ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries


June 1988 /  355

As you can see, my enthusiasm for the place of 
popular music in an academ ic setting is high. T hat 
does not mean there are no pitfalls, including the 
very real problem of protecting the collection from 
theft. This is crucial when you are dealing with a 
non-research collection like ours with materials 
readily accessible and therefore stealable. CDs are 
especially vulnerable.

And we have had other problems, such as find­
ing the funds to keep the project going. Unfortu­
nately the Main Library is no longer able to allo­
cate special grants or allow us to utilize non-music 
budget lines. Since the Music Library budget must 
continue to be earmarked for curriculum -related 
purchases, we have for the first time applied for 
grant money to purchase additional popular and 
local music materials. I am exploring other options 
as well and feel confident that we will be able to 
continue adding to the existing collection.

The popular music collection has indeed turned

out to com plem ent and not com pete w ith the 
cu rricu lu m -o rien ted  m aterials in our lib rary . 
Knowing the limitations, being aw are of the pri­
m ary mission of the university, and remaining sen­
sitive to the politics and economics of the situation 
makes integrating popular music into our collec­
tion feasible and rewarding.

So if you are planning to be in New Orleans this 
July for the ALA Annual Conference, take the St. 
Charles streetcar uptown (a tourist “must” in any 
case) and come visit us at the Loyola Music L i­
b ra ry . You are w elcom e to use our co llectio n , 
w hether you’re interested in B ach , the Boogie 
Kings o r— better yet— both!

E d ito r’s note: This article is based on a p ap er p re ­
sented at the A nnual M eeting o f the Popular C u l­
tu re  A ssociation in N ew  O rlea n s‚ M a rc h  2 5 , 
1988.

(l-r) Marcello Buzzonetti, Secretary, E u rop ea n  University Institute‚ Fiesole, Italy; Assunta Pisani, 
Collection D evelopm ent L ibrarian, H arvard University; and Mario Casalini M anaging D irector, 

Casalini L ibri, Fiesole. Credit: Martha Brogan

WESS goes to Florence

T o th e secon d  in te rn a tio n a l c o n fe re n c e  of 
A C R L ’s W estern European Specialists Section, 
held in Florence, Italy, on April 4 - 8 , 1988, cam e 
90 U.S. librarians to meet with 60 W estern E u ro ­
pean librarians, publishers, and book distributors.

The aim of the conference, entitled “Shared Re­
sources, Shared Responsibilities,” was to enable 
these people to meet with each other and to discuss 
current collection development realities, trends 
and problems. One particular emphasis for Ameri-



356 /  C &RL News

can librarians was on how to locate some of the 
more elusive European publications.

The opening session immediately brought to the 
fore a recurring conference them e— the difference 
in philosophy between European and American 
academ ic librarians. The Europeans see their pri­
m ary function as curatorial and the Americans see 
theirs as d elivery  of in fo rm atio n . H e rb e rt R. 
Lothm an, author and international correspondent 
of P ublisher’s W eekly, delivered a salvo against the 
Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris in recounting his 
difficulties in doing research there. The next day 
L e Roy Ladurie, adm inistrateur generale of the 
Bibliothèque, responded sharply to his criticisms 
but did admit to the poor health of the Paris li­
braries. Implicit in some of his remarks was the 
thought that perhaps the expectations of American 
scholars were unrealistic in their demands for a 
level of service not contemplated or offered.

The conference provided 19 sessions packed with 
information; each 90-m inute period included at 
least three short papers. Topics ranged widely from 
“L arg e Microform Collections” and “Databases 
and Online Com m unication” to “L ocal History 
and Regional Publishing” and “W om en’s Studies in 
W estern E u ro p e .” One would have liked more 
tim e for discussion.

One of the most interesting sessions, “European 
National Libraries in Transition,” revealed that 
the concept of a national library is surprisingly dif­
ficult to define. The French, according to L e Roy 
Ladurie, are now trying to disperse their central

R eception, sponsored by Casalini L ibri at the Villa di M ezzom onte outside F lo rence. M ichael Albin 
(center), H ead o f Acquistions at the Library o f Congress.

national library into a number of other locations 
around Paris, and to provide telecommunication 
with other natural resources as a supplement to 
their collections.

The Italians do not really have a national li­
brary, according to Anna Lenzuni of the Biblioteca 
Nazionale Centrale in Florence, but they have re­
gional centers. The Biblioteca Nazionale serves as a 
central institution only for bibliography.

Several European countries, including Belgium, 
Switzerland, and Spain, in trying to deal with sub­
stan tial eth n ic and linguistic regionalism  have 
opted for decentralization of library collections. 
These countries are trying for a better balance be­
tween conservation and com m unication, but in 
many the museum, not the library, is regarded as 
the center for information. All librarians em pha­
sized severe financial constraints.

