ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries 145 INNOVATIONS Humor and creativity By Norman D. Stevens Director The M olesworth Institute In “C reativity, Innovation and Risk-Taking,” C & RL N ews, July/August 1987, Joanne R. Euster, as ACRL president-elect, raised the question of “how bureaucratic, highly structured organiza­ tions... can encourage creative thinking and inno­ vative behavior” (p.405). She suggested th a t crea­ tiv ity can be ta u g h t, t h a t in n o v a tio n can be developed systematically, and offered some ideas and suggestions. One im portant elem ent th a t she failed to m ention, and th a t is too often overlooked, is the use of hum or in the prom otion and develop­ m ent of creativity and innovation. W hile the de­ velopm ent of a tru e sense of hum or is not some­ th in g t h a t c a n b e ta u g h t , or p e rh a p s even encouraged, the use of hum or, even in serious set­ tings, can be encouraged and supported as a tech­ nique th a t will help foster the maximum degree of creativity and innovation. O ne’s innate sense of h um or can be applied in a variety of ways in the operation and m anagem ent of libraries to help us avoid becom ing stale and to take a fresh look at w h at we are doing and why. There are some practical observations and sugges­ tions about how hum or can be used effectively to prom ote a fresh approach to our work. One significant use of hum or is in the initial steps of challenging existing policies, procedures, and practices th a t m ay have become outm oded and a r­ cane and th a t, indeed, m ay always have been less th a n satisfactory. By, for example, carrying out the application of a policy or a procedure to an ex­ trem e, it is often possible to dem onstrate the true inappropriateness of th a t policy or procedure and the extent to w hich it is simply a standard b u reau ­ cratic response. Seeing and laughing at the folly of our ways can break dow n our attachm ent to the old and can bring about creative change. H u m o r can also be helpful in stretch in g our im agination as we consider new policies, proce­ dures, and program s. The use of “blue-sky” and “w h at if” techniques are now routinely encouraged as a w ay of developing a laundry list of potential approaches to a situation in a w ay th a t will foster the broadest possible exam ination of all options. Those techniques should allow and encourage the inclusion of the most outrageous nonsensical solu­ tions and suggestions. By accepting suggestions th a t are so far out as to be unquestionably unac­ ceptable, one points out how im practical the exist­ ing s itu a tio n m ay b e, a n d how little m odest changes will accomplish, while also avoiding plac­ ing practical, bu t radical, suggestions th a t m ay be w orth serious consideration all alone at the outer end of the spectrum . H aving wildly outrageous suggestions to elim inate from consideration may well save som ew hat less outrageous suggestions from being dismissed w ithout an adequate h ear­ ing. Extrem e suggestions m ay also encourage those who make them , and others, to stretch their im agi­ nation to come up w ith creative and innovative ideas th a t are realistic. In some cases the presenta­ tion of a truly creative idea, or at least the germ of th a t creative idea, in a hum orous fashion m ay make it appear less threatening and more accept­ able. A good idea can appear, at first, to be simply a joke b u t, as its humorous aspects are peeled aw ay, the kernel of tru th and the idea’s practicality may be revealed and understood. M any internal library meetings and discussions are of a highly serious n atu re th a t take place in an u n certain atm osphere. A pprehension, hostility, and tension are not conducive to creative thinking and innovation. W hen those elements are present (or even dom inate as they all too often do) a discus­ sion of a library issue, the response of the p artici­ pants as they seek to solve a problem is likely to be 146 caution and timidity. Reliance on existing policies and practices (“we’ve always done it this way”), strict interpretation of rules and regulations (“it says that students may not borrow reference books for use outside the library”), shifting the blame (“I would have been able to help that user if books were cataloged in a timely fashion”), and similar techniques designed, on the one hand, to avoid re­ sponsibility or even blame and to avoid, on the other hand, leadership and the promotion of re­ form are likely to prevail. The careful and appro­ priate use of humor, not to punish or poke fun at an