly from the 70s and 80s, is what's left. However, from what I've gleaned from other volunteers, the public and school libraries in Vanuatu rely on donations, mostly from Australia. This generally means old books that have been weeded from public library collections - that is, the books that nobody reads anymore.
Finally, I poked my head into the Reference and Study room:
This was by far the busiest area in the library, with the room occupied by school students. I particularly liked the big mural on the far side of the wall, with the caption "rid mo raet emi openem rod blong laef blong yumi". My handle on bislama is rudimentary at best... anybody want to translate for me?
And finally, the reference desk:
All in all, despite the unfortunate age of the collection, the public library appeared to have no shortage of users, and certainly seems effective in the ways by which it engages with the local community. Imagine the difference it would make in the community if it were able to provide access to new literature and up-to-date information...
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Three months and National Library of Vanuatu
Well, it's been three months since I've relocated back to Melbourne, and I've feeling thoroughly settled in. I've spent a substantial amount of that time doing some project work at the State Library of Victoria in Reader Development, and they've been a wonderful team to work with. In addition to my work, I also got to hang out with the cool CYL folks, and help out behind the scenes at Reading Matters conference, which was amazingly amazing.
Anyway, last night I met up with a bunch of "new" librarians in Melbourne, for our semi-regular social evening with some fancy beers, and I was chatting a little about my recent trip to Vanuatu, visiting my friend Romany, who is currently working as a volunteer, fixing up the school library in a remote village, and getting the kids engaged in using it.
So, for those of you who are a little rusty with their geography, Vanuatu is an archipelago nation in Melanesia, in the Pacific Ocean... umm (checks atlas) about 1750 kms to the East of Northern Queensland. It's a developing country, so they're still struggling with the influence of western culture, since they gained independence from the French and English less than 30 years ago.
Anyway, being a librarian at heart, I took the opportunity to check out a few of the libraries in the nation's capital, Port Vila.
The National Library
Now, you'd think that, with such a nice big colourful sign, you'd be visiting a huge amazing library. On arriving at the National Library, I was asked to remove my shoes, as a measure of pest control. Clad in socks, I then stepped into the first of two small rooms. The National Library. I was asked to sign myself in, and it was explained to me that if they get enough visitors, then they can put up a case to get a bigger space to house the library in. It's nice to know that some library issues are universal.
Anyway, after chatting to June and Anne, the librarians, I had a browse about the collections. The main room housed the Vanuatu Collection, containing anything published about or in Vanuatu. There were many fascinating and sometimes hilariously non-PC titles written by 19th and early 20th century missionaries.
I also noticed that quite a number of titles (such as the Quarterly Jottings from the New Hebrides, pictured below) were facsimiles of publications held by the National Library of Australia, and it struck my how dependent a nation like Vanuatu is on its neighbouring countries (ie. Australia) in providing pertinent historical texts that they wouldn't even be aware of.
The other room housed the Pacific Collection, with its focus on information about the Pacific region. Naturally, my instinct was to see what they had about Australia. I was slightly disheartened when I initially spied a solitary Australian Yearbook from 1971.
However, there was plenty about Australia over in 919.4 on the shelf, as it should be.
I was also aware that I was in Vanuatu during the relatively dry winter months, but only cringe at the thought of the preservation issues that would arise during the monsoon season. Even for a National Library, the scope for environmental control struck me as being somewhat rudimentary. It really made me appreciate the challenges that librarians must have in preserving the cultural heritage in a developing country, especially given the lack of available resources.
NEXT TIME: Part two - Port Vila Public Library.
Anyway, last night I met up with a bunch of "new" librarians in Melbourne, for our semi-regular social evening with some fancy beers, and I was chatting a little about my recent trip to Vanuatu, visiting my friend Romany, who is currently working as a volunteer, fixing up the school library in a remote village, and getting the kids engaged in using it.
So, for those of you who are a little rusty with their geography, Vanuatu is an archipelago nation in Melanesia, in the Pacific Ocean... umm (checks atlas) about 1750 kms to the East of Northern Queensland. It's a developing country, so they're still struggling with the influence of western culture, since they gained independence from the French and English less than 30 years ago.
Anyway, being a librarian at heart, I took the opportunity to check out a few of the libraries in the nation's capital, Port Vila.
The National Library
Now, you'd think that, with such a nice big colourful sign, you'd be visiting a huge amazing library. On arriving at the National Library, I was asked to remove my shoes, as a measure of pest control. Clad in socks, I then stepped into the first of two small rooms. The National Library. I was asked to sign myself in, and it was explained to me that if they get enough visitors, then they can put up a case to get a bigger space to house the library in. It's nice to know that some library issues are universal.
Anyway, after chatting to June and Anne, the librarians, I had a browse about the collections. The main room housed the Vanuatu Collection, containing anything published about or in Vanuatu. There were many fascinating and sometimes hilariously non-PC titles written by 19th and early 20th century missionaries.
I also noticed that quite a number of titles (such as the Quarterly Jottings from the New Hebrides, pictured below) were facsimiles of publications held by the National Library of Australia, and it struck my how dependent a nation like Vanuatu is on its neighbouring countries (ie. Australia) in providing pertinent historical texts that they wouldn't even be aware of.
The other room housed the Pacific Collection, with its focus on information about the Pacific region. Naturally, my instinct was to see what they had about Australia. I was slightly disheartened when I initially spied a solitary Australian Yearbook from 1971.
However, there was plenty about Australia over in 919.4 on the shelf, as it should be.
I was also aware that I was in Vanuatu during the relatively dry winter months, but only cringe at the thought of the preservation issues that would arise during the monsoon season. Even for a National Library, the scope for environmental control struck me as being somewhat rudimentary. It really made me appreciate the challenges that librarians must have in preserving the cultural heritage in a developing country, especially given the lack of available resources.
NEXT TIME: Part two - Port Vila Public Library.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)