Books to read and consider regarding library services and the PIC

Thinking about library services and incarceration? Here are some of the books that have helped me to parse out this bureaucratic tangle, in no particular order. Please note that the new ALA Standards for Library Services for the Incarcerated and Detained are almost here! But just as the PIC is vast, there are many angles to consider. This list is not at all comprehensive, but I hope it is a good point of reference for library and information workers who are wondering what is up on these fronts. For other information and resources relating to libraries and incarceration, please visit Library Services to the Justice Involved, where we've linked lots of good stuff like the Expanding Information Access GIS map and training videos.

Are Prisons Obsolete? By Angela Davis, 2003, Seven Stories Press

Concise, cutting insights into the prison industrial complex, or PIC. The following passage is especially apt to the place of public libraries in a world with fewer jails and prisons:

“The prison industrial complex is much more than the sum of all the jails and prisons in this country. It is a set of symbiotic relationships among correctional communities, transnational corporations, media conglomerates, guards, unions, and legislative and court agendas.

. . . Imagine a constellation of alternative strategies and institutions, with the ultimate aim of removing the prison from the social and ideological landscapes of our society. . . . Try to envision a continuum of alternatives to imprisonment–demilitarization of schools, revitalization of education at all levels, a health system that provides free physical and mental care to all, and a justice system based on reparation and reconciliation rather than retribution and vengeance.”

We Do This 'til We Free Us: Abolitionist Organizing and Transforming Justice, by Mariame Kaba, 2021, Haymarket Books

What is abolition? In brief, "PIC abolition is a positive project that focuses, in part, on building a society where it is possible to address harm without relying on structural forms of oppression or the violent systems that increase it." Kaba follows in the tradition of Davis to talk about the role of life-affirming institutions. These arguments also apply to our responsibility to "reduce contact between the public and the police." This will necessitate a dramatic shift from the "carceral logic," which dominates "nearly every government function, including those seemingly removed from prisons."

The Utopia of Rules: On Technology, Stupidity, and the Secret Joys of Bureaucracy, by David Graeber, 2015, Melville House

Do we protect things or people? Librarianship is bureaucratic by nature, meaning that we focus our energies on allocating resources. Even the most "benevolent bureaucracies," will spawn absurdities, and at the end of the day, are backed by the "threat of force." Graeber continues the logic and tradition of Max Weber to show us our true nature. This book is not specific to libraries or the PIC, though Graeber actually calls on the example of academic libraries to illustrate a key point about society and "lopsided systems of imagination."

Library Services and Incarceration: Recognizing Barriers, Strengthening Access, by Jeanie Austin, 2021, American Library Association

This book shows the lay of the land, including the history of library services for people impacted by incarceration, and all of the challenges that relate.

The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness, by Michelle Alexander, 2012, The New Press

The PIC has been built out on racism and the socioeconomic problems we inherited from past generations, and as such, has disproportionately impacted people of color, especially black men. Rhetoric and laws that present as "tough on crime" reproduce and exacerbate harm, and have catalyzed the growth of the PIC.

Invisible Child: Poverty, Survival and Hope in an American City, by Andrea Elliott, 2022, Random House

I include this book on this list because it really goes to show the interlocking network of public services and the lack of a safety net for poor families which too often results in experiences with law enforcement and the PIC. Also, this narrative should be front of mind for children's and teen librarians, who could create welcoming and safe environments for families at the crossroads of the legal system and other social services.

Waiting for an Echo: The Madness of American Incarceration, by C. Montross, 2020, Penguin Press

This book also is not specific to libraries, but offers compelling arguments to show how "privilege and poverty and race are determining factors that suffuse and define our encounters with the criminal legal system."

Milo Imagines the World, by Matt de la Pena, illustrated by Christian Robison, 2021, G.P. Putnam,'s Sons Books for Young Readers

A picture book for all ages that goes to show we're not alone, and thereby may help to break down walls and barriers to imagination.

The Short and Tragic Life of Robert Peace, by Jeff Hobbs, 2015, Scribner

I hate to burst our bubble, but libraries, or education, are no silver bullet. Like Invisible Child, this book offers a very personal account to the impacts of societal shortcomings and politics. I will never not think about Robert Peace's mother, returning to work the day after hearing that he had been killed.

Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption, by Bryan Stevenson, 2018, One World

May I suggest listening to this one as an audiobook? But especially, the chapter about women on Death Row stands alone.