individual or a unit, to point up the futility of a sit­ uation, how ridiculous a p a rtic u la r procedure seems in retrospect, or the folly of existing policies and practices can, by breaking the ice, go a long way towards creating a climate in which creative and innovative ideas have a better chance of being put forward and given serious consideration. Humor can also be extremely effective in creat­ ing a bond among those who are working on an as­ signment in a way that few other techniques can. Activities th at bring individuals together over time invariably create “in jokes” that are understood only by those involved and make no sense even to other colleagues. That kind of bond, which should be encouraged, creates an atmosphere in which new ideas are more likely to flourish as the group finds an identity that brings it together as a group not as a collection of individuals each w ith some­ thing to risk or lose. Libraries need to be careful to nurture and sup­ port, and not punish or ridicule, those few mem­ bers of the staff who are willing to take on a perm a­ nent unpaid assignment as gad-fly. The constant prodding of the library bureaucracy through the use of humor and satire is needed to keep that bu­ reaucracy from becoming too firmly entrenched. Regular reminders of our foolish ways need to be encouraged. The skills needed by a gad-fly are not ones th at can be listed in a job description, assigned to a particular position, or identified as we inter- Feeling funny? N o rm an D. Stevens, as d ire c to r of th e Molesworth Institute, has an abiding interest in collecting as well as creating library humor. He would welcome examples of academic library humor, particularly in the form of pieces in in­ ternal academic library newsletters for his col­ lection. Dr. Stevens has agreed to sample such items as they are received and, from time to time as the quality w arrants, to prepare a brief column of excerpts of the best academic (or re­ search) library humor for College & Research Libraries News. Material can be sent to him at 143 Hanks Hill Road, Storrs, CT 06268. Please also enclose your business card (signed and dated on the verso) to enhance Dr. Stevens’s collection of library ephemera. view and hire staff. They are probably innate skills not found in most staff but they are skills to be fos­ tered, or at least tolerated, in those who do have them. Apart from its appropriate use in formal settings where it can help foster a creative climate, the con­ tinuing use of humor in internal library newslet­ ters, occasional nonsensical memos, notices and signs, and even, from time to time, w ithin formal memos and presentations offers an opportunity for the organization as a whole to be seen by its mem­ bers as one in which the rigid bureaucratic struc­ ture in which we work is just that. Those uses re­ veal the fact that the library is not necessarily the ideal setting that we would like it to be. The con­ stant reinforcement of the notion and power of the library as a bureaucracy through always stiff and formal newsletters, memos, and presentations is to be avoided at all costs. If the overall structure is seen simply as just another entrenched bureauc­ racy, even the sporadic use of humor in dealing with particular problems and issues can do little to save the day. Laughing together is an ideal way to foster an at­ mosphere in which creativity and innovation, and even risk-taking, may stand a chance of emerging, surviving, and perhaps flourishing. The Future of BI ACRL’s Bibliographic Instruction Section will hold a one-day Preconference program in New O r­ leans on July 8, 1988. The program is entitled, “The Future of BI: Approaches in the Electronic Age,” and will feature tw o keynote speakers: Sharon Hogan, director of libraries at Louisiana State University, and Christine Borgman, associate professor at the University of California, Los An­ geles. In the afternoon participants will have the op­ portunity to attend four break-out sessions and choose from eight topics: • Deborah Murphy, University of California, Santa Cruz, and creator of BiblioMania, will lead a session on developing desktop CAI; • Claudette Hagle, University of Dallas, will address the one-shot lecture; • choosing and using appropriate technology will be the focus of a session led by Pauline Rankin, Louisiana State University; • Sarah W atstein, H unter College, will present a session on burnout in BI librarians; • Sandra Ready, Mankato State University, will lead a session on teaching the online catalog; • Jane Kleiner, head of reference at Louisiana State