Re: [ARSCLIST] Interesting WSJ Article on when libraries should discard their holdings.

[George Brock-Nannestad <pattac@xxxxxxxx>]

From: Patent Tactics, George Brock-Nannestad

----- just a small comment in this discouraging thread:

> Karl: 
> >   So shall I tell you of the music librarian who threw out boxes full of
> rare
> piano music (which we didn't otherwise have) because the paper was acidic? 
> and
> didn't bother to make photocopies...
> >

Steven Barr(x): 
> Interesting...and also sad! The "acidic" quality of the paper would
> only have affected the life of those documents...AFAIK, it can't
> turn other paper artifacts acidic via contact. So...he/she/it
> basically said "These can't be preserved forever...so I'll get
> rid of them now!" Note that this reasoning could have been applied
> to any of us at birth...

----- well, that's the problem: it is costly to keep an item alive. Now in 
Steven's case, he has amply repaid the investment in him by supplying us with 
discographical information - but from society's viewpoint, who cares?

There is no good answer, other than the fact that writing, printing, and 
reading were good skills, and the present AV-based culture (not high culture, 
merely what people do) will increase the illiteracy, but perhaps there will 
be a suitable balance, so that the powers that be may at least communicate 
between themselves. Modern surveillance, introduced because of what is 
defined as a threat to society, will ensure that only priviliged information 
will be communicated. To me, the most scary part of '1984' was always the 
hole in the wall where evidence could be burned. We have laws in Denmark, and 
I am sure elsewhere, where it is forbidden to cull and collate information 
from daily newspapers and store it, so that it is historically accessible, if 
the information relates to personal data. This is part of data protection. 

Now, do not go and incriminate yourselves by following up on my comment!

Kind regards,


George