Evicted: Poverty and Profit in the American City, by Matthew Desmond, 2017, Crown

Important narrative journalism, especially as cities move to criminalize homelessness, and insofar as the housing crisis and poverty connect to the PIC.

The Women's House of Detention: A queer History of a Forgotten Prison, by Hugh Ryan, 2022, Bold Type Books

Kind of a difficult read, but like Poverty or Invisible Child, really great journalism, which positions an infamous jail alongside the women who were incarcerated there and the surrounding community. See especially the chapter about the Stonewall Riot and the House of D.













Rural libraries, rural jails: Outreach to incarcerated community members in western Massachusetts

It's Freedom to Read week! Like anyone I am concerned with the exponential increase in challenges, and attacks on libraries and library and information workers. We know that the number of challenges to books in libraries far exceeds those reported to the ALA. Did you know though, that PEN America recognizes censorship in jails and prisons as the greatest example of censorship? The Freedom to Read is a Constitutionally protected right, established also by IFLA and the Nelson Mandela Rules, and the ALA’s Prisoner’s Right to Read.

This slide deck is from a presentation that Sarah Hertel-Fernandez and I gave to the MBLC on October 5, 2023, about the $9,700 grant we received from the LSTA towards our pilot project to expand library services at the Franklin County Jail in Greenfield, Massachusetts.



Growing Services: Libraries creating access for incarcerated people

Privileged to share the preliminary findings of the 2020-2021 Library Services and Incarceration survey with LJ! Read “Growing Services: Libraries creating access for incarcerated people,” and also please be sure to respond to the latest iteration of the survey, and to share the link with your colleagues as well!

Map courtesy of Bee Okelo, SFPL-JARS Administrative & GIS Analyst

Outside and In: Services for people impacted by incarceration

This past summer I got to work with Dr. Jeanie Austin to share our research findings about library services to people impacted by incarceration in Library Journal. Read, “Outside and In: Services for people impacted by incarceration,” here! The crux of our argument is that public and academic libraries are not doing enough to support people who are incarcerated or recently released, and their loved ones, as we found fewer than 50 libraries offering programs and services of this type. Our hope is that in showcasing the work that is being done, more libraries will be inspired to reach out to jails, prisons, and nonprofits in their communities that support people impacted by incarceration.

Besides reading the article in LJ, please take the new survey we’ve launched in partnership with the Library Research Service (LRS.org), to collect more information about library services to people impacted by incarceration. The survey closes December 6, 2021, so hop to it!

Connections, from the New York Public Library, is a free guide for people who have been incarcerated.

Connections, from the New York Public Library, is a free guide for people who have been incarcerated.

improving public library services for people impacted by the prison industrial complex (PIC)

“Abolition is about presence, not absence. It is about building life-affirming institutions.”

-Dr. Ruth Wilson Gilmore

More than 2.3 million Americans are behind bars; that’s 698 per 100,000 people. Consider, then, how many people have been in prison, or have a loved one who is impacted by the prison industrial complex (PIC).

How many people are in prison in the United States? https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2020.html

How many people are in prison in the United States?
https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2020.html

Recently, I researched public library programs for people impacted by the PIC, and began connecting with other librarian abolitionists. (Back up here, all this took off when I moved back to Massachusetts, and began volunteering with Great Falls Books Through Bars. They are great, please give them your money.)

What we found, when we looked into it, was a shocking dearth of public library services for people impacted by the PIC. Even after having been shared through several library listservs, twitter, etc., my google doc list of programs for people impacted by the PIC is disappointingly short. I conclude that we are failing a large segment of our communities.

This represents a gaping opportunity for public libraries, as so-called bastions of democracy, information, and access, to reach and connect more people. As “life-affirming institutions,” public libraries are uniquely positioned in a future that values people over profit.

“Breaking down library barriers to serving impoverished or homeless patrons will invariably aid formerly incarcerated persons, as this population is disproportionately affected by both poverty and homelessness. ”
— Ringrose, K., 2020, p. 4

I myself am the director in a really small, rural library. It might not be immediately obvious how GML could at all contribute to the cause of abolishing prisons. Of course, it is still politically taboo, and sensitive, as ideas go. But here are a few things that any library can do:

Be sure to keep up with conversations about library services for the justice-involved: join the prison-l listserv, here. Also, anyone out there interested in working on a zine about public libraries, and the resources/services we offer? To be shared with people who are looking forward to release. Please email me! chelsea@renewedlibraries.org.

