I’ve been reading “Tomorrow Now” by Bruce Sterling and in his first thematic stage “the infant” he suggests that “the infant personifies the future. You place your children into history. You are their past” (page 3). This passage made me think about how I viewed my parents when I was growing up. They were my past, even when I was living with them in the present. Their existence constituted what “was” about my life, not what was to be. I did not look to them when determining a new direction in my life. Certainly they were safe and held a knowledge and experience that could be drawn from, but was that the first place I chose to look? No… I sought among my peers- including my relationships with them, and to what was happening in the world currently.
What would make me look back at my parents or my history? A crisis of identity perhaps- or not finding a satisfying answer from the present. Similarly, why would today’s children look to libraries? First, they would need to understand the value of them, or what they have to offer. What makes libraries different than the Internet? A common thread running through a few of the postings is the idea of the library as place, or as a means for establishing relationships.
My personal opinion is that this is the key. This may not be an appreciated comment, but yes, I think there are plenty of others out there in affiliated professions who can “do it better and more efficiently” as far as designing databases, and creating better accessibility, and teaching how to use ever-changing database interfaces. But, “machines themselves have nothing to teach us (page 60).” The Internet cannot provide human touch or emotional support. People still do that. How do we take this “specialty” and promote it as reasoning for the comtinuation of libraries? I don’t know. But, I think it’s all we’ve got.

Beth Hill
University of Idaho
Moscow