These days public libraries operate on desperation as often as they run on anything else. This recently drove several library staff to do something a little reckless.
Culling library collections often relies on numbers. If a patron checks out a book, that book is safe in the system. If a book isn’t checked out for a certain period of time, however, that book is often placed on a to-be-culled list. These lists don’t take into account whether or not a book is considered a classic, was written by a famous author, or has regional value. It only looks at circulation numbers.
To get around this system, several librarians at Florida’s East Lake County Library created a fictitious library patron, Chuck Finley. Named after a retired major league baseball pitcher, Finley would be their savior. During 2016, Finley checked out 2,361 books from the library. These books varied and included titles by John Steinbeck as well as children’s books, rendering them safe from culling. When the subterfuge came to light, the library’s branch manager defending the creation of Finley, stating that the fake patron prevented the library from needing to repurchase books in the future.
The people involved in the Finley scheme are currently undergoing various degrees of disciplinary action.
What this story affirms to me is both that libraries are filled with people who love books and that libraries are experiencing extreme budget cuts. Trying to reconcile these two things makes staff desperate. I certainly understand the need not to have fake patrons, but I am also sympathetic to the desire to save books. What we as community members can do to ease the burden on staff is to support local libraries, check out their book sales, and vote for measures that increase their funding.
I have to admit though that when I originally read this story, I raised a coffee cup in Chuck Finley’s honor. He had a good run.
Reblogged this on The Owl Lady.
LikeLiked by 1 person
What an absolutely wonderful idea! My wife (a former librarian) thought it priceless.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’m glad she approved! The staff could have been a bit less blatant though. Ah, well.
LikeLike
That is just amazing. It goes to show that those librarians were truely dedicated to their job and every book holds meaning to them. I never knew that that happened to books that never got checked out, it’s rather surprising to me because I spend a lot of time at my public library and most times I don’t even check anything out 😦
LikeLiked by 1 person
One of the great tragedies of libraries is that there just isn’t space in them to keep all of the books! These particular library staff certainly did what they could to save the reading materials though.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Bookheathen's Right to Read and commented:
I too raise a glass to Chuck Finley. Perhaps if he (they) hadn’t been quite so obvious he (they) might have got away with it. maybe 1,001 books?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Have re-blogged on Bookheathen’s Right to Read.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Kristen, this story is great (well, bittersweet). I love “Chuck Finley”. He is a hero and it sucks that those who are a part of the scheme have to be disciplined for such a benevolent scheme. I’ve always been a major patron of my local public libraries no matter what township or county or city I live in. And as I always say I give back to my library system regularly by averaging about $75 in late fees annually 😀
LikeLiked by 4 people
Now if only you could write off those late fees on your taxes… 😉 I’m sure your library enjoys having such a loyal patron.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on Rucker | Writer.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Aww, this touches my heart. When I was a teenager I would ride my bike 10 miles into town from the country just to fill up the basket with books. It’s where I first found the Crystal Cave series by Mary Stewart, which probably is in a cull list somewhere, even though it’s now out of print.
LikeLiked by 3 people
It is always so strange to think of books we once loved that may have ended up in the trash pile. There were a few children’s books that I ended up hunting down and buying just because I suspected that my local library wouldn’t have them forever. But then, I am a sentimental creature.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Definitely book lovers – here’s to Chuck Finley!
LikeLiked by 1 person
He had a good run.
LikeLiked by 1 person
They deserve an award for thinking of this, not disciplinary action!
LikeLiked by 2 people
It certainly was a noble attempt to save the books!
LikeLike
Reblogged this on e. michael helms.
LikeLike
Such a shame they were caught. Maybe they should’ve invented a dozen or so “patrons” to spread the books around a little. Chuck was one avid reader! Libraries are important, and they should be supported. Sadly, it looks as though reading is declining every year; a victim of the electronic/games era and “instant gratifications.” 😦
LikeLiked by 4 people
It definitely puts librarians in a tough spot. And yes, they could have been more subtle about their invented patron. 1000 books is…a lot.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Chris The Story Reading Ape's Blog and commented:
The best way to subjugate and control a people is to keep them ignorant of alternative possibilities and dull their imaginations by depriving them of a good variety of books.