”Imagine a constellation of alternative strategies and institutions, with the ultimate aim of removing the prison from the social and ideoligical landscapes of our society.”

-Dr. Angela Davis

Reference:
Ringrose, K. (2020). Libraries & Reentry: The importance of public spaces, technologies, and community to formerly incarcerated patrons. ALA Policy Perspectives (7).

public library leaders and the status quo: vocabulary and ideas for better bureaucracy

Last month, I published a paper called, “Public libraries as bureaucracies: Toward a more critical perspective,” in Public Libraries Quarterly. This paper was the result of several years spent grappling with critical theory and my own experience as a public librarian, manager, and director, yet is by no means an end of the difficult work that remains to be done in regards to the ways that public libraries enact bureaucracy, and themselves operate within larger and more complex social constructs of bureaucracy and capitalism. Some of the ideas that I came across in my research relate particularly to the challenges public libraries are facing at present, especially vis a vis responding meaningfully to calls for racial justice in our communities and workplaces. That this vocabulary seems to be missing from public librarianship is no accident, it is evidence of the ways bureaucracy reinforces the status quo.

The concepts I most wish to highlight at this juncture include:

  • “bureaucratic balance of power principle,”

  • “soft touch hegemony,”

  • “interpretive labor,”

  • libraries as “undertheorized spaces,”

  • “threat of force,” and, last but not least . . .

  • praxis.


Let me begin, though, by defining bureaucracy. The most succinct definition of a bureaucracy is “any location where any numberof people gather to discuss the allocation of resources of any kind at all” (Graeber, 2015, p. 21). Of course, this is a very simplistic understanding of a difficult and nebulous phenomenon. The way I would explain bureaucracy, in a nutshell, would be any system that aims to enable efficiency, predictability, and calculability, but which likely also produces inefficiencies, absurdities, and inequalities. Bureaucracies are underpinned by control through non-human technologies, and ultimately, “threat of force,” an ugly truth that deserves the attention it has just begun receiving from public library practitioners in recent months, and which I will explore in greater detail in what follows.

First, the “bureaucratic balance of power principle,” is quite straightforward; it states:

When a conflict over alternatives arises in an organization, they are evaluated on the basis of their impact on the balance of power among the decision makers. The alternative that maintains the status quo, or alters it in the least, is favored whether or not it is the best choice under the circumstances.

It is interesting to look for this principle at play now, as libraries reckon with and respond to the Black Lives Matter movement. Indeed, it is easier to release a statement, put up a sign, or strike a task force, than to enact substantive, radical, systemic change to upend racism in public libraries. In fact, these responses I’ve named represent more bureaucracy, and to that end a concept that I did not intend to introduce in this post: the iron law of liberalism, which holds that any initiative taken to reduce bureaucracy will actually have the opposite effect. David Graeber, who as best as I can tell coined this term, was speaking to market reforms and government policies, but I don’t think it is a stretch to see how it applies also to governance and committees and so many of the ways that we try to move change forward in public libraries.

pastedImage.png

Task forces and committees serve as a good segue to the notion of “soft touch hegemony,” a phrase that Karen Nicholson applies in, “The McDonaldization of academic libraries and the values of transformational change,” to describe the ways that libraries leverage empowerment to their strategic advantage. Examples of soft-touch hegemony in public libraries include coaching employees towards resilience and self-care, mindfulness trainings, team agreements, and scrum and self-organizing teams in Agile, each of which can serve as an effective and powerful tool for fostering healthy and positive environments, or can inadvertently produce the opposite. Here it is interesting to think of the theory that a bureaucracy will follow “the direction which the powers using the apparatus give to it” (Weber, as translated in Gerth and Mills, 1946, p. 230).

Let’s return to the example of a public library striking a committee or task force to make recommendations as to building diversity and equity into their organization, and creating a safe and welcoming environment for all visitors, especially BIPOC, people who identify as LGBTQ2S+, and people with disabilities. This could be a good idea, but does it place an imbalance of interpretive labor on the shoulders on people in your organization who are already oppressed? Interpretive labor, as I understand it, describes how the work of understanding power dynamics falls to the people who are disempowered. Not only do the people who are disenfranchised need to understand what makes their oppressors tick, they must also do the work of calling out injustices, for example, calling out racism. Ironically, the people in positions of power have greater access to information (I note, ironically, that the paper of my own that I reference within this post is beyond a paywall), education, and opportunities to understand their privilege, but outsource this labor to others instead of taking it upon themselves.

