And now, my long awaited rebuttal to Degolar's enthusiastic posts in support of gaming in libraries. Lately there has been a flurry of e-mail and conversation about this topic at work, and a serious divide has emerged. The e-mail discussion seems to be unflinchingly positive, to the degree that one would get the impression that the only people who could possibly oppose the introduction of gaming into libraries are the congenitally cranky (okay, guilty) and the hopelessly anachronistic. I, on the other hand think there are valid objections to the idea, and here they are.
From "Application Day" (Degolar, 12/06/05 11:46 am): "Is there something especially appealing about the idea of libraries as studious book places...?". Well, yes, actually. Because if the library is no longer that place (and I would submit that, in large part, it already isn't), then that place will no longer exist in our society. As much as I love Barnes & Noble, Borders, and Half-Price books, they are places of commerce-- often loud ones. The library has always been an almost sacred place, a temple of knowledge, if you will, and bookstores, for all their charm, just aren't the same. (So the question is, will those of us that hold this view of libraries be forever banished to the university library? or will there be a place for us in the public library?)
My strong opposition to this idea, I think, came as quite a shock to Degolar. I'm not someone who disparages gaming as the root of all our social ills, or as an unambiguous time waster with no value whatsoever. In fact, my only real objection to gaming is the money that it continues to cost me. (Must get new video card, must get new video card...) Ok, that, and perhaps the drain on my time that could be put into more fruitful pursuits (it can be a time waster). But the bottom line is I love computer games. I am an avid gamer. In fact, as soon as this post is done I'm going to set about conquering 13th century Europe. And, yes, video games can be educational. I know more about football from playing Madden than I ever would from being a simple spectator (same goes for hockey, thank you NHL '97), but I think the value of games in this respect is limited and being exaggerated by the proponents of this idea. They can improve hand-eye coordination, teach teamwork, etc. , but so can basketball, and I still don't think we should tear out the reference shelves to put in a court.
Which, I think, gets me to the crux of my point. A place for everything, and everything in its place. It seems more and more, that we are attempting to become an all purpose community center. Albeit a community center with a lot of books. Maybe I am an anachronism, but I don't see that as our role (which is not to say that I object to most of our programming-- I don't. Storytimes, current events discussion groups, book clubs, etc. these all seem appropriate to me, but this gaming thing just seems a step too far).
A couple of other random objections:
Again from Degolar: "This is only a recent topic, but many academic types are now studying and beginning to understand the learning value of video games; and not just the "learning" games, but the skills required to succeed in almost all of them (critical thinking, problem solving, etc.). Most tell stories and have a narrative mythology, are a type of literature. We can do a lot more than use games as bait to get at the true learning, but can learn from them in the way we conduct our business and stay relevant in a changing world."
Color me dubious. While I appreciate a game with a good story, I think once again this argument overstates the case. Of the best-selling games, few are storyline intensive, and many of the ones that are (GTA, for example) are not age appropriate for the gamers we're intent on reaching. The list seems to be largely populated by racing games and real-time strategy games. Not a lot of literary quality there. I remain unconvinced that all of the Starcraft in the world will equal the intellectual stimulation of one well written book.
I also think it should be noted that of the games most often cited as having beneficial attributes, the MMORPG's, most are a) subscription based, usually $14.95 a month, and b) require substantial, and I do mean substantial, time commitments to get any real enjoyment out of. Plus, I'm not sure that the online teamwork and social skills translate into those things in the real world. If we want to use RPG's to teach kids social and thinking skills, then I say give them some dice and pencils and large complex sets of rules that they will have to learn to play. Don't let the computer do all the heavy lifting.
Those are my somewhat random thoughts on this topic. Sorry, I don't have a good closer here. Maybe my writing skills have atrophied because of too many computer games (Language skills people! Language skills! The indispensable key to critical thinking and intellectual development, and almost entirely absent from the gaming world... just a thought.)
I leave you with this:
Extra credit to anyone that knows what and where it is.
7 comments:
I too have reservations about gaming in the library, but I see the other side too. We are a community building. One of our purposes is to allow others access, whether it be books, games or information.
Oh, and it's from Oxford. Next time you should obscure the web address from which you obtained the photo. Any "librarian" can easily find the answer.
Ah yes, but more specifically what is it? Oxford only doesn't get you the extra credit, sorry.
It's the bloody Radcliffe. Part of their library!
Right you are sir, the Radcliffe Camera, of the Bodleian Library. One of my very favorite places in Oxford. Of course, my very favorite place in Oxford is the Eagle and Child. Ahh, Tetley's on tap-- what truly makes Britain a better country.
I'm on a unique side of the coin, as I teach classes for the library. Should the library be responsible for providing rudimentary classes for the public? As some of our staff would suggest, no.
However, teaching, like gaming, will suck individuals into the library so they might use other sources. If the games can be held in a room where the noise level could be kept down (or better yet, no speakers at all, as is the case with large scale LAN parties), the only noise is the occasional grunt or moan from those playing the game). A situation much like teaching...pull the users aside in a computer lab and give them some time to do their thing.
While they're here, they can see all the new DVDs they can watch for free, pick up a book or two, or realize the library has wireless internet access and they can come here to a safe place to congregate.
Is computer training/gaming necessary for library to function? Nope. It's a way for the library to advertise itself, to keep the crowds coming in to show what other services we have to provide.
And by no means give them a 5 minute "this is what you can do at the library speech." They won't listen. Come sit down with a couple books and movies as it's time to play your round and if they notice what you're reading/watching...your job is done.
My library doesn't have wireless internet but it does have a bunch of kids who play video games. Not once have they picked up a book.
Rudimentary classes compared to gaming? I think teaching adults how to read is much more important than teaching a 9 year old what a frag is. "The occasional grunt or moan" doesn't exactly make the idea of games in the library more appealing. It does however make lan parties sound pathetic.
It blows my mind that the argument "It's a library for god's sake" doesn't work for this matter. Why is the intellect so underrated these days?
I will gladly pay my tax money for the county library but if that money is being used to buy kids a playstation I could think of a million better uses for it. There are poor and undereducated people out there who could benefit from the services libraries should be offering. Freedom of information and education is what libraries should be about.
Excellent heading. Made me laugh.
Post a Comment