Help your local Librarians avoid possible disciplinary actions by being REAL users of the Library 🐵
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’m guessing these particular librarians were also Burn Notice fans.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ha! Quite possibly.
LikeLiked by 1 person
As a librarian myself, I’ve been known to check out titles just to add to their circ stats so as to save them from future culling…I never created a fake patron though!
LikeLiked by 3 people
I certainly understand the impulse! The staff must have felt a bit adrift though; they certainly weren’t subtle with their creation of this particular patron.
LikeLike
This is true lol I’ve heard horror stories of librarians getting new directors who did some very aggressive weeding (or culling, same thing) so to protect their favorite books and/or certain classics, they’d secretly check out hundreds of books in order to save them lol
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m familiar with that style of weeding (cull things not checked out ruthlessly) and it is a ridiculous policy. A school in WI recently removed all books published before 2000: http://www.bluecheddar.net/?p=40934 in a shameful manner (local activist groups had arranged to donate the books to inner city schools but the books were pulped instead). Recently students at one library where I work were assigned a history question as part of a project – to research the answer they had to use three books from the collection which had not been checked out in almost a decade. We all learned a lot from that one. You never weed items of permanent value, or items that you cannot replace with a better resource. It’s better to have an old book than no book at all.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Hearing about that school in WI hurts my heart. Such waste. I worked in academic libraries for a while, and one of the hardest things was balancing space constraints and research needs. Often classes required esoteric texts. It was quite a puzzle to figure out how to keep all of the relevant books.
LikeLiked by 2 people
That’s shameful. What a waste. 😦
LikeLiked by 2 people
It is a balancing act — maintaining breadth and depth in a collection, keeping up to date, and avoiding that “grubby” look. I must admit I was glad to be working in an area other than collections, because I find it hard to throw out perfectly good books that might be useful to someone, someday.
LikeLiked by 3 people
It really can put librarians in a bind. Even though libraries are intended to be repositories of books, they are also meant to be used. If a book isn’t being checked out, it sometimes has to make room for one that will be.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Exactly. I worked in a public library technical services department for 20+ years, and recall many discussions about this among my collection-developing colleagues.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on The Owl Lady.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s an odd policy, weeding. I’m a librarian and I don’t always rigorously weed.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m glad to hear that. I think it definitely depends on the library system. In one of my libraries, we had to downsize and got rid of something like 400,000 titles. The system we used wasn’t quite as stark as the one from this story though.
Regardless, I’m glad that you have the chance to hold on to the books!
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Kate McClelland.
LikeLiked by 1 person
What a clever idea! I love it. I was astonished a few years ago to learn of libraries closing in southern Oregon due to lack of funds. Libraries are so necessary!
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is always rough to hear about libraries being shut down. They provide so many necessary services. (Bookish and otherwise.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Our libraries offer musical programs, computer labs, classes,art displays, etc. They are “community centers” in their own way. I can’t imagine life without a library!
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is a great story! I’m always amazed at which books are on the for-sale shelf! So I am doing my duty, checking out as many books as possible…
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is strange sometimes the books that libraries have to get rid of. I’m sure that your local one appreciates having such a dedicated patron though!
LikeLike
I used my small library near where I live quite a lot until it closed. Which is a shame when small libraries close as its easy for everyone including the disabled and the elderly. Now it’s a bus or car journey into the town I don’t bother going and I don’t expect the elderly or disabled would travel into the town. A touring library in most housing estate would be nice to see.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is such a pity that the library near you shut down! I’m sure it was an issue of funding and resources, but like you said, it was close to a population that needed it and perhaps couldn’t travel far to other libraries.
LikeLike
We had a civilized collection development policy at the college library from which I recently retired which did not use circ stats as the only criterion for keeping (or weeding) any items. But I could have used Mr. Finley at a couple of public libraries in a previous lifetime.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s good to hear that you all had a more holistic approach to collection management. Deciding which books should stay and which ones should go can be such a terrible puzzle.
LikeLiked by 1 person
What a brilliant idea! My local library would probably be too apathetic to try anything as innovative as this. The gloom that hung over the library has left me feeling seriously depressed all day. There doesn’t seem to be a solution to library problems….
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh, no! That is too bad about your local library. I know some places are more passionate about these things than others are.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is fascinating!
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is strange to imagine, but I suppose things like this happen fairly frequently.
LikeLiked by 1 person