In fact, public libraries—and the greater forces of financialization and capitalism—enact bureaucracy to the effect of maintaining environments where the work of understanding is purposefully precluded. For this reason, libraries can be described as “undertheorized spaces,” in which emphasis is placed upon the practical, tangible, measurable aspects of library work. To quote from my own paper:

Nicholson and Seale have called this the “politics of practicality,” a phenomenon that “acts to reproduce patriarchy, neoliberal ideology, neutrality, and white supremacy” (2017, p. 5). Popowich, also in the spirit of critical librarianship, observed that in libraries, rationality, and practicality, have resulted in “an untheorized practice,” that in turn, “reproduces the inequalities and oppressions of the system even while it allows the system to keep functioning” (Popowich, 2017, p. 62).

Hence, public libraries have not been in the habit of creating space and time for staff to read, reflect, and discuss Black Lives Matter, or Truth and Reconciliation, or disability studies, or feminism, et cetera, on work time. I have often thought it is ironic that library work is not typically considered “knowledge work,” as we are not known for producing new ideas and systems, so much as we are at reproducing existing information and systems. To the ends that they represent practical, and undertheorized environments, David Graeber describes bureaucracies as “dead zones of the imagination.” How ironic is it that libraries so often self-describe as valuing imagination, access to information, and innovation, while not investing in their employees’ development by paying for this work? Another way that these practical, undertheorized dead zones persist is by keeping people in need. People who are preoccupied with food, rent, and money worries are not as free to engage in politics, theory, and creative pursuits.

A recent article in School Library Journal, “What if paying library staff and teachers to read IS part of the anti-racist work we could, and should, be doing?” made two excellent points about the usual practice of not paying library staff for time spent reading (and I would add, researching):

One, you have library staff that don’t read because they would have to do so on their own time, which means that all of the book knowledge they have comes from whatever they read in school or casually on their own time. Spoiler alert, whatever they read in school was most likely predominantly written by a white male author and is part of the traditional cannon, whichever age group they were reading and studying. And two, if you do have well read library staff, that means that they are reading on their own time and the library or school is benefiting from the unpaid labor of their staff. Librarianship and education are two of the professions which benefit a lot from both the unpaid labor of their staff and staff spending their own money on materials to help enhance the program. 

Library leaders seeking ways to practice anti-racism can also foster the right circumstances for growth and ingenuity by creating space and time for reading, research, reflection, and discourse, within paid work time.

When I was writing “Public libraries as bureaucracies,” I struggled with what seemed like it would be a radical and unpopular notion that threatened any vestiges of vocational awe: public libraries, as bureaucracies, rest upon “threat of force.” As I shared in my paper, though, the very example that David Graeber drew upon, in The Utopia of Rules, was that of someone being removed from a library. From a SWOT perspective, in which opportunities and threats are examined as factors external to an organization, threat of force underpins a society that rests upon property ownership and the division of wealth, there is no getting around it. But within public libraries, we have some control over when and how often we summon the “armed men,” i.e., the police, to our libraries. We also have control over our codes of conduct, and the ways that staff are trained to apply these expectations. This represents one of the most significant areas in which library leaders have any real power to reform bureaucracy in public libraries.

Critical librarianship still is not too well known, I have found in my personal experience, working primarily in public libraries, and as follows the above thoughts on libraries as practical, undertheorized spaces, i.e. “dead zones of the imagination,” but it is a movement which brings critical theory into librarianship. Within critical librarianship, “praxis” is used to describe “the dialectical unity of theory and practical activity” (Popowich, 2017, p. 62). This would entail “both a critique of institutions and practices, and a practice of solidarity with all those who . . . find it difficult or impossible to speak or act for themselves” (Popowich, 2017, p. 62). Praxis, to me, represents owning the personal and the political within librarianship, and taking practical action. Within public libraries, hierarchical structures grant more power to managers and directors, who in turn have more control and influence over bureaucracy, and thus, ability to exert change. Recalling the above quote to the effect that a bureaucracy follows the direction of the powers that be, it is incumbent on public library leaders, especially, to develop their own praxes, taking the necessary steps to learn and understand their own privilege and status, and subsequently examining and dismantling the systems that uphold the outdated, unequal status quo, in the public libraries in which they work, and in their communities and own homes.

Gerth, H.H. and Mills, W. 1946. From Max Weber: Essays in sociology. New York: Oxford University Press.