University, will focus on teaching the end- user to search databases; • Alan W . R itch, University of C alifornia, 147 Santa Cruz, will lead a session on electronic point- of-use instruction; • and Mignon Adams, Philadelphia College of Pharmacy and Sciences, will address evaluating the instructor. Registration details will be published in a future issue of C&RL News. The chair of ACRL’s BIS Pre conference Committee is Jane Kleiner, Louisiana State University. Perfect preservation: A lesson from the past? By Philip H. Young Library Director University of Indianapolis The library profession is leading the way in iden­ tifying an impending crisis which threatens the very roots of modern culture—I refer to the acidic destruction of books. For the last century, the p a­ per used in books, magazines, and newspapers was made with acids which are now causing it to be­ come brittle and to crumble into dust, bearing with it society’s recorded knowledge of the last several generations. Librarians are attem pting to avert the cultural suicide of our era by preserving their library collec­ tions with the assistance of high technology. De­ acidification programs are underway, as are m i­ crofilming projects to photograph key items in research collections. Even new er technologies promise other methods of saving the w ritten record of the 20th century, including digitizing it for elec­ tronic storage in traditional, magnetic formats or using the new optical w izardry of CD-ROM. U n fo rtu n a te ly th ese e ffo rts, th o u g h w ell- intentioned, have proven costly, slow and (worst of all) not really perm anent. A deacidified book will still face the mechanical rigors of usage, including dog-eared pages and accidental drops into mud- puddles during a rush to catch a bus. Microfilm, microfiche, and other photographic processes will greatly extend the print’s life but are themselves vulnerable to chemical decay of image and file w ith the eventual loss of viability. Electronic me­ dia are also susceptible to long-term decay, as well as to short-term damage. (Who hasn’t heard of someone accidentally typing D EL *.* on their com puter keyboard?) No one seems to know w hat the shelf-life of CD-ROM will be, but it is already a p p a re n t th a t surface scratches in terfere w ith image-processing. Is our effort to preserve the records of our age in vain? Is there no incorruptible medium to which to entrust the essence of our era? Perhaps examining the methods used in earlier ages might provide an insight for us. Since antiquity, writers have used parchm ent, vellum and other skins, and non-aeidic paper for preservation of their m usings, but these media, while stable when stored in a monastery or public archives, do not guarantee a lasting record. In ancient times records w ere also w ritte n on bronze, wood and stone. Although wood is clearly im perm anent, metal and stone present the desired characteristics of virtual indestructibility. We can read a 6th-century B. C . treaty of the Greek city Sy- baris w ritten on a bronze plate or any of the thou­ sands of imperial Roman tomb inscriptions carved into stone (and now cluttering the w orld’s muse­ ums) just as well as at the time of their creation. The w ritten record has been preserved! U nfortu­ nately, however, metal and stone are not inexpen­ sive, easily obtained, rapidly inscribed, or effi­ ciently stored in quantity. Who w ould w ant to chisel War and Peace into blocks of m arble (or store the result in their library!)? Happily, research tells us th at there is yet an­ other medium used for w riting by ancient civiliza­ tions which overcomes these problems—the clay tablet. H um anity’s earliest surviving documents were im printed in soft clay, baked to rock-like hardness, and stored for systematic recall (or, as of­ ten happened, for posterity.) Do clay tablets meet our needs for w riting permanence? They do, in­ deed, approach indestructibility. G ranted, if you drop one, it breaks—but the text is not lost because any archaeologist worth his or her salt can piece it back together, good as new. (Try th at w ith acid p a ­ per!) Furtherm ore, clay is easily and quickly in­ scribed, unlike metal or stone. It can be found al­ most anywhere and molded into manageable units for efficient handling and storage. And, most im­ portantly, the w riting lasts forever! My fellow librarians, I submit to you that our preservation efforts have been misdirected. Instead of expensive deacidification, microphotography, electronic or optical conversion, we should be tra n ­ scribing our hallowed texts onto clay tablets! ■ ■