The crux of many library problems continues, as 
always, to be a question of finances— not enough 
government or institutional support of the library, 
rising costs of books and periodicals, and the cost of 
new technology. In anoth er excellent session, 
“Databases and Online Communication I , ” Karen 
Hunter of Elsevier Science Publications observed 
th at we are technically capable of doing much 
more with electronic delivery of information than 
library finances will allow, and that scholarly pub­
lishing in electronic form is not encouraging be­
cause the market is small, fragm ented, and poorly 
funded. The PC revolution has created wants that 
cannot be fulfilled at present. Com m ercial vendors



June 1988 /  357

are interested in huge datafiles for many users; the 
only successful scholarly databases have been tax- 
supported.

Leslie Hume of the Research Libraries Group 
also spoke of the proliferation of very specialized 
scholarly databases and about the need for com pre­
hensive sources or indexes to make these accessible. 
She sees a need for databases with an interdiscipli­
nary focus, for more archival repositories in elec­
tronic form , and for more access to visual m ateri­
als. She re ite ra te d  th e need for in stitu tio n al 
funding, since scholarly databases are not revenue- 
producing.

W h at emerged from these meetings was that E u ­
ropean libraries are exploring the sharing of re­
sources, mostly within their own boundaries, but 
that national libraries are contending with prob­
lems of increasing regional ethnic focus. It is clear 
that in Europe, as in the U.S. ‚ that new technology 
is forcing librarians to make hard choices. The E u ­
ropeans are trying to make appropriate and finan­
cially possible selections of electronic technologies, 
but are finding difficulties w ith incom patible 
hardw are and rapidly changing products.

Most Continental librarians continue to see their

role as curatorial; however, they do not aim at 
completeness of collections as do A m erican re­
search librarians. In fact, the idea of a complete 
collection appears unrealistic to European librari­
ans, as indicated by the discussion at the session on 
“ The Conspectus as a C ollection M anagem ent 
Tool for Western European Studies.”

All in all this first overseas A C R L conference was 
both enlightening and stimulating. U.S. librarians 
found much to exchange with others from their 
own country as well as with the Europeans. As al­
ways, the informal exchanges were as valuable as 
the working sessions.

Florence was an ideal choice for a site, although 
perhaps too seductive a city for conferees. It took 
real strength of character to resist the lure of the 
museums, churches, and Renaissance streets in fa­
vor of meetings. And the hospitality (repasts and 
entertainment) arranged by Mario Casalini of C a ­
salini Libri was superb— probably never again will 
a library conference offer such feasts in such ele­
gant surroundings. — Claire D udley, Science and 
N onprint Editor, C hoice, M iddletow n, C onnecti­
cut.

RTSD preservation microfilming institute 
at Yale University

F o r two and a half days, April 2 1 - 2 3 ,1 9 8 8 , over 
110 librarians and archivists m et at Yale University 
for a program entitled “Preservation Microfilming: 
Planning & Production,” a regional institute spon­
sored by the ALA Resources and Technical Services 
Division’s Reproduction of Library Materials Sec­
tion. The Institute was a follow-up to their earlier 
institute, “Preservation Microfilming: Administra­
tive Issues,” held in M arch 1986. Both programs 
were planned in order to meet the training needs of 
libraries currently or prospectively involved in 
preservation microfilm ing. The recent institute 
was designed to provide practical information and 
training to those responsible for microfilming pro­
grams.

Following welcoming remarks by Yale Univer­
sity librarian Millicent Abell, Wesley Boom gaar- 
den, preservation officer at the Ohio State Univer­
sity L ib r a r ie s , spoke on th e elem en ts in th e 
preservation microfilming process and their inter­
connections to the library’s preservation activities 
and other operations, such as collection develop­
m en t and p ro vid in g  b ib lio g rap h ical co n tro l. 
Boomgaarden also discussed such “macro-issues” 
as the institutional planning process, cost control, 
technologies to consider, and the effect on the li­
brary users.

To ensure that microfilm will provide a perm a­
nent copy, libraries must meet many special stan­

dards and specifications in the preparation, pro­
duction, duplication, and storage of the microfilm. 
Myron B. C hace, head of the Special Services Sec­
tion, Photoduplication Service, at the Library of 
Congress, reviewed m any of the standards and 
specifications in the filming process, providing 
some insights into their development.

A key p art of the Institute was four preparation 
workshops, each focusing on a different type of m a­
terial: monographs, serials, newspapers, and m an­
uscripts and archives. E ach  of the workshop lead­
ers described key steps in the preparation process: 
searching available records to determine the exist­
ence of other microform or hard copies; the physi­
cal examination and preparation of m aterial; the 
physical preparation of the items to be filmed, in­
cluding collation, targeting, and reel p ro gram ­
ming; film inspection and other post-filming pro­
cedures. The workshop leaders for these sessions 
w ere Sherry Byrne, preservation lib rarian, the 
University of Chicago Library (Monographs); T a ­
m ara Swora, assistant preservation microfilming 
officer, Preservation Microfilming Office, the L i­
brary of Congress (Serials); Ann Swartzell, associ­
ate librarian (Conservation), New York State L i­
brary (Newspapers); and Vanessa Piala, head of 
preservation services, Smithsonian Institution L i­
braries (Archives and Manuscripts).

Participants had the opportunity to see such