Graeber, D. 2015. The utopia of rules: On technology, stupidity, and the secret joys of bureaucracy. Brooklyn, NY and London: Melville House.

Nicholson, K.P. 2015. The McDonaldization of academic libraries and the values of transformational change. College & Research Libraries, 76 (3): 328-338.

Popowich, S. 2017. ‘Ruthless criticism of all that exists’: Marxism, technology, and library work, in The politics of theory and the practice of critical librarianship, ed. K. P. Nicholson and M. Seale, 39-66. Sacramento, CA: Library Juice Press.

the trouble with resilience narratives

This past year has been a difficult one for me, including a series of personal traumas and professional challenges, even before the current pandemic situation hit. I am humbled and thankful for the outpouring of support I received from family, friends, and colleagues, but one day, hearing for the umpteenth time something about my resilience, I bristled. “I don’t want to have to be resilient!” As I looked into this thought/feeling, I was reminded of all the times I’ve coached others towards resilience, which I had learned, was defined as “the ability to bounce back.” Indeed, resilience is an important life skill, but it can leave one feeling like one of those inflatable punching bag clowns I remember from my childhood.

bop+bag.jpg

We all love a good come back story, and it certainly beats staying down in the dirt. But, resilience narratives can equate to gaslighting, especially if we are too quick to go there. Karen Nicholson has written about “soft touch hegemony,” in which worker empowerment is leveraged for business returns (2015, p. 330). Here I am reminded of that Rene Brown cartoon about empathy, where someone thinks they are being caring, but really they are not allowing another person the time and space to feel what they must and ought to. If we’re too quick to look for silver linings, it may seem like we are denying the existence of the cloud.

These aren’t the only issues with resilience narratives. As I questioned why I should feel icky about resilience, I thought also of Meredith Farkas’ 2017 article in Library Journal, “Less is not more: rejecting resilience narratives for library workers,” in which Farkas connects resilience narratives to cultures that demand we do more with less, accept what we’re given, and go above and beyond without due recompense, working ourselves into the ground.

For leaders, all this means not to be so quick with the resilience narratives. Moreover, it begs the question, is there a root cause that you or your organization can address? For example, I have worked in a few organizations where security concerns were a recurring stressor. Revising our codes of conduct, offering more training, and hiring security personnel addressed the problem itself, rather than just demanding that staff deal with these situations again and again.

It is also important to think of the underlying assumptions and privilege in coach speak as to resilience and self care. Not everyone has equal access to time and space for self care. If we are asking others to be resilient, we should be asking also what we can do to engender the circumstances for their resilience, including fair pay and health care and a schedule that supports their needs.

Resilience is an amazing and essential skill, but before we ask folks to bounce back, let’s stop and ask, back to what?

Nicholson, K.P. 2015. The McDonaldization of academic libraries and the values of transformational change. College & Research Libraries, 76 (3): 328-338.







make the most of your time: do nothing! just kidding, I want you to read

Image: You are worth more than your productivity sticker, from Praxis Studiohttps://www.amazon.com/s?k=Praxis+Studio&i=handmade&search-type=ss&ref=bl_dp_s_web_0

Image: You are worth more than your productivity sticker, from Praxis Studio

https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Praxis+Studio&i=handmade&search-type=ss&ref=bl_dp_s_web_0

So your library is closed, on account of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, with no telling as to when you will be able to reopen. Hopefully, you are able to work from home, and maybe catch up on reporting or other administrative duties, as I intend to do, or else you are finding innovative ways to deliver traditional services like story hour. Maybe your team will take advantage of this opportunity to learn new skills—indeed, it looks like there will be an explosion of webinars and online learning opportunities to help library personnel make the most of this time. These approaches make a lot of sense, as we are adapting to new circumstances, using technology to stay connected, and keeping busy.

But wait . . . not so fast! Now is an opportunity for us to talk about busy, or more precisely, “cultures of busy,” which emphasize action, and doing, over reflection. This is a concept I came to think of through my training in Agile, and concomitantly, Lean, two scientific management philosophies intent on maximizing efficiency, each problematic in their own rites, insofar as the direction of this post is going, but also, relevant. Through Agile, I learned to trim all “non-value adding” actions from workflow, these being steps that don’t benefit library patrons. For example, moving materials from one spot to another, labeling them, and leaving them be, until the work will actually get done. Or, I worked in a technical services environment wherein staff made work for themselves in labeling and flagging materials. They were busy, and felt good about keeping busy, but in the end, these activities did not create any value for our patrons.

With circulation at a stand-still, the above point is irrelevant, but how about using this time for training? Surely that is a productive use of time! Not necessarily, due to the principle of “half-life of information,” which states that you will remember only half of what you learn, for two weeks, to diminishing effects after that. Or something like that, case in point! Agile recommends “just-in-time,” versus “just-in-case,” learning, which coincides with adult learning theory, that we learn best when there is a relevant application at hand. Watch those videos about Excel formulas now, then wait six weeks to see how much they benefit you. Or, look them up just as you are actually in need of applying those formulas, and you will get the point.

I wish to suggest, instead, a more radical use of this time, one that is grounded in critical librarianship. Librarianship has long been characterized by its practical nature, which emphasizes efficiency and productivity, resulting in what has been called “un- or undertheorization.” Undertheorization, and busy-ness, prevent us from asking difficult questions, or, well, diving into theory. As per Sam Popowich in the essay, “ ‘Ruthless Criticism of All That Exists’: Marxism, technology, and library work,” “Under-theorization is both cause and effect of the robust if erroneous belief that libraries and library workers must and can be ‘neutral’” (Popowich, p. 49). Popowich goes on to say, “An undertheorized practice simply reproduces the inequalities and oppressions of the system even while it allows the system to keep functioning” (p. 62).

It seems that the coronavirus/COVID-19 pandemic is forcing us, as a society, to hit pause. I relish the news that the environment has benefitted from this disruption, insofar as air quality has improved, thanks to fewer emissions, and wildlife have returned to places usually populated by tourists. What about all of the time that workers are now able to spend with their families? For me, because I live in a rural area without access to internet, I’ve enjoyed time offline, and yes, thinking! I can’t help but think we may return to our libraries refreshed, if we have made the most of this time.

These examples represent the low-hanging fruits of critical librarianship, just having the space to reflect, or to not be so busy, but there is also opportunity now to dig into our professional literature. I think we all struggle to make space to read articles and texts, but here, now, is that chance. Besides taking in literature specifically pertinent to libraries, maybe this is a chance to grow in other directions. Another chapter, from the same book as the aforementioned essay by Popowich, describes how a group of librarians formed to read and discuss Michel Foucault’s The Order of Things, since the authors described, “we were all hungry for the kind of idea-based conversations that weren’t happening in our bureaucratic workplace” (Coysh, Denton, Sloniowski, p. 129). Besides the act of reading Foucault, the authors describe “reading and slow conversation as resistance” (Coysh, Denton, Sloniowski, p. 132).

Thus, my suggestion, during this time of upheaval and quiet, is for each of us to do some reading and writing. Maybe you don’t want to get into Marx or Foucault, but find what interests or challenges you, something without a “practical” nature. Each of the papers referenced above comes from the book, The Politics of Theory and the Practice of Critical Librarianship, edited by Karen P. Nicholson and Maura Seale, if you’d maybe like to start there.

Whatever your flavor, let’s resist our pre-programmed settings to be productive, and aim to be reflective, or introspective, and to dip our toes in theory. When we do get back to work, our practice will be the richer for it.

And hey, it looks like I’m not the only ones thinking along these lines: check out this article in The New Republic, “Against Productivity in a Pandemic.”


 

 

Falling in love with the ordinary: the Zen of Materials Management

The work that we do in Materials Management (aka, circulation, back of the house, or as we like to call it, “the heart of the library” is repetitive and detail-oriented. If you could maintain your focus through a morning’s check-ins, you’d be a Zen master! This isn’t a realistic expectation, but can you catch your thoughts when they’re wandering, and return your focus to the work at hand?

It helps if you can find joy in the work that you do. It’s pretty wondrous to have hundreds of books and DVDs pass through your hands any given day! Well, that itself can be distracting! What tools can we use to help train our attention? The first thing that comes to my mind is a quote, from Thich Nhat Hanh: “Mindfulness helps us to fall in love with the ordinary.” Can we begin to see the mundane as extraordinary?

396bd40effacc990adfe4452ed867ad1.jpg

A while back I installed a Google Chrome Extension “bell of mindfulness” to my Chrome account. There is a chime you can set according to your preferences (e.g. every 15 minutes or once an hour). When I hear the signal, I take a breath, in and out, and then resume working, giving the task at hand my full attention.

What at your library can you fall in love with?